Australia’s High Court clarifies test for registrability of trade marks
Section 41 (in the form litigated) requires that an Australian trade mark application be rejected if the mark is not capable of distinguishing the designated goods and/or services. A key aspect of this assessment is the extent to which the mark is inherently distinctive as that will determine which subsection then applies. There are effectively three possibilities under Australian law:
Saiba mais em: http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=d075f12d-e879
Rubik’s Cube Trademark Puzzle Solved by EU Court
The Rubik’s Cube has confounded millions of people, including myself since discovering it in my uncle’s house as a child. And now the iconic three-dimensional puzzle has been the subject of an EU ruling.
Copyright Implications Of A “Right To Be Forgotten”? Or How To Take-Down The Internet Archive.
In our earlier posts, we discussed the so-called “right to be forgotten” in connection with a Canadian trade-secret misappropriation and passing-off case and an EU privacy case. In a brief ruling in October, the Federal Court reviewed a copyright claim that fits into this same category. In Davydiuk v. Internet Archive Canada, 2014 FC 944 (CanLII), the plaintiff sought to remove certain pornographic films that were filmed and posted online years earlier.
High Court decision — registrability of foreign language trademarks
On 3 December 2014, the High Court handed down a decision in Cantarella Bros Pty Ltd v Modena Trading Pty Ltd, clarifying the test for inherent distinctiveness of trademarks and giving clarity to the treatment of foreign words used as trademarks.
India, Japan spar over higher intellectual property standards
India and Japan locked horns over a higher standard in intellectual property rights (IPR), with a special focus on the pharmaceutical sector, at the negotiations for a Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP). Japan, also a key participant in the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) agreement, is pushing for “extremely stringent standards” for IPR, which are higher than the limit set under global trading rules, officials told Business Standard.
China Court Ruled Infringement For Ambush Marketing In Film Industry
The term “Ambush Marketing” originally came from inappropriate sport advertisement in western countries. It involves a marketing strategy wherein the advertisers associate themselves with, and therefore capitalize on, a particular event without paying any sponsorship/license fee. As more and more film producers are engaging such marketing strategies to promote their films over recent years in the PRC, there have been controversies on whether Ambush Marketing activities should be deemed as infringement in the Film Industry.
Saiba mais em: http://www.mondaq.com/x/357528/Trademark/China+Court
India: Should There Be A Specialized Court For Patent Litigation?
When properly enforced, patents aim to promote innovation by rewarding inventors for their efforts. However patent protection always remains a topic of debate as some believe that patents do not encourage innovation rather impedes it. To keep a check on this, the courts are charged with preserving the balance between the access to innovation and the inventor’s right of monopoly over the patent, ensuring that the system rewards past innovation without unduly burdening future innovators.
Saiba mais em: http://www.mondaq.com/india/x/357212/Patent/Should+There
What the Courts Did to Curb Patent Trolling—For Now
The last decade was a boom time for patent trolls. Their names and lawsuits made the news; This American Life dedicated two hour-long episodes to them. The number of defendants in patent troll lawsuits increased sixfold from 2003 through last year. But now the tides seem to be turning for them: After growing very rapidly since 2009, the number of lawsuits filed by “non-practicing entities” will be significantly lower this year compared to 2013.
Trademarks battle against Sydney barrister Derek Minus sees Federal Court judge Annabelle Bennett step down over apprehended bias claims
It is a small world, the Sydney legal fraternity, and one barrister caught up in his own legal woes has asked two Federal Court judges to step aside from hearing a case against him because of potential bias.