Impact of UK’s Brexit for Intellectual Property Rights
A British vote to leave the European Union (EU)—the Brexit referendum issue scheduled for a vote on June 23, 2016 — would have a significant effect on intellectual property right-holders, such as manufacturers doing business in Europe, as Intellectual Property rights are governed by numerous EU regulations. Bearing in mind the intricate economic relationship between the UK and the EU, the British government would likely apply transitional provisions to the EU-wide IP rights currently in place in the event Brexit occurs. As the referendum date comes closer and the Brexit debate gains momentum, we explore the possible outcomes for IP rights holders if the UK were to leave the EU.
Read more at: http://www.natlawreview.com/article/impact-uk-s-brexit-intellectual-property-rights
Britain’s businesses risk losing trademark protection after referendum result
A Cambridge law firm says businesses could lose protection of their trademarks after Britain voted to leave the European Union. trademarks brics union
Jo Eales, associate for commercial technology at Taylor Vinters, said trademarks are at risk as a result of last night’s referendum result.
Read more at: http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/brex
Donald Trump meets intellectual property
Donald Trump’s recent comments about the federal judge handling the Trump University case have led to a whole new round of comments regarding his judgment and fitness for the office of president. And it was perhaps because of that issue that Trump decided to demonstrate on social media how much he is loved by minorities. For that reason,Trump recently retweeted a post that featured a photograph of an African-American family with a caption saying “American Families for Trump.”
Saiba mais em: http://www.cincinnati.com
Federal Court rules on use of Trade Marks as keywords
The increase in businesses using the internet to promote their products and services has prompted a corresponding growth in the ways in which trade marks may be used and abused online.
Read more at: https://www.lexology.com/library/d
The Israeli Supreme Court: Patent rights do not override Patients’ rights!
In a landmark judgment[1] rendered on June 15, 2016, the Supreme Court allowed an appeal filed by The Manufacturers Association of Israel (“the Association”), but denied that filed by Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. (“MSD”), thereby determining that MSD’s patent term extension (“PTE”) for ezetimibe (EZETROL®, marketed in the US under the name ZETIA®), has expired. The judgment has significant importance, both with respect to the constitutionality, as well as to the purposive interpretation of the amendment of the Israeli Patents Law, 1967 back in 2006. Furthermore, the judgment contains important observations concerning the essence of the intellectual property right and its limitations, as well as classifying the pertinent legislation as retroactive, and the implications of such classification.
Read more at: http://www.lexology.com/librar
Software patents in Australia: where to from here?
In May 2016, The High Court of Australia dismissed an application for special leave to appeal the RPL Central decision1 of the Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia. The Full Federal Court found that RPL Central’s invention was not patentable as it was simply a scheme or idea implemented on a generic computer, using standard software and hardware.
Read more at: http://www.lexology.com/libr
Exclusion Of The Suspensive Effect In Trademarks Opposition Cases
On December 21st, 2015, the Argentine Executive Power enacted Law No. 27,222, passed by the Argentine Congress on November 25th, 2015, which modifies sections 18 of the Mediation Law No. 26,589 (the “Mediation Law”) and sections 16 and 17 of the Trademark Law No. 22,362 (the “Trademark Law”).
Read more at: http://www.mondaq.com/x/502756/Trademark/Exc
Federal Court rules on use of Trade Marks as keywords
Apart from obvious uses as domain names and on websites, trade marks may also be used as metatags (invisible tags which describe a web page’s content), or as keywords to optimise particular sites being found by search engines, such as Google. If a business uses its own trade mark for this purpose, there isn’t a problem, but issues can arise where a business uses a competitor’s mark on its website or as a keyword in a Google AdWords campaign. These issues were considered in the recent Federal Court case of Veda Advantage Limited v Malouf Group Enterprises Pty Limited [2016] FCA 255.
Saiba mais em: http://www.lexology.com/library/deta