Never Too Late: If you missed the IPKat last week!

Missed last week on the IPKat? Catch up with our round-up of last week’s posts:

Copyright


Georgia Jenkins delved into the subject of copyright exhaustion in light of the recent judgment of the Court of Appeal of England and Wales in JJH Enterprises Limited v Microsoft Corporation.

Marcel Pemsel reported on the German Supreme Court ruling in USM Haller II (I ZR 96/22) and its implications for the copyright protection of works of applied art.

Katfriend Chijioke Okorie discussed the constitutional aspects surrounding copyright exceptions in the context of the Constitutional Court of South Africa’s decision on the country’s proposed copyright reform.

Katfriend Peter Ling reviewed the book Creative Value Chains - Copyright and Beyond for a Better Value Distribution by Yaniv Benhamou.

Trade Marks

Söğüt Atilla-Aydın commented on the Tribunal judiciaire de Paris’s judgment in RG No. 23/15690 concerning Hermès and the limits of the artistic expression defence in trade mark law.

Domain Names

Katfriend Stefaan Meuwissen walked us through the most significant UDRP decisions and developments from the past six months.

Photo by Nihat on Pexels
Never Too Late: If you missed the IPKat last week!  Never Too Late: If you missed the IPKat last week! Reviewed by Kliment Markov on Friday, July 31, 2026 Rating: 5

No comments:

All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.

It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.

Learn more here: http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/p/want-to-complain.html

Powered by Blogger.