Home » 2013 (Page 7)
Yearly Archives: 2013
G1/10 – Portion vs Position: Where are they now?
Around this time last year, decision G1/10 of the Enlarged Board of Appeal was published by the EPO, and over at IPCopy, we’re paying it a little re-visit. ‘Why ever is that?’ I hear you cry! Well, I’m so glad you asked. Separate opposition proceedings relating to the patent in question were in progress when G1/10 was issued; the oral proceedings were scheduled for this month, and an interesting decision was due to be made, so IPCopy took a little look at the EP patents register to see what happened. (more…)
Bad Faith & trade marks: Frost Products Ltd v F C Frost Ltd
On Friday 26th July 2013 Mr Justice Vos, sitting in the PCC, delivered a detailed judgment which is a stark reminder to traders not to “turn a blind eye” to competitors. In a complex case, in which the papers filled 17 lever arch files, the judge complimented counsel for managing to remain within the 2 day allocated time frame for this PCC matter. Although there was plenty of legal argument, the case ultimately turned on facts. Who was doing what, when, who knew what, when, and what they ought to have done about it. (more…)
Unitary Patent Package – The Ratification Game [Updated: 12 August 2013]
[Update (12.8.13) – Austria has apparently deposited its instrument of ratification. The Info graphic and State of Play text below have been updated.]
As discussed in our Q&A post on the unitary patent package, the unified patent court agreement requires 13 or more participating member states to ratify the agreement before the unitary patent system can get up and running. Furthermore, three of those 13 member states need to be France, Germany and the United Kingdom.
We will be following the ratification process here on IPcopy but thought we’d try and do so via the medium of football and info graphics.
So, without further ado here’s the process of ratification re-imagined in the form of a (wildly stretched) football analogy. The European team “UPP United” (Unitary Patent Package) are at the ground for their match against the Rest of the World (an aim of the unitary patent system is to make the European patent system more competitive compared to the systems in the US and Japan). This being a slightly inaccurate analogy the European team will comprise 13 players (instead of the usual 11) and will form up in a 5-5-2 formation! The info graphic is below and more notes are further down the post. We hope you enjoy.
Unitary patent package – Timeline for implementation
The dolly zoom is a camera effect, famously used by Alfred Hitchcock in Vertigo, in which the background in a shot suddenly appears to change size in relation to the foreground subject matter. Those of you following the implementation of the unitary patent system may have noted that despite the main legislative regulations and agreements being in place the actual “go live” date for the system appears to be performing the legal equivalent of a dolly zoom by disappearing into the distance!
Since the original implementation date was April 2014 but is now being reported as late 2015/2016, we thought we’d take a quick look at the timeline as it appears now.
Trade Mark Review: Snickers versus Kickers
In the case of Hultafors Group AB (Hultafors) V OHIM (Case T-537/11, April 19 2013), the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal was upheld by the General Court confirming that there was a likelihood of confusion between a figurative Community trademark application incorporating the word ‘SNICKERS’ and an earlier Italian registration for the word mark ‘KICKERS’ in Class 25. Both marks covered goods including ‘clothing, footwear and headgear’. (more…)
Trade Mark Tribunal – Fast Track Opposition Procedure at the UKIPO
Back at the beginning of May we looked at a consultation that was running at the UKIPO which sought the views of users and potential users of the UK national trade mark registration system about the introduction of a lower cost “fast track” opposition based on earlier registered or pending marks (see original post here). The consultation closed on 17 May 2013 and the Government’s response was released recently. In this post we take a quick look at the consultation again and the Government’s response.
Unified Patent Court News: European Commission Adopts Proposal for Amendment to Brussels I Regulation
Breaking news from IPCopy (with a shout-out to the eagle-eyed Giles Parsons of Browne Jacobson for the heads-up): The European Commission has adopted the Proposal for a Regulation amending Regulation No 1215/2012 (the ‘Brussels I’ regulation). This amendment has been eagerly anticipated by Unitary Patent spotters, and is necessary to bring the Agreement on the Unified Patent Court into effect.
SkyDrive v Sky: Microsoft lose against BSkyB over the use of the term “Skydrive”
BSkyB, the British Satellite Broadcasting company has won a case against the American multinational software corporation (Microsoft) in actions for passing off and for infringement of two CTM Registrations and two UK trade mark registrations for SKY. By way of these actions, BSkyB sought to prevent Microsoft from using “SkyDrive” as the name for their cloud storage service in Europe.
In a counterclaim, Microsoft filed for a declaration of partial invalidity in respect of the SKY trade marks on the grounds of descriptiveness for cloud storage services. (more…)
3D printing – seminar review
On 26 June 2013 Field Fisher Waterhouse held an excellent afternoon seminar on “Developments in UK and EU patent law”. David Knight’s session on 3D printing (“3D Printing – A licence to infringe IP rights?”) was particularly interesting as it looked at the implications for intellectual property rights owners arising from the developing field of 3D printing.
In this post we provide a (hopefully accurate!) recap of David’s talk and a look at the world of 3D printing. (more…)
Patent Marking on Vintage Recreation Products – Inspired by Gretsch® Guitars
You may not believe it, but in her spare time, this IPCopy writer does occasionally turn to pursuits other than combing through Unitary Patent legislation (no, really). Not so long ago, she was perusing the website of Gretsch® guitars, on the brink of doing some damage to her wallet, and stumbled across something that caught her eye*.
Gretsch® has been around since the 1880s, and started out making banjos and ukuleles, soon progressing to guitars. Today, they focus on vintage-style guitars, some being recreations of earlier instruments. Why on earth might you care about this? Well, recreating the appearance of a vintage instrument is relevant to the important subject of patent marking (no, really).
IPcopy 