Summer seems to be drawing to a close so it’s probably time to put the mankini away again for another year. Fear not however because we have the first post-beach update on the unitary patent and the UPC. Covered below are brief updates on Italy in the unitary patent, feedback from the UPC fees consultation, the UPC in London and highlights from the most recent update from the UK’s UPC Taskforce (including news on the EPLC). (more…)
Today on IPcopy we have a guest post from Caroline Bommer of Shelston IP on the subject of Australia’s innovation patent system. This post first appeared on the Shelston IP website and has been reproduced with the permission of the author.
In June 2014, following a three year plus review process with a broad range of inputs, ACIP (the Advisory Council on Intellectual Property), published a “final” report on the effectiveness of the Australian innovation patent system. Despite the results of its own economic research commissioned as part of that review, it was unable to come to any clear conclusions regarding retention or abolition of the system, and limited its recommendations to options for addressing concerns regarding the current low patentability threshold. (more…)
A Bank holiday plus a torrential downpour must mean that summer’s just about over. Just in case you missed us over the last few weeks, here’s our summer round-up from mid-July through to the end of August. (more…)
According to the website of the Council of the European Union, Portugal has now deposited its instrument of ratification (on 28 August 2015) to become the eighth country to complete its ratification formalities. Portugal joins Luxembourg, Malta, Denmark, Belgium, Sweden, France and Austria as one of the eight countries who have completed their ratification processes.
Regular readers will recall that we noted last month that Portugal had ratified the UPC Agreement but had not deposited its instrument of ratification in Brussels. Now that Portugal has completed all of the formalities we have updated our ratification infographic (for an answer to the question “What’s up with this infographic?“, please see the bottom of the post!”).
This September Keltie teams will be raising money for a range of charities by taking part in the Run the River and Tough Mudder events. Full details including links to their team profiles and charity pages are below. (more…)
We’ve all been there. The Office Action for your client’s latest US patent application contains an inventive step objection based on the combination of two documents. The documents together appear to be relevant to your main claim but the client swears blind that the documents would never be combined to arrive at the invention. What do you do? How can you argue against such a combination of prior art. Well, here is a brief compilation of relevant US cases bearing on the obviousness of combinations*. (more…)
The English legal system does not acknowledge image rights. Celebrities cannot claim a monopoly on their image, nor a right to control the use of their name, likeness and other attributes that the public associates with them. Historically, they have resorted, as a compromise, to other forms of protection, such as registered trade marks and passing off (see explanation of passing off below), in particular.
However, a recent appeal judgement by the English Courts indicates that in certain circumstances, and depending entirely on the facts of the case, the Common Law tort of passing off can be “stretched” to prohibit the commercial use of celebrities’ images. This precedent is, in the view of the author, likely to be applied tightly, but presents an opening that celebrities will look to rely on to control the use of their image by unauthorised third parties.
The appeal judgement relates to the entertainment industry and follows a case successfully brought by pop-star Rihanna against the high street retailer Topshop. However, the implications for sports personalities, for whom a large proportion of the earnings originates from product endorsements, are self- evident and possibly greater that those for the entertainment industry. (more…)
One trend in sport that is becoming increasingly prominent is the capture (and subsequent processing) of athlete data via wearable devices. While this is usually done for medical, training or performance purposes, the desire on the part of sports bodies to identify new revenue streams is strong and there is no doubt that the demand for this kind of data is growing. Alongside the technological difficulties, one of the most significant obstacles to the successful commercialisation of that data is data protection. Nick White, Partner at Couchmans LLP, examines the treatment of athlete personal data gathered via wearable technology and does so through the lens of the recent general approach adopted by the Council of the European Union (‘the Council’) on 15 June 2015 concerning the proposed draft General Data Protection Regulation (‘GDPR’). (more…)
Book Review: ‘Inside Intellectual Property – Best Practice in Intellectual Property Law, Management and Strategy’
‘Inside Intellectual Property’ is written by a true ‘insider’ . Mike Jewess is the quintessential IP insider, his impressive career in IP having spanned private practice at a major London IP firm, senior in-house roles across a range of industries (including telecoms, packaging, aerospace and defence), and heading departments. He is a sought-after speaker, commentator and mentor in the IP community. If that isn’t enough, his comprehensive book is also informed by an in-depth survey of 25 UK IP practices. The result is a text that should become a seminal reference work. (more…)