Are you over 18 and want to see adult content?
More Annotations
![A complete backup of essaychamp.co.uk](https://www.archivebay.com/archive5/images/328cc5d3-ab5b-42b5-983d-3604c59112c5.png)
A complete backup of essaychamp.co.uk
Are you over 18 and want to see adult content?
![A complete backup of fourhourbody.com](https://www.archivebay.com/archive5/images/af0e36be-1902-49ce-a11f-5abd42eb4ff1.png)
A complete backup of fourhourbody.com
Are you over 18 and want to see adult content?
![A complete backup of athomeinlove.com](https://www.archivebay.com/archive5/images/be414416-325b-495f-a104-764616eb0a59.png)
A complete backup of athomeinlove.com
Are you over 18 and want to see adult content?
![A complete backup of kestrelmeters.com](https://www.archivebay.com/archive5/images/ad207eca-e840-4dae-adad-a7a5c90e2626.png)
A complete backup of kestrelmeters.com
Are you over 18 and want to see adult content?
![A complete backup of monteverdeinfo.com](https://www.archivebay.com/archive5/images/a51070a7-8cad-4134-966f-47f31753cabf.png)
A complete backup of monteverdeinfo.com
Are you over 18 and want to see adult content?
![A complete backup of toyota-forklifts.eu](https://www.archivebay.com/archive5/images/d145d0d9-daff-4aac-ac3d-ecede11af7d2.png)
A complete backup of toyota-forklifts.eu
Are you over 18 and want to see adult content?
Favourite Annotations
![A complete backup of cartwheelfactory.com](https://www.archivebay.com/archive2/25e233f0-ef51-4c00-8cc9-bd37490da556.png)
A complete backup of cartwheelfactory.com
Are you over 18 and want to see adult content?
![A complete backup of quizworldcup.com](https://www.archivebay.com/archive2/74ab4d4b-8804-4353-8f15-2a9050999af9.png)
A complete backup of quizworldcup.com
Are you over 18 and want to see adult content?
![A complete backup of marx-brothers.org](https://www.archivebay.com/archive2/40c62a08-7ebd-4d6f-9cc8-1183194a8ddc.png)
A complete backup of marx-brothers.org
Are you over 18 and want to see adult content?
![A complete backup of hauteresidence.com](https://www.archivebay.com/archive2/0e67839f-b288-4403-85c5-9b924daeb06f.png)
A complete backup of hauteresidence.com
Are you over 18 and want to see adult content?
Text
perspective.
DOES THE IRISH COURT OF APPEAL IN MERCK V CLONMEL PART The CJEU decision Santen (C-673/18) has now been applied by the Court of Appeal of Ireland (Merck v Clonmel IECA 54).The case related to Merck's Ireland SPC for its cholesterol lowering combo-product Inegy (ezetimibe + simvastatin). Interestingly, given the apparent uncompromising position of the CJEU in Santen (C-673/18), the Irish Court of Appeal found that Article BOEING'S COMMA DRAMA: COMMAS AND TAKING THE DESCRIPTION It is not only the choice of words that matter in patent claim interpretation. As the recent decision in T 1127/16 shows, grammar can be similarly important. In this decision, the lack of a comma in a claim led to a successful added matter objection against Boeing's patent EP1798872. Caught in the inescapable trap of added matter that cannot be deleted without unallowably broadening the claim THE LEGO CASE T-515/19: A BUILDING BLOCKAUTHOR: ELEONORAROSATI
In Lego A/S v EUIPO (T-515/19), the General Court (“GC”) considered the scope of protection of a design, consisting of the representation of a building-block that is part of a larger Lego building set. The implications of the present judgment may change the paradigm of design protection in the EU since it considerably enlargesthe scope of
AN INFRINGEMENT OF IP RIGHTS THAT IS ALSO A BREACH OF A week before Christmas, the Court of Justice of the EU handed down its judgment in IT Development SAS v. Free Mobile SAS (case C-666/18).The question, referred to the CJEU by the Paris Court of Appeal was, in short, whether the Enforcement Directive (2004/47) and the Software Directive (2009/24) are applicable to those cases in which the infringement of IP rights (the unauthorized THE TRIPS WAIVER DEBATE: WHY, AND WHERE TO First, it is not a matter of being for or against *the* waiver.In the end, there is likely to be *a* waiver, with specific provisions about, inter alia (think of it as turning three knobs): (a) which rights are waived; (b) for which purpose and (c) for which period of time.It is possible that the WTO will actually vote on this waiver, though WTO practice would more typically look for a text HACON HHJ AND THE SEED DRILL: INTENTIONALITY IN PRIOR USE The Judge raised (but did not address) the question in Claydon v Mzuri of whether a potential observer could be afforded technical equipment in the form of binoculars, video recorder or even a swarm of drones (para. 80). The Judge steered away from the possibility of permitting most forms of ski lled person the use of a drone swarm, believing that "it will not be often that evidence will ILLUMINA V MGI PART 2: HAS THE UK LOST ITS WAY ON THE The High Court decision in Illumina v MGI ( EWHC 57 (Pat) hit the IP headlines for its application of the Supreme Court decision in Regeneron v Kymab ( UKSC 27) (see IPKat: Illumina v MGI Part 1: Mr Justice Birss on sufficiency, DNA sequencing and chocolate teapots).Those who make it to paragraph of the over 500 paragraph judgment are also rewarded with Mr Justice Birss JEFF KOONS LOSES (AGAIN) IN FRANCE: HIS FAIT D'HIVER FOUNDAUTHOR:ELEONORA ROSATI
First, the standard of infringement. In case there was still any doubt, the test to be applied is the one that the CJEU set forth in Infopaq (an infringement case, before being an originality case) : there is reproduction in part of a work when what has been reproduced is original in the sense that it is its author’s own intellectual creation, the result of free TEN QUESTIONS ABOUT CONFIRMATORY ASSIGNMENTS This got me to thinking about the why and what of a confirmatory assignment, assuming that the putative confirmation relates to an unwritten assignment of THE IPKAT - BLOGGERTHE IPKAT TEAMKATS’ POSTSTOPICSSUNDAY SURPRISESSOLO INDEPENDENT IP PRACTITIONERS The IPKat blog reports on copyright, patent, trade mark, info-tech and privacy/confidentiality issues from a mainly UK and Europeanperspective.
DOES THE IRISH COURT OF APPEAL IN MERCK V CLONMEL PART The CJEU decision Santen (C-673/18) has now been applied by the Court of Appeal of Ireland (Merck v Clonmel IECA 54).The case related to Merck's Ireland SPC for its cholesterol lowering combo-product Inegy (ezetimibe + simvastatin). Interestingly, given the apparent uncompromising position of the CJEU in Santen (C-673/18), the Irish Court of Appeal found that Article BOEING'S COMMA DRAMA: COMMAS AND TAKING THE DESCRIPTION It is not only the choice of words that matter in patent claim interpretation. As the recent decision in T 1127/16 shows, grammar can be similarly important. In this decision, the lack of a comma in a claim led to a successful added matter objection against Boeing's patent EP1798872. Caught in the inescapable trap of added matter that cannot be deleted without unallowably broadening the claim THE LEGO CASE T-515/19: A BUILDING BLOCKAUTHOR: ELEONORAROSATI
In Lego A/S v EUIPO (T-515/19), the General Court (“GC”) considered the scope of protection of a design, consisting of the representation of a building-block that is part of a larger Lego building set. The implications of the present judgment may change the paradigm of design protection in the EU since it considerably enlargesthe scope of
AN INFRINGEMENT OF IP RIGHTS THAT IS ALSO A BREACH OF A week before Christmas, the Court of Justice of the EU handed down its judgment in IT Development SAS v. Free Mobile SAS (case C-666/18).The question, referred to the CJEU by the Paris Court of Appeal was, in short, whether the Enforcement Directive (2004/47) and the Software Directive (2009/24) are applicable to those cases in which the infringement of IP rights (the unauthorized THE TRIPS WAIVER DEBATE: WHY, AND WHERE TO First, it is not a matter of being for or against *the* waiver.In the end, there is likely to be *a* waiver, with specific provisions about, inter alia (think of it as turning three knobs): (a) which rights are waived; (b) for which purpose and (c) for which period of time.It is possible that the WTO will actually vote on this waiver, though WTO practice would more typically look for a text HACON HHJ AND THE SEED DRILL: INTENTIONALITY IN PRIOR USE The Judge raised (but did not address) the question in Claydon v Mzuri of whether a potential observer could be afforded technical equipment in the form of binoculars, video recorder or even a swarm of drones (para. 80). The Judge steered away from the possibility of permitting most forms of ski lled person the use of a drone swarm, believing that "it will not be often that evidence will ILLUMINA V MGI PART 2: HAS THE UK LOST ITS WAY ON THE The High Court decision in Illumina v MGI ( EWHC 57 (Pat) hit the IP headlines for its application of the Supreme Court decision in Regeneron v Kymab ( UKSC 27) (see IPKat: Illumina v MGI Part 1: Mr Justice Birss on sufficiency, DNA sequencing and chocolate teapots).Those who make it to paragraph of the over 500 paragraph judgment are also rewarded with Mr Justice Birss JEFF KOONS LOSES (AGAIN) IN FRANCE: HIS FAIT D'HIVER FOUNDAUTHOR:ELEONORA ROSATI
First, the standard of infringement. In case there was still any doubt, the test to be applied is the one that the CJEU set forth in Infopaq (an infringement case, before being an originality case) : there is reproduction in part of a work when what has been reproduced is original in the sense that it is its author’s own intellectual creation, the result of free TEN QUESTIONS ABOUT CONFIRMATORY ASSIGNMENTS This got me to thinking about the why and what of a confirmatory assignment, assuming that the putative confirmation relates to an unwritten assignment of NEVER TOO LATE: IF YOU MISSED THE IPKAT LAST WEEK The IPKat blog reports on copyright, patent, trade mark, info-tech and privacy/confidentiality issues from a mainly UK and Europeanperspective.
HOW STAR TREK MAY BE CONTRIBUTING TO COVID-19 VACCINE The IPKat blog reports on copyright, patent, trade mark, info-tech and privacy/confidentiality issues from a mainly UK and Europeanperspective.
ILLUMINA V MGI PART 2: HAS THE UK LOST ITS WAY ON THE The High Court decision in Illumina v MGI ( EWHC 57 (Pat) hit the IP headlines for its application of the Supreme Court decision in Regeneron v Kymab ( UKSC 27) (see IPKat: Illumina v MGI Part 1: Mr Justice Birss on sufficiency, DNA sequencing and chocolate teapots).Those who make it to paragraph of the over 500 paragraph judgment are also rewarded with Mr Justice Birss COMMISSION UNVEILS ARTICLE 17 GUIDANCE: 3 HIGHLIGHTS In any event, we may expect to hear more about this issue when, in a few weeks (on 22 June), the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) issues its judgment in YouTube, C-682/18 and Cyando, C-683/18.In his Opinion last year , Advocate General Øe opined that platforms like YouTube and Uploaded could be liable under Article 17 lacking a licence, but the same would not be THE EU GENERAL COURT ON RELATIVE GROUNDS FOR REFUSAL: THE The IPKat blog reports on copyright, patent, trade mark, info-tech and privacy/confidentiality issues from a mainly UK and Europeanperspective.
THE CJEU BROMPTON BICYCLE CASE: A UK VIEW The CJEU Brompton Bicycle case: a UK view. Kat friend Hugo Cox offers Kat readers a UK perspective on the recent decision by the CJEU in the Brompton Bicycle case. As reported by IPKat, here, the CJEU delivered a judgment concerning the Brompton bicycle on 11 June 2020. This judgment has the potential to turn the world of design on its head NOTHING TO SEE HERE, LILLY WINS IN KICKING OUT GENENTECH'S The case relates to Taltz, Eli Lilly's biologic drug for psoriasis. Taltz is Eli Lilly's marketed anti-IL-17A/F monoclonal antibody ixekizumab. Genentech owns a family of European patents claiming IL-17A/F antibodies and their use for the treatment of psoriasis. Last year, in a dispute between Lilly and Genentech, Mr Justice Arnold (asthen was
THE COFEMEL DECISION WELL BEYOND THE ‘SIMPLE’ ISSUE OF As early as Infopaq, C-5/08, in fact, the CJEU removed the possibility of envisaging different standards of protection for different subject matter.If a work falls within the scope of application of the InfoSoc Directive, then protection only arises upon satisfying the requirement that it is its ‘author’s own intellectual creation’, that is the result of ‘free and creative choices GUEST POST: WILL SOCIAL MEDIA CHANGE AMBUSH MARKETING AT With overseas spectators banned from the 2020 Tokyo Olympic Games due to COVID-19, will more non-official sponsors create further tension with official sponsors by using legally strategic ‘ambush marketing’ campaigns to reach spectators watching from abroad?. Ambush marketing in sport. Drawing revenue from spectator and transfer fees, sponsorship and broadcasting rights; elite sport has HAS SKIDMORE V LED ZEPPELIN CHANGED US MUSIC COPYRIGHT Randy Wolfe (a.k.a Randy California) was a guitarist in the 1960s Southern California rock band, Spirit. In 1966-76 he wrote the instrumental song Taurus, which was released on THE IPKAT - BLOGGERTHE IPKAT TEAMKATS’ POSTSTOPICSSUNDAY SURPRISESSOLO INDEPENDENT IP PRACTITIONERS The IPKat blog reports on copyright, patent, trade mark, info-tech and privacy/confidentiality issues from a mainly UK and Europeanperspective.
BOEING'S COMMA DRAMA: COMMAS AND TAKING THE DESCRIPTION It is not only the choice of words that matter in patent claim interpretation. As the recent decision in T 1127/16 shows, grammar can be similarly important. In this decision, the lack of a comma in a claim led to a successful added matter objection against Boeing's patent EP1798872. Caught in the inescapable trap of added matter that cannot be deleted without unallowably broadening the claim DOES THE IRISH COURT OF APPEAL IN MERCK V CLONMEL PART The CJEU decision Santen (C-673/18) has now been applied by the Court of Appeal of Ireland (Merck v Clonmel IECA 54).The case related to Merck's Ireland SPC for its cholesterol lowering combo-product Inegy (ezetimibe + simvastatin). Interestingly, given the apparent uncompromising position of the CJEU in Santen (C-673/18), the Irish Court of Appeal found that Article AN INFRINGEMENT OF IP RIGHTS THAT IS ALSO A BREACH OF A week before Christmas, the Court of Justice of the EU handed down its judgment in IT Development SAS v. Free Mobile SAS (case C-666/18).The question, referred to the CJEU by the Paris Court of Appeal was, in short, whether the Enforcement Directive (2004/47) and the Software Directive (2009/24) are applicable to those cases in which the infringement of IP rights (the unauthorized THE TRIPS WAIVER DEBATE: WHY, AND WHERE TO First, it is not a matter of being for or against *the* waiver.In the end, there is likely to be *a* waiver, with specific provisions about, inter alia (think of it as turning three knobs): (a) which rights are waived; (b) for which purpose and (c) for which period of time.It is possible that the WTO will actually vote on this waiver, though WTO practice would more typically look for a text THE LEGO CASE T-515/19: A BUILDING BLOCKAUTHOR: ELEONORAROSATI
In Lego A/S v EUIPO (T-515/19), the General Court (“GC”) considered the scope of protection of a design, consisting of the representation of a building-block that is part of a larger Lego building set. The implications of the present judgment may change the paradigm of design protection in the EU since it considerably enlargesthe scope of
ILLUMINA V MGI PART 2: HAS THE UK LOST ITS WAY ON THE The High Court decision in Illumina v MGI ( EWHC 57 (Pat) hit the IP headlines for its application of the Supreme Court decision in Regeneron v Kymab ( UKSC 27) (see IPKat: Illumina v MGI Part 1: Mr Justice Birss on sufficiency, DNA sequencing and chocolate teapots).Those who make it to paragraph of the over 500 paragraph judgment are also rewarded with Mr Justice Birss THE COFEMEL DECISION WELL BEYOND THE ‘SIMPLE’ ISSUE OF The Cofemel decision well beyond the ‘simple’ issue of designs and copyright. As announced on The IPKat, last week the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) issued its much awaited judgment in Cofemel, C-683/17 . It ruled that, as far as designs are concerned, no other requirement is mandated for JEFF KOONS LOSES (AGAIN) IN FRANCE: HIS FAIT D'HIVER FOUNDAUTHOR:ELEONORA ROSATI
First, the standard of infringement. In case there was still any doubt, the test to be applied is the one that the CJEU set forth in Infopaq (an infringement case, before being an originality case) : there is reproduction in part of a work when what has been reproduced is original in the sense that it is its author’s own intellectual creation, the result of free TEN QUESTIONS ABOUT CONFIRMATORY ASSIGNMENTS This got me to thinking about the why and what of a confirmatory assignment, assuming that the putative confirmation relates to an unwritten assignment of THE IPKAT - BLOGGERTHE IPKAT TEAMKATS’ POSTSTOPICSSUNDAY SURPRISESSOLO INDEPENDENT IP PRACTITIONERS The IPKat blog reports on copyright, patent, trade mark, info-tech and privacy/confidentiality issues from a mainly UK and Europeanperspective.
BOEING'S COMMA DRAMA: COMMAS AND TAKING THE DESCRIPTION It is not only the choice of words that matter in patent claim interpretation. As the recent decision in T 1127/16 shows, grammar can be similarly important. In this decision, the lack of a comma in a claim led to a successful added matter objection against Boeing's patent EP1798872. Caught in the inescapable trap of added matter that cannot be deleted without unallowably broadening the claim DOES THE IRISH COURT OF APPEAL IN MERCK V CLONMEL PART The CJEU decision Santen (C-673/18) has now been applied by the Court of Appeal of Ireland (Merck v Clonmel IECA 54).The case related to Merck's Ireland SPC for its cholesterol lowering combo-product Inegy (ezetimibe + simvastatin). Interestingly, given the apparent uncompromising position of the CJEU in Santen (C-673/18), the Irish Court of Appeal found that Article AN INFRINGEMENT OF IP RIGHTS THAT IS ALSO A BREACH OF A week before Christmas, the Court of Justice of the EU handed down its judgment in IT Development SAS v. Free Mobile SAS (case C-666/18).The question, referred to the CJEU by the Paris Court of Appeal was, in short, whether the Enforcement Directive (2004/47) and the Software Directive (2009/24) are applicable to those cases in which the infringement of IP rights (the unauthorized THE TRIPS WAIVER DEBATE: WHY, AND WHERE TO First, it is not a matter of being for or against *the* waiver.In the end, there is likely to be *a* waiver, with specific provisions about, inter alia (think of it as turning three knobs): (a) which rights are waived; (b) for which purpose and (c) for which period of time.It is possible that the WTO will actually vote on this waiver, though WTO practice would more typically look for a text THE LEGO CASE T-515/19: A BUILDING BLOCKAUTHOR: ELEONORAROSATI
In Lego A/S v EUIPO (T-515/19), the General Court (“GC”) considered the scope of protection of a design, consisting of the representation of a building-block that is part of a larger Lego building set. The implications of the present judgment may change the paradigm of design protection in the EU since it considerably enlargesthe scope of
ILLUMINA V MGI PART 2: HAS THE UK LOST ITS WAY ON THE The High Court decision in Illumina v MGI ( EWHC 57 (Pat) hit the IP headlines for its application of the Supreme Court decision in Regeneron v Kymab ( UKSC 27) (see IPKat: Illumina v MGI Part 1: Mr Justice Birss on sufficiency, DNA sequencing and chocolate teapots).Those who make it to paragraph of the over 500 paragraph judgment are also rewarded with Mr Justice Birss THE COFEMEL DECISION WELL BEYOND THE ‘SIMPLE’ ISSUE OF The Cofemel decision well beyond the ‘simple’ issue of designs and copyright. As announced on The IPKat, last week the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) issued its much awaited judgment in Cofemel, C-683/17 . It ruled that, as far as designs are concerned, no other requirement is mandated for JEFF KOONS LOSES (AGAIN) IN FRANCE: HIS FAIT D'HIVER FOUNDAUTHOR:ELEONORA ROSATI
First, the standard of infringement. In case there was still any doubt, the test to be applied is the one that the CJEU set forth in Infopaq (an infringement case, before being an originality case) : there is reproduction in part of a work when what has been reproduced is original in the sense that it is its author’s own intellectual creation, the result of free TEN QUESTIONS ABOUT CONFIRMATORY ASSIGNMENTS This got me to thinking about the why and what of a confirmatory assignment, assuming that the putative confirmation relates to an unwritten assignment of HOW STAR TREK MAY BE CONTRIBUTING TO COVID-19 VACCINE The IPKat blog reports on copyright, patent, trade mark, info-tech and privacy/confidentiality issues from a mainly UK and Europeanperspective.
COMMISSION UNVEILS ARTICLE 17 GUIDANCE: 3 HIGHLIGHTS In any event, we may expect to hear more about this issue when, in a few weeks (on 22 June), the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) issues its judgment in YouTube, C-682/18 and Cyando, C-683/18.In his Opinion last year , Advocate General Øe opined that platforms like YouTube and Uploaded could be liable under Article 17 lacking a licence, but the same would not be GUEST POST: WILL SOCIAL MEDIA CHANGE AMBUSH MARKETING AT With overseas spectators banned from the 2020 Tokyo Olympic Games due to COVID-19, will more non-official sponsors create further tension with official sponsors by using legally strategic ‘ambush marketing’ campaigns to reach spectators watching from abroad?. Ambush marketing in sport. Drawing revenue from spectator and transfer fees, sponsorship and broadcasting rights; elite sport has WHEN DOES A COMMUNICATION TO THE PUBLIC UNDER EU COPYRIGHT The two key requirements of art. 3(1) of the InfoSoc Directive are a ‘communication’ directed at a ‘public’. A simple example might be a free-to-air broadcast: the broadcast is an act of communication and it is to the public, because any member of the public with a suitable device can receive the signal and watch/listen to thebroadcast.
THE COFEMEL DECISION WELL BEYOND THE ‘SIMPLE’ ISSUE OF As early as Infopaq, C-5/08, in fact, the CJEU removed the possibility of envisaging different standards of protection for different subject matter.If a work falls within the scope of application of the InfoSoc Directive, then protection only arises upon satisfying the requirement that it is its ‘author’s own intellectual creation’, that is the result of ‘free and creative choices SHADY'S BACK: QUANTIFYING DAMAGES FOR COPYRIGHT In this case the hypothetical negotiation would have been for a licence to make 2,891 copies of Infinite in the UK. The Judge stated that the licence would probably have been for a unit price per record and given the nature and reputation of the licensor (with valid rights) and that this was a special anniversary disc which might attract higher pricing, the notional licensee would be able to ILLUMINA V MGI PART 2: HAS THE UK LOST ITS WAY ON THE The High Court decision in Illumina v MGI ( EWHC 57 (Pat) hit the IP headlines for its application of the Supreme Court decision in Regeneron v Kymab ( UKSC 27) (see IPKat: Illumina v MGI Part 1: Mr Justice Birss on sufficiency, DNA sequencing and chocolate teapots).Those who make it to paragraph of the over 500 paragraph judgment are also rewarded with Mr Justice Birss CONFERENCE REPORT: 'THE NEW AGE OF FASHION Tuesday saw the latest event from Fashion Law London, this time covering the timely and somewhat nebulous issue of sustainability.This GuestKat's colleague (and new Kat Friend), Emily Nuttall-Wood, was (virtually) there and sent this report: Fashion Law London’s latest event (its fifth virtual conference since the pandemic hit – see previous reports here, here and here for example) centred FURRY THOUGHTS ON SKY V. SKYKICK following the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU)'s decision in C-371/18 Sky v. SkyKick . This post concerns the issue of bad faith registrations in the absence of anintention to use.
HAS SKIDMORE V LED ZEPPELIN CHANGED US MUSIC COPYRIGHT Randy Wolfe (a.k.a Randy California) was a guitarist in the 1960s Southern California rock band, Spirit. In 1966-76 he wrote the instrumental song Taurus, which was released on THE IPKAT - BLOGGERTHE IPKAT TEAMKATS’ POSTSTOPICSSUNDAY SURPRISESSOLO INDEPENDENT IP PRACTITIONERS The IPKat blog reports on copyright, patent, trade mark, info-tech and privacy/confidentiality issues from a mainly UK and Europeanperspective.
BOEING'S COMMA DRAMA: COMMAS AND TAKING THE DESCRIPTION It is not only the choice of words that matter in patent claim interpretation. As the recent decision in T 1127/16 shows, grammar can be similarly important. In this decision, the lack of a comma in a claim led to a successful added matter objection against Boeing's patent EP1798872. Caught in the inescapable trap of added matter that cannot be deleted without unallowably broadening the claim DOES THE IRISH COURT OF APPEAL IN MERCK V CLONMEL PART The CJEU decision Santen (C-673/18) has now been applied by the Court of Appeal of Ireland (Merck v Clonmel IECA 54).The case related to Merck's Ireland SPC for its cholesterol lowering combo-product Inegy (ezetimibe + simvastatin). Interestingly, given the apparent uncompromising position of the CJEU in Santen (C-673/18), the Irish Court of Appeal found that Article AN INFRINGEMENT OF IP RIGHTS THAT IS ALSO A BREACH OF A week before Christmas, the Court of Justice of the EU handed down its judgment in IT Development SAS v. Free Mobile SAS (case C-666/18).The question, referred to the CJEU by the Paris Court of Appeal was, in short, whether the Enforcement Directive (2004/47) and the Software Directive (2009/24) are applicable to those cases in which the infringement of IP rights (the unauthorized THE TRIPS WAIVER DEBATE: WHY, AND WHERE TO First, it is not a matter of being for or against *the* waiver.In the end, there is likely to be *a* waiver, with specific provisions about, inter alia (think of it as turning three knobs): (a) which rights are waived; (b) for which purpose and (c) for which period of time.It is possible that the WTO will actually vote on this waiver, though WTO practice would more typically look for a text THE LEGO CASE T-515/19: A BUILDING BLOCKAUTHOR: ELEONORAROSATI
In Lego A/S v EUIPO (T-515/19), the General Court (“GC”) considered the scope of protection of a design, consisting of the representation of a building-block that is part of a larger Lego building set. The implications of the present judgment may change the paradigm of design protection in the EU since it considerably enlargesthe scope of
ILLUMINA V MGI PART 2: HAS THE UK LOST ITS WAY ON THE The High Court decision in Illumina v MGI ( EWHC 57 (Pat) hit the IP headlines for its application of the Supreme Court decision in Regeneron v Kymab ( UKSC 27) (see IPKat: Illumina v MGI Part 1: Mr Justice Birss on sufficiency, DNA sequencing and chocolate teapots).Those who make it to paragraph of the over 500 paragraph judgment are also rewarded with Mr Justice Birss THE COFEMEL DECISION WELL BEYOND THE ‘SIMPLE’ ISSUE OF The Cofemel decision well beyond the ‘simple’ issue of designs and copyright. As announced on The IPKat, last week the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) issued its much awaited judgment in Cofemel, C-683/17 . It ruled that, as far as designs are concerned, no other requirement is mandated for JEFF KOONS LOSES (AGAIN) IN FRANCE: HIS FAIT D'HIVER FOUNDAUTHOR:ELEONORA ROSATI
First, the standard of infringement. In case there was still any doubt, the test to be applied is the one that the CJEU set forth in Infopaq (an infringement case, before being an originality case) : there is reproduction in part of a work when what has been reproduced is original in the sense that it is its author’s own intellectual creation, the result of free TEN QUESTIONS ABOUT CONFIRMATORY ASSIGNMENTS This got me to thinking about the why and what of a confirmatory assignment, assuming that the putative confirmation relates to an unwritten assignment of THE IPKAT - BLOGGERTHE IPKAT TEAMKATS’ POSTSTOPICSSUNDAY SURPRISESSOLO INDEPENDENT IP PRACTITIONERS The IPKat blog reports on copyright, patent, trade mark, info-tech and privacy/confidentiality issues from a mainly UK and Europeanperspective.
BOEING'S COMMA DRAMA: COMMAS AND TAKING THE DESCRIPTION It is not only the choice of words that matter in patent claim interpretation. As the recent decision in T 1127/16 shows, grammar can be similarly important. In this decision, the lack of a comma in a claim led to a successful added matter objection against Boeing's patent EP1798872. Caught in the inescapable trap of added matter that cannot be deleted without unallowably broadening the claim DOES THE IRISH COURT OF APPEAL IN MERCK V CLONMEL PART The CJEU decision Santen (C-673/18) has now been applied by the Court of Appeal of Ireland (Merck v Clonmel IECA 54).The case related to Merck's Ireland SPC for its cholesterol lowering combo-product Inegy (ezetimibe + simvastatin). Interestingly, given the apparent uncompromising position of the CJEU in Santen (C-673/18), the Irish Court of Appeal found that Article AN INFRINGEMENT OF IP RIGHTS THAT IS ALSO A BREACH OF A week before Christmas, the Court of Justice of the EU handed down its judgment in IT Development SAS v. Free Mobile SAS (case C-666/18).The question, referred to the CJEU by the Paris Court of Appeal was, in short, whether the Enforcement Directive (2004/47) and the Software Directive (2009/24) are applicable to those cases in which the infringement of IP rights (the unauthorized THE TRIPS WAIVER DEBATE: WHY, AND WHERE TO First, it is not a matter of being for or against *the* waiver.In the end, there is likely to be *a* waiver, with specific provisions about, inter alia (think of it as turning three knobs): (a) which rights are waived; (b) for which purpose and (c) for which period of time.It is possible that the WTO will actually vote on this waiver, though WTO practice would more typically look for a text THE LEGO CASE T-515/19: A BUILDING BLOCKAUTHOR: ELEONORAROSATI
In Lego A/S v EUIPO (T-515/19), the General Court (“GC”) considered the scope of protection of a design, consisting of the representation of a building-block that is part of a larger Lego building set. The implications of the present judgment may change the paradigm of design protection in the EU since it considerably enlargesthe scope of
ILLUMINA V MGI PART 2: HAS THE UK LOST ITS WAY ON THE The High Court decision in Illumina v MGI ( EWHC 57 (Pat) hit the IP headlines for its application of the Supreme Court decision in Regeneron v Kymab ( UKSC 27) (see IPKat: Illumina v MGI Part 1: Mr Justice Birss on sufficiency, DNA sequencing and chocolate teapots).Those who make it to paragraph of the over 500 paragraph judgment are also rewarded with Mr Justice Birss THE COFEMEL DECISION WELL BEYOND THE ‘SIMPLE’ ISSUE OF The Cofemel decision well beyond the ‘simple’ issue of designs and copyright. As announced on The IPKat, last week the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) issued its much awaited judgment in Cofemel, C-683/17 . It ruled that, as far as designs are concerned, no other requirement is mandated for JEFF KOONS LOSES (AGAIN) IN FRANCE: HIS FAIT D'HIVER FOUNDAUTHOR:ELEONORA ROSATI
First, the standard of infringement. In case there was still any doubt, the test to be applied is the one that the CJEU set forth in Infopaq (an infringement case, before being an originality case) : there is reproduction in part of a work when what has been reproduced is original in the sense that it is its author’s own intellectual creation, the result of free TEN QUESTIONS ABOUT CONFIRMATORY ASSIGNMENTS This got me to thinking about the why and what of a confirmatory assignment, assuming that the putative confirmation relates to an unwritten assignment of HOW STAR TREK MAY BE CONTRIBUTING TO COVID-19 VACCINE The IPKat blog reports on copyright, patent, trade mark, info-tech and privacy/confidentiality issues from a mainly UK and Europeanperspective.
COMMISSION UNVEILS ARTICLE 17 GUIDANCE: 3 HIGHLIGHTS In any event, we may expect to hear more about this issue when, in a few weeks (on 22 June), the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) issues its judgment in YouTube, C-682/18 and Cyando, C-683/18.In his Opinion last year , Advocate General Øe opined that platforms like YouTube and Uploaded could be liable under Article 17 lacking a licence, but the same would not be GUEST POST: WILL SOCIAL MEDIA CHANGE AMBUSH MARKETING AT With overseas spectators banned from the 2020 Tokyo Olympic Games due to COVID-19, will more non-official sponsors create further tension with official sponsors by using legally strategic ‘ambush marketing’ campaigns to reach spectators watching from abroad?. Ambush marketing in sport. Drawing revenue from spectator and transfer fees, sponsorship and broadcasting rights; elite sport has WHEN DOES A COMMUNICATION TO THE PUBLIC UNDER EU COPYRIGHT The two key requirements of art. 3(1) of the InfoSoc Directive are a ‘communication’ directed at a ‘public’. A simple example might be a free-to-air broadcast: the broadcast is an act of communication and it is to the public, because any member of the public with a suitable device can receive the signal and watch/listen to thebroadcast.
THE COFEMEL DECISION WELL BEYOND THE ‘SIMPLE’ ISSUE OF As early as Infopaq, C-5/08, in fact, the CJEU removed the possibility of envisaging different standards of protection for different subject matter.If a work falls within the scope of application of the InfoSoc Directive, then protection only arises upon satisfying the requirement that it is its ‘author’s own intellectual creation’, that is the result of ‘free and creative choices SHADY'S BACK: QUANTIFYING DAMAGES FOR COPYRIGHT In this case the hypothetical negotiation would have been for a licence to make 2,891 copies of Infinite in the UK. The Judge stated that the licence would probably have been for a unit price per record and given the nature and reputation of the licensor (with valid rights) and that this was a special anniversary disc which might attract higher pricing, the notional licensee would be able to ILLUMINA V MGI PART 2: HAS THE UK LOST ITS WAY ON THE The High Court decision in Illumina v MGI ( EWHC 57 (Pat) hit the IP headlines for its application of the Supreme Court decision in Regeneron v Kymab ( UKSC 27) (see IPKat: Illumina v MGI Part 1: Mr Justice Birss on sufficiency, DNA sequencing and chocolate teapots).Those who make it to paragraph of the over 500 paragraph judgment are also rewarded with Mr Justice Birss CONFERENCE REPORT: 'THE NEW AGE OF FASHION Tuesday saw the latest event from Fashion Law London, this time covering the timely and somewhat nebulous issue of sustainability.This GuestKat's colleague (and new Kat Friend), Emily Nuttall-Wood, was (virtually) there and sent this report: Fashion Law London’s latest event (its fifth virtual conference since the pandemic hit – see previous reports here, here and here for example) centred FURRY THOUGHTS ON SKY V. SKYKICK following the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU)'s decision in C-371/18 Sky v. SkyKick . This post concerns the issue of bad faith registrations in the absence of anintention to use.
HAS SKIDMORE V LED ZEPPELIN CHANGED US MUSIC COPYRIGHT Randy Wolfe (a.k.a Randy California) was a guitarist in the 1960s Southern California rock band, Spirit. In 1966-76 he wrote the instrumental song Taurus, which was released on THE IPKAT - BLOGGERTHE IPKAT TEAMKATS’ POSTSTOPICSSUNDAY SURPRISESSOLO INDEPENDENT IP PRACTITIONERS The IPKat blog reports on copyright, patent, trade mark, info-tech and privacy/confidentiality issues from a mainly UK and Europeanperspective.
THE LEGO CASE T-515/19: A BUILDING BLOCKAUTHOR: ELEONORAROSATI
The IPKat is pleased to host the following analysis by Vincenzo Vinciguerra (Weblegal and Cattolica University) on the recent design decision of the General Court in Lego, T-515/19.. Here's what Vincenzo writes: The Lego Case T-515/19: A building block castle built SHADY'S BACK: QUANTIFYING DAMAGES FOR COPYRIGHT In this case the hypothetical negotiation would have been for a licence to make 2,891 copies of Infinite in the UK. The Judge stated that the licence would probably have been for a unit price per record and given the nature and reputation of the licensor (with valid rights) and that this was a special anniversary disc which might attract higher pricing, the notional licensee would be able to DOES THE IRISH COURT OF APPEAL IN MERCK V CLONMEL PART The CJEU decision Santen (C-673/18) has now been applied by the Court of Appeal of Ireland (Merck v Clonmel IECA 54).The case related to Merck's Ireland SPC for its cholesterol lowering combo-product Inegy (ezetimibe + simvastatin). Interestingly, given the apparent uncompromising position of the CJEU in Santen (C-673/18), the Irish Court of Appeal found that Article BOEING'S COMMA DRAMA: COMMAS AND TAKING THE DESCRIPTION It is not only the choice of words that matter in patent claim interpretation. As the recent decision in T 1127/16 shows, grammar can be similarly important. In this decision, the lack of a comma in a claim led to a successful added matter objection against Boeing's patent EP1798872. Caught in the inescapable trap of added matter that cannot be deleted without unallowably broadening the claim WHEN DOES A COMMUNICATION TO THE PUBLIC UNDER EU COPYRIGHT The two key requirements of art. 3(1) of the InfoSoc Directive are a ‘communication’ directed at a ‘public’. A simple example might be a free-to-air broadcast: the broadcast is an act of communication and it is to the public, because any member of the public with a suitable device can receive the signal and watch/listen to thebroadcast.
AN INFRINGEMENT OF IP RIGHTS THAT IS ALSO A BREACH OF A week before Christmas, the Court of Justice of the EU handed down its judgment in IT Development SAS v. Free Mobile SAS (case C-666/18).The question, referred to the CJEU by the Paris Court of Appeal was, in short, whether the Enforcement Directive (2004/47) and the Software Directive (2009/24) are applicable to those cases in which the infringement of IP rights (the unauthorized JEFF KOONS LOSES (AGAIN) IN FRANCE: HIS FAIT D'HIVER FOUND First, the standard of infringement. In case there was still any doubt, the test to be applied is the one that the CJEU set forth in Infopaq (an infringement case, before being an originality case) : there is reproduction in part of a work when what has been reproduced is original in the sense that it is its author’s own intellectual creation, the result of free TEN QUESTIONS ABOUT CONFIRMATORY ASSIGNMENTS The IPKat blog reports on copyright, patent, trade mark, info-tech and privacy/confidentiality issues from a mainly UK and Europeanperspective.
HAS SKIDMORE V LED ZEPPELIN CHANGED US MUSIC COPYRIGHT Randy Wolfe (a.k.a Randy California) was a guitarist in the 1960s Southern California rock band, Spirit. In 1966-76 he wrote the instrumental song Taurus, which was released on THE IPKAT - BLOGGERTHE IPKAT TEAMKATS’ POSTSTOPICSSUNDAY SURPRISESSOLO INDEPENDENT IP PRACTITIONERS The IPKat blog reports on copyright, patent, trade mark, info-tech and privacy/confidentiality issues from a mainly UK and Europeanperspective.
THE LEGO CASE T-515/19: A BUILDING BLOCKAUTHOR: ELEONORAROSATI
The IPKat is pleased to host the following analysis by Vincenzo Vinciguerra (Weblegal and Cattolica University) on the recent design decision of the General Court in Lego, T-515/19.. Here's what Vincenzo writes: The Lego Case T-515/19: A building block castle built SHADY'S BACK: QUANTIFYING DAMAGES FOR COPYRIGHT In this case the hypothetical negotiation would have been for a licence to make 2,891 copies of Infinite in the UK. The Judge stated that the licence would probably have been for a unit price per record and given the nature and reputation of the licensor (with valid rights) and that this was a special anniversary disc which might attract higher pricing, the notional licensee would be able to DOES THE IRISH COURT OF APPEAL IN MERCK V CLONMEL PART The CJEU decision Santen (C-673/18) has now been applied by the Court of Appeal of Ireland (Merck v Clonmel IECA 54).The case related to Merck's Ireland SPC for its cholesterol lowering combo-product Inegy (ezetimibe + simvastatin). Interestingly, given the apparent uncompromising position of the CJEU in Santen (C-673/18), the Irish Court of Appeal found that Article BOEING'S COMMA DRAMA: COMMAS AND TAKING THE DESCRIPTION It is not only the choice of words that matter in patent claim interpretation. As the recent decision in T 1127/16 shows, grammar can be similarly important. In this decision, the lack of a comma in a claim led to a successful added matter objection against Boeing's patent EP1798872. Caught in the inescapable trap of added matter that cannot be deleted without unallowably broadening the claim WHEN DOES A COMMUNICATION TO THE PUBLIC UNDER EU COPYRIGHT The two key requirements of art. 3(1) of the InfoSoc Directive are a ‘communication’ directed at a ‘public’. A simple example might be a free-to-air broadcast: the broadcast is an act of communication and it is to the public, because any member of the public with a suitable device can receive the signal and watch/listen to thebroadcast.
AN INFRINGEMENT OF IP RIGHTS THAT IS ALSO A BREACH OF A week before Christmas, the Court of Justice of the EU handed down its judgment in IT Development SAS v. Free Mobile SAS (case C-666/18).The question, referred to the CJEU by the Paris Court of Appeal was, in short, whether the Enforcement Directive (2004/47) and the Software Directive (2009/24) are applicable to those cases in which the infringement of IP rights (the unauthorized JEFF KOONS LOSES (AGAIN) IN FRANCE: HIS FAIT D'HIVER FOUND First, the standard of infringement. In case there was still any doubt, the test to be applied is the one that the CJEU set forth in Infopaq (an infringement case, before being an originality case) : there is reproduction in part of a work when what has been reproduced is original in the sense that it is its author’s own intellectual creation, the result of free TEN QUESTIONS ABOUT CONFIRMATORY ASSIGNMENTS The IPKat blog reports on copyright, patent, trade mark, info-tech and privacy/confidentiality issues from a mainly UK and Europeanperspective.
HAS SKIDMORE V LED ZEPPELIN CHANGED US MUSIC COPYRIGHT Randy Wolfe (a.k.a Randy California) was a guitarist in the 1960s Southern California rock band, Spirit. In 1966-76 he wrote the instrumental song Taurus, which was released on NEVER TOO LATE: IF YOU MISSED THE IPKAT LAST WEEK The trade marks section of The IPKat included an interesting double feature. Within a single post, Tobias Cohen Jehoram and Irenah Klink first offered a guest post on the issue of re-filings of trade marks after the Monopoly judgement from the Court of Justice.The guest post was prepared as a response to an earlier analysis of the same case, published by The IPKat. COMMISSION UNVEILS ARTICLE 17 GUIDANCE: 3 HIGHLIGHTS In any event, we may expect to hear more about this issue when, in a few weeks (on 22 June), the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) issues its judgment in YouTube, C-682/18 and Cyando, C-683/18.In his Opinion last year , Advocate General Øe opined that platforms like YouTube and Uploaded could be liable under Article 17 lacking a licence, but the same would not be ILLUMINA V MGI PART 2: HAS THE UK LOST ITS WAY ON THE The High Court decision in Illumina v MGI ( EWHC 57 (Pat) hit the IP headlines for its application of the Supreme Court decision in Regeneron v Kymab ( UKSC 27) (see IPKat: Illumina v MGI Part 1: Mr Justice Birss on sufficiency, DNA sequencing and chocolate teapots).Those who make it to paragraph of the over 500 paragraph judgment are also rewarded with Mr Justice Birss THE AG OPINION IN YOUTUBE/CYANDO: A REGRESSIVE Whether user-uploaded content (UUC) platforms like YouTube and Uploaded (the latter is a cyberlocker) do perform acts of communication to the public under Article 3(1) of the InfoSoc Directive ;; Whether the hosting safe harbour in Article 14 of the E-commerce Directive is in principle available to these platforms ; THE TRIPS WAIVER DEBATE: WHY, AND WHERE TO First, it is not a matter of being for or against *the* waiver.In the end, there is likely to be *a* waiver, with specific provisions about, inter alia (think of it as turning three knobs): (a) which rights are waived; (b) for which purpose and (c) for which period of time.It is possible that the WTO will actually vote on this waiver, though WTO practice would more typically look for a text FIBROGEN V. AKEBIA: ARNOLD LJ ADDRESSES INSUFFICIENCY And so, this week Arnold LJ handed down his judgment in FibroGen v.Akebia that displays his characteristic sharpness of reasoning and, to this young Kat at least, astonishing productivity.At 137 pages, it tackles a range of thorny patent law issues. Not all of them can be discussed here in detail. SKYKICK EPISODE IV: A NEW HOPE 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 THE CJEU BROMPTON BICYCLE CASE: A UK VIEW Hugo Cox offers Kat readers a UK perspective on the recent decision by the CJEU in the Brompton Bicycle case. As reported by IPKat, here, the CJEU delivered a judgment concerning the Brompton bicycle on 11 June 2020.This judgment has the potential to turn the world of design on its head because of the way the Court was prepared to grant copyright protection to product designs and, with DÜSSELDORF COURT REFERS QUESTIONS ON COMPONENT While our American cousins were waking up early to put their turkeys in the oven this morning, the Düsseldorf court announced that it will be referring questions to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in the high-stakes patent battle between Nokia and Daimler .The text of the decision is not yet available, but a press release issued by the court can be HAS SKIDMORE V LED ZEPPELIN CHANGED US MUSIC COPYRIGHT This will have a direct impact of the decision on Ed Sheeran "Let's Get it On" v "Thinking Out Loud" case , where Sheeran's lawyers argued that the Let's Get It On deposit defines the scope of protection, but Townsend's team argued that the composition is embodied on the Gaye recording.Let's Get It On was written in 1973, so would also fall under the 1976 Act. THE IPKAT - BLOGGERTHE IPKAT TEAMKATS’ POSTSTOPICSSUNDAY SURPRISESSOLO INDEPENDENT IP PRACTITIONERS The IPKat blog reports on copyright, patent, trade mark, info-tech and privacy/confidentiality issues from a mainly UK and Europeanperspective.
DOES THE IRISH COURT OF APPEAL IN MERCK V CLONMEL PART The CJEU decision Santen (C-673/18) has now been applied by the Court of Appeal of Ireland (Merck v Clonmel IECA 54).The case related to Merck's Ireland SPC for its cholesterol lowering combo-product Inegy (ezetimibe + simvastatin). Interestingly, given the apparent uncompromising position of the CJEU in Santen (C-673/18), the Irish Court of Appeal found that Article THE LEGO CASE T-515/19: A BUILDING BLOCK In Lego A/S v EUIPO (T-515/19), the General Court (“GC”) considered the scope of protection of a design, consisting of the representation of a building-block that is part of a larger Lego building set. The implications of the present judgment may change the paradigm of design protection in the EU since it considerably enlargesthe scope of
AN INFRINGEMENT OF IP RIGHTS THAT IS ALSO A BREACH OF A week before Christmas, the Court of Justice of the EU handed down its judgment in IT Development SAS v. Free Mobile SAS (case C-666/18).The question, referred to the CJEU by the Paris Court of Appeal was, in short, whether the Enforcement Directive (2004/47) and the Software Directive (2009/24) are applicable to those cases in which the infringement of IP rights (the unauthorized THE COFEMEL DECISION WELL BEYOND THE ‘SIMPLE’ ISSUE OF The Cofemel decision well beyond the ‘simple’ issue of designs and copyright. As announced on The IPKat, last week the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) issued its much awaited judgment in Cofemel, C-683/17 . It ruled that, as far as designs are concerned, no other requirement is mandated for SHADY'S BACK: QUANTIFYING DAMAGES FOR COPYRIGHT Inquiry into damages. FBT claimed damages on three bases: 1. The loss of an opportunity to license a third party to exploit the Work (and various tracks comprised in the Work); 2. The losses flowing from the licence the Claimant would have offered TRADE MARKS AND MOBILE APPS: THE PLANETART V PHOTOBOX SAGA here), and failed to adduce pilot survey evidence in August 2019. However, the introduction of a trade mark infringement claim allowed PlanetArt to emerge (partially) successful, on the basis that the 'Photobox Free Prints’ app icon had infringed their trade mark (which, interestingly, had been filed a day before defendants PhotoboxLtd were served).
THE CJEU BROMPTON BICYCLE CASE: A UK VIEW The CJEU Brompton Bicycle case: a UK view. Kat friend Hugo Cox offers Kat readers a UK perspective on the recent decision by the CJEU in the Brompton Bicycle case. As reported by IPKat, here, the CJEU delivered a judgment concerning the Brompton bicycle on 11 June 2020. This judgment has the potential to turn the world of design on its head STRUGGLING TO UNDERSTAND TRADE MARK INFRINGEMENT ISSUES Trade mark infringement is about 7 essential things. (1) Use (NB: non-exhaustive list!) i. Person affixes sign to goods or packaging thereof; ii. Person offers or exposes goods for sale, put them on the market or stocks them for those purposes under the sign or offers or supplies services under the sign, or offers or supplies services TEN QUESTIONS ABOUT CONFIRMATORY ASSIGNMENTS This got me to thinking about the why and what of a confirmatory assignment, assuming that the putative confirmation relates to an unwritten assignment of THE IPKAT - BLOGGERTHE IPKAT TEAMKATS’ POSTSTOPICSSUNDAY SURPRISESSOLO INDEPENDENT IP PRACTITIONERS The IPKat blog reports on copyright, patent, trade mark, info-tech and privacy/confidentiality issues from a mainly UK and Europeanperspective.
DOES THE IRISH COURT OF APPEAL IN MERCK V CLONMEL PART The CJEU decision Santen (C-673/18) has now been applied by the Court of Appeal of Ireland (Merck v Clonmel IECA 54).The case related to Merck's Ireland SPC for its cholesterol lowering combo-product Inegy (ezetimibe + simvastatin). Interestingly, given the apparent uncompromising position of the CJEU in Santen (C-673/18), the Irish Court of Appeal found that Article THE LEGO CASE T-515/19: A BUILDING BLOCK In Lego A/S v EUIPO (T-515/19), the General Court (“GC”) considered the scope of protection of a design, consisting of the representation of a building-block that is part of a larger Lego building set. The implications of the present judgment may change the paradigm of design protection in the EU since it considerably enlargesthe scope of
AN INFRINGEMENT OF IP RIGHTS THAT IS ALSO A BREACH OF A week before Christmas, the Court of Justice of the EU handed down its judgment in IT Development SAS v. Free Mobile SAS (case C-666/18).The question, referred to the CJEU by the Paris Court of Appeal was, in short, whether the Enforcement Directive (2004/47) and the Software Directive (2009/24) are applicable to those cases in which the infringement of IP rights (the unauthorized THE COFEMEL DECISION WELL BEYOND THE ‘SIMPLE’ ISSUE OF The Cofemel decision well beyond the ‘simple’ issue of designs and copyright. As announced on The IPKat, last week the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) issued its much awaited judgment in Cofemel, C-683/17 . It ruled that, as far as designs are concerned, no other requirement is mandated for SHADY'S BACK: QUANTIFYING DAMAGES FOR COPYRIGHT Inquiry into damages. FBT claimed damages on three bases: 1. The loss of an opportunity to license a third party to exploit the Work (and various tracks comprised in the Work); 2. The losses flowing from the licence the Claimant would have offered TRADE MARKS AND MOBILE APPS: THE PLANETART V PHOTOBOX SAGA here), and failed to adduce pilot survey evidence in August 2019. However, the introduction of a trade mark infringement claim allowed PlanetArt to emerge (partially) successful, on the basis that the 'Photobox Free Prints’ app icon had infringed their trade mark (which, interestingly, had been filed a day before defendants PhotoboxLtd were served).
THE CJEU BROMPTON BICYCLE CASE: A UK VIEW The CJEU Brompton Bicycle case: a UK view. Kat friend Hugo Cox offers Kat readers a UK perspective on the recent decision by the CJEU in the Brompton Bicycle case. As reported by IPKat, here, the CJEU delivered a judgment concerning the Brompton bicycle on 11 June 2020. This judgment has the potential to turn the world of design on its head STRUGGLING TO UNDERSTAND TRADE MARK INFRINGEMENT ISSUES Trade mark infringement is about 7 essential things. (1) Use (NB: non-exhaustive list!) i. Person affixes sign to goods or packaging thereof; ii. Person offers or exposes goods for sale, put them on the market or stocks them for those purposes under the sign or offers or supplies services under the sign, or offers or supplies services TEN QUESTIONS ABOUT CONFIRMATORY ASSIGNMENTS This got me to thinking about the why and what of a confirmatory assignment, assuming that the putative confirmation relates to an unwritten assignment of NEVER TOO LATE: IF YOU MISSED THE IPKAT LAST WEEK The trade marks section of The IPKat included an interesting double feature. Within a single post, Tobias Cohen Jehoram and Irenah Klink first offered a guest post on the issue of re-filings of trade marks after the Monopoly judgement from the Court of Justice.The guest post was prepared as a response to an earlier analysis of the same case, published by The IPKat. COMMISSION UNVEILS ARTICLE 17 GUIDANCE: 3 HIGHLIGHTS In any event, we may expect to hear more about this issue when, in a few weeks (on 22 June), the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) issues its judgment in YouTube, C-682/18 and Cyando, C-683/18.In his Opinion last year , Advocate General Øe opined that platforms like YouTube and Uploaded could be liable under Article 17 lacking a licence, but the same would not be SHADY'S BACK: QUANTIFYING DAMAGES FOR COPYRIGHT In this case the hypothetical negotiation would have been for a licence to make 2,891 copies of Infinite in the UK. The Judge stated that the licence would probably have been for a unit price per record and given the nature and reputation of the licensor (with valid rights) and that this was a special anniversary disc which might attract higher pricing, the notional licensee would be able to WHEN DOES A COMMUNICATION TO THE PUBLIC UNDER EU COPYRIGHT The two key requirements of art. 3(1) of the InfoSoc Directive are a ‘communication’ directed at a ‘public’. A simple example might be a free-to-air broadcast: the broadcast is an act of communication and it is to the public, because any member of the public with a suitable device can receive the signal and watch/listen to thebroadcast.
TPM CIRCUMVENTION AND WEBSITE BLOCKING ORDERS: AN EU Availability of website blocking orders in TPM circumvention cases in EU Member States. Adopting a broader, European perspective, in a case concerning TPM-circumventing devices, the jurisdiction to grant a website blocking order could be also rooted within the domestic provisions implementing Article 8 (3) of the InfoSoc Directive. AN INFRINGEMENT OF IP RIGHTS THAT IS ALSO A BREACH OF A week before Christmas, the Court of Justice of the EU handed down its judgment in IT Development SAS v. Free Mobile SAS (case C-666/18).The question, referred to the CJEU by the Paris Court of Appeal was, in short, whether the Enforcement Directive (2004/47) and the Software Directive (2009/24) are applicable to those cases in which the infringement of IP rights (the unauthorized BOEING'S COMMA DRAMA: COMMAS AND TAKING THE DESCRIPTION It is not only the choice of words that matter in patent claim interpretation. As the recent decision in T 1127/16 shows, grammar can be similarly important. In this decision, the lack of a comma in a claim led to a successful added matter objection against Boeing's patent EP1798872. Caught in the inescapable trap of added matter that cannot be deleted without unallowably broadening the claim JEFF KOONS LOSES (AGAIN) IN FRANCE: HIS FAIT D'HIVER FOUND First, the standard of infringement. In case there was still any doubt, the test to be applied is the one that the CJEU set forth in Infopaq (an infringement case, before being an originality case) : there is reproduction in part of a work when what has been reproduced is original in the sense that it is its author’s own intellectual creation, the result of free BREAKING: KYMAB CAUGHT THE MOUSE AS SUFFICIENCY Kymab appealed to the Court of Appeal. The Court of Appeal disagreed with the High Court, and found the patents sufficiently disclosed. Lord Justice Kitchin (as then was) agreed with the High Court that the example provided in the patent would not have worked. THE LEVOLA HENGELO CJEU DECISION: AMBIGUITIES All this served the Court to conclude that the taste of a food product cannot be identified with precision and objectivity. This would make it different from "a literary, pictorial, cinematographic or musical work, which is a precise and objective form of expression".All this appears rather questionable, especially because the Court associated such presumed 'objectivity' to the way in whichTHE IPKAT
Passionate about IP! Since June 2003 the IPKat has covered copyright, patent, trade mark, designs, info-tech, privacy and confidentiality issues from a mainly UK and European perspective. Read, post commentsand participate!
The team is Eleonora Rosati, Annsley Merelle Ward, Neil J. Wilkof, and Merpel. E-mail the Kats here! The team is joined by GuestKats Léon Dijkman, Riana Harvey, Rose Hughes, Thomas Key, Peter Ling, Nedim Malovic, Frantzeska Papadopolou,and Alex Woolgar.
SpecialKats: Verónica Rodríguez Arguijo (TechieKat), Hayleigh Bosher (Book Review Editor), Tian Lu (Asia Correspondent) and Chijioke Okorie (Africa Correspondent). InternKats: Sophie Corke, Magdaleen Jooste, and Anastasiia Kyrylenko.*
* Home
* A bit more about the IPKat* The IPKat Team
* Kats’ posts
* Kats of the Past & Emeritus Kats * Forthcoming Events* Topics
* Policies
MenuA bit more about the IPKatThe IPKat TeamKats’ postsKats of the Past & Emeritus KatsForthcoming EventsTopicsPolicies IF ONCE IS A MISFORTUNE AND TWICE IS CARELESS, THREE TIMES IS…? GENENTECH LOSES UK SPC FOR LUCENTIS DUE TO COSTLY PROCEDURAL ERROR In the field of patents, an unintentional failure to pay the right fees at the right time can be a very costly mistake. The costs of amista...
Rose Hughes -
Monday, March 23, 2020 If once is a misfortune and twice is careless, three times is…? Genentech loses UK SPC for Lucentis due to costly procedural error Reviewed by Rose Hughes on Monday, March 23, 2020 Rating: 5 SWEDISH SUPREME COURT FAVOURS COPYRIGHT PROTECTION OVER FREEDOM OF INFORMATION AND OF THE PRESS Earlier this week, the Swedish Supreme Court issued its decision in an interesting copyright case: T 4412-19 (commonly referred to as the...
Nedim Malovic
- Sunday, March 22, 2020 Swedish Supreme Court favours copyright protection over freedom of information and of the press Reviewed by Nedim Malovic on Sunday, March 22, 2020 Rating: 5AROUND THE IP BLOGS
Socially distancing yourself and feel like you've lost touch with the outside world? Don't worry! Here are some interesting IP new...Magdaleen Jooste
- Sunday, March
22, 2020
Around the IP blogs Reviewed by Magdaleen Jooste on Sunday, March 22, 2020 Rating: 5 WILLEM HOYNG: TODAY'S DECISION SETS BACK UPC AT LEAST FIVE YEARS As reported earlier, the German constitutional court has upheld the constitutional complaint against Germany's accession to theAgreemen...
Léon Dijkman
- Friday, March 20, 2020 Willem Hoyng: today's decision sets back UPC at least five years Reviewed by Léon Dijkman on Friday, March 20, 2020 Rating: 5 NEVER TOO LATE: IF YOU MISSED THE IPKAT LAST WEEK This Kat is working from home Welcome to this week's edition of Never Too Late! Copyright & related rights GuestKat Nedim M...Sophie Corke -
Friday, March 20, 2020 Never Too Late: If you missed the IPKat last week Reviewed by Sophie Corke on Friday, March 20, 2020 Rating: 5 BREAKING: GERMAN CONSTITUTIONAL COURT UPHOLDS COMPLAINT AGAINST UPC AGREEMENT AND IMPLEMENTING ACT This morning, the German constitutional court issued a 86-page decision in which it upholds the constitutional complaint against theGerman ...
Léon Dijkman
- Friday, March 20, 2020 BREAKING: German constitutional court upholds complaint against UPC Agreement and implementing act Reviewed by Léon Dijkman on Friday, March 20, 2020 Rating: 5FRIDAY FANTASIES
While most of the opportunities have now moved online, here is our list of the most interesting items. Stay-at-home Kat Conferences Afe...
Anastasiia Kyrylenko- Friday, March
20, 2020
Friday Fantasies Reviewed by Anastasiia Kyrylenko on Friday, March 20, 2020 Rating: 5 IN THE WAKE OF THE COVID-19 VIRUS, ISRAELI GOVERNMENT AUTHORIZES USE OF THREE PATENTS FOR MAINTENANCE OF ESSENTIAL SUPPLIES AND SERVICES The Israeli Government, acting through its Minister of Health with the authorization of the Attorney General of Israel, issued apreceden...
Neil Wilkof -
Thursday, March 19, 2020 In the wake of the COVID-19 virus, Israeli Government authorizes use of three patents for maintenance of essential supplies and services Reviewed by Neil Wilkof on Thursday, March 19, 2020 Rating: 5 CAN A CO-EXISTENCE AGREEMENT TIP THE SCALES IN FAVOR OF A FINDING OF BAD FAITH IN AN OPPOSITION ACTION? Is there any more elusive aspect of trademark law than the role of bad faith in connection with the right to registration? Kat friend...Neil Wilkof -
Wednesday, March 18, 2020 Can a co-existence agreement tip the scales in favor of a finding of bad faith in an opposition action? Reviewed by Neil Wilkof on Wednesday, March 18, 2020 Rating:5
Older Posts
Home
Subscribe to: Posts ( Atom ) THE IPKAT: INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY NEWS AND FUN FOR EVERYONE! HOW MANY PAGE-VIEWS HAS THE IPKAT RECEIVED?41,926,072
NOT JUST ANY OLD IPKAT ... - "Most Popular Intellectual Property Law Blawg" of all time accordingto JUSTIA RANKINGS
,
March 2020.
- "Most Popular Copyright Blawg" of all time according to JUSTIARANKINGS
,
March 2020.
- PermaKat Eleonora Rosati listed as one of the Managing Intellectual Property magazine's "Fifty Most Influential People" of 2018. - IPKat founder and Blogmeister Emeritus Jeremy Phillips listed as one of the Managing Intellectual Property magazine's "Fifty Most Influential People" of 2005, 2011, 2013, and 2014. - Recommended by the European Patent Office as reading material for candidates for the European Qualifying Examinations, 2013. - Listed as "Top Legal Blog" in The Times Online, March 2011. - One of the only two non-US blogs listed in the Blawg 2010 ABAJOURNAL 100.
- Court Reporter Top Copyright Blog award winner, November 2010. - Number 1 in the 2010 TOP COPYRIGHT BLOG list compiled by the Copyright Litigation Blog, July 2010. - Selected by United States Library of Congress for inclusion in its historic collections of Internet materials related to Legal Blawgs2010.
- Top Patent Blog poll 2009: 3rd out of 50 in the "Favourite Patent Blog" poll and 2nd out of 50 in the "Most-read" poll. - ComputerWeekly IT Law and Governance BLOG OF THE YEAR, 20 August 2008.
- Best of the Blogs
,
Times Online, 21 August 2008. FOLLOW THE IPKAT ON FACEBOOK THE KAT THAT TWEETS! CURRENT FOLLOWERS: 19.9K To follow the IPKat team's posts and comments on Twitter, just clickhere
FOLLOW THE IPKAT ON LINKEDINThe IPKat
GET THE KAT IN YOUR INBOX! 16,400 readers already subscribe to the IPKat by email. To subscribe click HEREand enter
your preferred e-mail address. You will receive an e-mail asking you to confirm your subscription. From here you can control how you would like to receive your e-mails - per post, daily digest or weekly digest. Any problems, please let the IPKat team know. HAS THE KAT GOT YOUR TONGUE?Select
LanguageAfrikaansAlbanianAmharicArabicArmenianAzerbaijaniBasqueBelarusianBengaliBosnianBulgarianCatalanCebuanoChichewaChinese(Simplified)Chinese
(Traditional)CorsicanCroatianCzechDanishDutchEsperantoEstonianFilipinoFinnishFrenchFrisianGalicianGeorgianGermanGreekGujaratiHaitian CreoleHausaHawaiianHebrewHindiHmongHungarianIcelandicIgboIndonesianIrishItalianJapaneseJavaneseKannadaKazakhKhmerKinyarwandaKoreanKurdish (Kurmanji)KyrgyzLaoLatinLatvianLithuanianLuxembourgishMacedonianMalagasyMalayMalayalamMalteseMaoriMarathiMongolianMyanmar (Burmese)NepaliNorwegianOdia (Oriya)PashtoPersianPolishPortuguesePunjabiRomanianRussianSamoanScots GaelicSerbianSesothoShonaSindhiSinhalaSlovakSlovenianSomaliSpanishSundaneseSwahiliSwedishTajikTamilTatarTeluguThaiTurkishTurkmenUkrainianUrduUyghurUzbekVietnameseWelshXhosaYiddishYorubaZuluPoweredby Translate
THE IPKAT'S MOST-READ POSTS IN THE PAST 30 DAYS*
BREAKING: EQE and pre-EQE postponed until further notice*
Breaking news: UK will not participate in UPC system*
Around the IP blogs
*
Functionality, cumulation and lessons from trade mark law: the Advocate General’s Opinion in Brompton Bicycle*
BREAKING: EPO and EUIPO extend deadlines in response to COVID-19pandemic
*
Never Too Late: if you missed the IPKat last week*
Free IP study/revision materials (also) in the time of Coronavirus: acollection
*
BREAKING: German constitutional court upholds complaint against UPC Agreement and implementing act*
Conference Report: Intellectual Property in the Era of Big Data andBlockchain
*
Reflections on IP exclusivity in the wake of the Corona virus outbreakBLOG ARCHIVE
* ▼ 2020 (157)
* ▼ March 2020 (41) * If once is a misfortune and twice is careless, thr... * Swedish Supreme Court favours copyright protection... * Around the IP blogs * Willem Hoyng: today's decision sets back UPC at le... * Never Too Late: If you missed the IPKat last week * BREAKING: German constitutional court upholds comp...* Friday Fantasies
* In the wake of the COVID-19 virus, Israeli Governm... * Can a co-existence agreement tip the scales in fav... * CJEU rules on counteraction by conceptual differen... * Fair dealing and online learning in the time of co... * Remembering Clayton Christensen: how has “disrupti... * BREAKING: EPO and EUIPO extend deadlines in respon... * Free IP study/revision materials (also) in the tim... * Study on the implications of a 25-year reversion/t... * Fashion Law London: The Spring/Summer... * Has Skidmore v Led Zeppelin changed US music copyr...* Sunday Surprises
* The broader teachings of the CJEU 'Fack Ju Göhte' ... * House of Lords EU subcommittee: Is the UK Governme... * CJEU upholds Burlington Arcade's grounds of appeal... * Conference Report: CIPIL 2020 (Part 2) * One Database to Rule Them All? The Mu... * Never Too Late: if you missed the IPKat last week * Crown use defence successful in telecom patent inf... * Conference Report: CIPIL 2020 (Part 1) * Around the IP blogs * Proportionality and FRAND in France - Paris appeal... * CREATe/BIICL conference report 2: new... * Reflections on IP exclusivity in the wake of the C... * Around the IP blogs * BREAKING: EQE and pre-EQE postponed until further ... * Never Too Late: if you missed the IPKat last week * Conference Report: The Second IP & Innovation Rese... * EU General Court reiterates that low distinctivene... * Meghan Markle and Prince Harry to abandon “Sussex ... * CREATe/BIICL conference report: Mappi... * Cancellation of MARQUES Spring Meeting 2020* Monday Miscellany
* Is my car a "digital audio recording device?" The ... * Can the shape or appearance of a product infringe ... * ► February 2020 (54) * ► January 2020 (62)* ► 2019 (748)
* ► December 2019 (45) * ► November 2019 (60) * ► October 2019 (66) * ► September 2019 (58) * ► August 2019 (55) * ► July 2019 (60) * ► June 2019 (60) * ► May 2019 (66) * ► April 2019 (74) * ► March 2019 (67) * ► February 2019 (69) * ► January 2019 (68)* ► 2018 (524)
* ► December 2018 (50) * ► November 2018 (42) * ► October 2018 (47) * ► September 2018 (31) * ► August 2018 (29) * ► July 2018 (28) * ► June 2018 (37) * ► May 2018 (44) * ► April 2018 (44) * ► March 2018 (60) * ► February 2018 (58) * ► January 2018 (54)* ► 2017 (599)
* ► December 2017 (44) * ► November 2017 (61) * ► October 2017 (68) * ► September 2017 (38) * ► August 2017 (30) * ► July 2017 (57) * ► June 2017 (62) * ► May 2017 (57) * ► April 2017 (53) * ► March 2017 (53) * ► February 2017 (41) * ► January 2017 (35)* ► 2016 (598)
* ► December 2016 (55) * ► November 2016 (45) * ► October 2016 (44) * ► September 2016 (61) * ► August 2016 (33) * ► July 2016 (38) * ► June 2016 (47) * ► May 2016 (62) * ► April 2016 (62) * ► March 2016 (63) * ► February 2016 (41) * ► January 2016 (47)* ► 2015 (864)
* ► December 2015 (57) * ► November 2015 (76) * ► October 2015 (71) * ► September 2015 (60) * ► August 2015 (69) * ► July 2015 (74) * ► June 2015 (72) * ► May 2015 (67) * ► April 2015 (65) * ► March 2015 (93) * ► February 2015 (73) * ► January 2015 (87)* ► 2014 (880)
* ► December 2014 (89) * ► November 2014 (58) * ► October 2014 (74) * ► September 2014 (78) * ► August 2014 (68) * ► July 2014 (73) * ► June 2014 (76) * ► May 2014 (72) * ► April 2014 (69) * ► March 2014 (67) * ► February 2014 (78) * ► January 2014 (78)* ► 2013 (768)
* ► December 2013 (64) * ► November 2013 (78) * ► October 2013 (72) * ► September 2013 (54) * ► August 2013 (57) * ► July 2013 (72) * ► June 2013 (56) * ► May 2013 (63) * ► April 2013 (73) * ► March 2013 (62) * ► February 2013 (55) * ► January 2013 (62)* ► 2012 (824)
* ► December 2012 (48) * ► November 2012 (77) * ► October 2012 (69) * ► September 2012 (65) * ► August 2012 (56) * ► July 2012 (70) * ► June 2012 (68) * ► May 2012 (61) * ► April 2012 (70) * ► March 2012 (78) * ► February 2012 (81) * ► January 2012 (81)* ► 2011 (767)
* ► December 2011 (66) * ► November 2011 (69) * ► October 2011 (62) * ► September 2011 (43) * ► August 2011 (61) * ► July 2011 (68) * ► June 2011 (61) * ► May 2011 (63) * ► April 2011 (68) * ► March 2011 (76) * ► February 2011 (66) * ► January 2011 (64)* ► 2010 (747)
* ► December 2010 (74) * ► November 2010 (60) * ► October 2010 (67) * ► September 2010 (60) * ► August 2010 (64) * ► July 2010 (62) * ► June 2010 (57) * ► May 2010 (61) * ► April 2010 (75) * ► March 2010 (63) * ► February 2010 (50) * ► January 2010 (54)* ► 2009 (666)
* ► December 2009 (50) * ► November 2009 (70) * ► October 2009 (58) * ► September 2009 (49) * ► August 2009 (55) * ► July 2009 (59) * ► June 2009 (57) * ► May 2009 (40) * ► April 2009 (51) * ► March 2009 (61) * ► February 2009 (56) * ► January 2009 (60)* ► 2008 (775)
* ► December 2008 (53) * ► November 2008 (66) * ► October 2008 (60) * ► September 2008 (52) * ► August 2008 (56) * ► July 2008 (60) * ► June 2008 (74) * ► May 2008 (78) * ► April 2008 (72) * ► March 2008 (70) * ► February 2008 (59) * ► January 2008 (75)* ► 2007 (844)
* ► December 2007 (55) * ► November 2007 (71) * ► October 2007 (64) * ► September 2007 (54) * ► August 2007 (51) * ► July 2007 (77) * ► June 2007 (75) * ► May 2007 (76) * ► April 2007 (62) * ► March 2007 (92) * ► February 2007 (84) * ► January 2007 (83)* ► 2006 (766)
* ► December 2006 (59) * ► November 2006 (74) * ► October 2006 (57) * ► September 2006 (52) * ► August 2006 (53) * ► July 2006 (61) * ► June 2006 (60) * ► May 2006 (66) * ► April 2006 (64) * ► March 2006 (83) * ► February 2006 (59) * ► January 2006 (78)* ► 2005 (870)
* ► December 2005 (65) * ► November 2005 (68) * ► October 2005 (56) * ► September 2005 (68) * ► August 2005 (70) * ► July 2005 (74) * ► June 2005 (90) * ► May 2005 (79) * ► April 2005 (84) * ► March 2005 (63) * ► February 2005 (70) * ► January 2005 (83)* ► 2004 (739)
* ► December 2004 (81) * ► November 2004 (95) * ► October 2004 (81) * ► September 2004 (66) * ► August 2004 (43) * ► July 2004 (63) * ► June 2004 (49) * ► May 2004 (49) * ► April 2004 (46) * ► March 2004 (61) * ► February 2004 (45) * ► January 2004 (60)* ► 2003 (344)
* ► December 2003 (59) * ► November 2003 (62) * ► October 2003 (52) * ► September 2003 (58) * ► August 2003 (73) * ► July 2003 (40) CREATIVE COMMONS ATTRIBUTION-NON COMMERCIAL LICENCE The IPKat licenses use of its blog posts under this CREATIVE COMMONSLICENCE .
SUBSCRIBE TO THE IPKAT'S POSTS BY EMAIL HERE Just pop your email address into the box and click 'Subscribe':FEED ME IPKAT!
Posts
Atom
Posts
All Comments
Atom
All Comments
THE IPKAT'S COUSINS: SOME IP-FRIENDLY BLOGS FOR YOU*
IP finance
Is it Time to Increase Funding to Universities for Research and Development in the United States?*
jiplp
February Editorial: The Age of Design*
Afro-IP - african intellectual property law, practice and policies COVID-19 concerns takes INTA 2020 into November*
IPTango
Call for WIPO Indigenous Fellowship Program*
The SPC blog
The AG's opinion in Santen*
At last ... the 1709 Copyright Blog 2019 - THE COPYRIGHT YEAR*
MARQUES Class 46 Blog MoU on online advertising and IPR to be signed during Blockathon*
SOLO Independent IP Practitioners The Soil Never Sleeps*
Art and Artifice
How art and law can work together beyond the marketplace*
PatLit: patent litigation law, practice and strategy Recruitment of UPC Judges is now open*
MARQUES - Class 99 (Designs) OUT FOR THE COUNT...*
*
*
*
Designed by SoraTemplates and distributed by Gooyaabi Templates Powered by Blogger .__
ORIGINAL TEXT
Contribute a better translation -------------------------Details
Copyright © 2024 ArchiveBay.com. All rights reserved. Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | DMCA | 2021 | Feedback | Advertising | RSS 2.0