- ABOUT JIPO
- TRADE MARKS
- GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS
- TRADITIONAL KNOWLEDGE
Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice - current issue
Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice - RSS feed of current issue
Updated: 2 min 47 sec ago
Hong Kong media group has no protectable goodwill in the UK; its Community trade mark is 'now' invalid
The Court of Appeal unanimously upheld the High Court's decision that, based on the evidence, the claimant (a Hong Kong-based media group) did not have a valid Community trade mark (CTM) or any goodwill in the UK that would give it the right to prevent BSkyB from using the name ‘NOW TV’ in relation to BSkyB's Internet protocol TV service. The appeal considered the requirement of distinctiveness for a CTM to be valid and whether a reputation established outside the UK could give rise to goodwill in the UK to support a claim for passing off.
United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit examines trade mark infringement under the Federal Trademark Dilution Act
The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit examines the six factors used to determine whether a trade mark use constitutes infringement under the Federal Trademark Dilution Act and clarifies the value of survey evidence and of considering the mark in the context of its use.
An internet intermediary that allows internet users to publish video clips, including copyright movies, does not incur in criminal liability under the Copyright Act of Argentina.
The Court of Appeal dismissed SAS Institute Inc's appeal from the High Court confirming, inter alia, that the look and feel of a computer program cannot be protected. By creating a software product to execute application programs written in SAS's language, World Programming Limited had not infringed SAS's copyright.
The General Court upheld an invalidity action brought by Puma against a registered Community design (RCD) for ‘logos’ representing a ‘jumping feline’ on the basis of earlier trade mark rights owned by Puma, which constituted a prior disclosed design.
The interpretation of the scope of an arbitration clause which contains a carve-out by which certain types of disputes (specifically intellectual property disputes) are excluded from arbitration had to be made by the arbitral tribunal and not by the California courts as a result of the incorporation of the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules in the arbitration clause.
The Technology Transfer Block Exemption Regulation and related Guidelines: competition law and IP licensing in the EU
Stefano Barazza is a lawyer at Studio Legale Barazza, in Italy.
The technology transfer realized through the licensing of intellectual property rights represents the key to the diffusion of innovation in the industry, which allows the creation of new and improved products, with beneficial effects for innovators, manufacturers and consumers.
Although they generally give rise to significant efficiencies and pro-competitive effects, technology transfer agreements may also contain restrictions capable of affecting the competition in the relevant product and technology markets, such as exclusive licensing, exclusive grant-back provisions, price restraints, and non-challenge clauses.
In the European Union, the Commission has progressively refined its approach towards the assessment of the compatibility of technology transfer agreements with Article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), currently disciplined by Regulation 772/2004 and by the Guidelines on the application of Article 81 of the EC Treaty to technology transfer agreements. A recent reform proposal seeks to maintain the principles enshrined in the existing legislation, introducing appropriate changes to improve the protection of the undertakings involved and to dissipate the risks of anti-competitive effects on the relevant markets.
Ana Ramalho did her PhD at the IViR—Institute for Information Law, University of Amsterdam, and is now a Senior Lecturer at the University of South Wales (UK). This article is based on research conducted by the author at the IViR.
EU legislation in the field of copyright has been largely based on the need to build an internal market—a concept foreign to copyright law, which lacks normative guidance.
Application of social sciences techniques to EU copyright legislation enables the mapping of the real goals of legislative activity in copyright, which in turn allows for the assessment of the consequences of the lack of normative guidance.
The evidence shows that the lack of normative guidance resulting from the main competence norm has resulted in a normative gap in copyright law-making.
Karin Stumpf is a partner with Stumpf Patent Attorneys in Stuttgart, Germany, specializing in trade mark law.
In order to overcome the strict use requirement for trade marks, trade mark owners whose marks become vulnerable to cancellation based on non-use upon expiration of the grace period have started to file identical applications for the same list of goods, thus obtaining another five-year period of non-use upon registration of the identical trade mark.
Repeated filing for the same trade mark has become a widely discussed issue; however, the legal ramifications at the European level remain vague.
Currently, the Community Trade Mark Directive does not cover the issue explicitly, thus putting competitors with an interest in the subject at a disadvantage.
This article discusses current case law and relevant statutes on the issue of repeated trade marks filing at the European level, and attempts to highlight shortcomings that need to be remedied in order to discuss and adjudicate this issue with more clarity.
The Italian Court of Cassation holds that Italian courts have jurisdiction to entertain an action seeking a declaration of non-infringement of different national fractions of a European patent.