IP Case Law Conference: Judicial cooperation and EU copyright challenges

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

IP Case Law Conference: Judicial cooperation and EU copyright challenges

EUIPO_2k-comp.jpg

Cross-border judicial collaboration and EU copyright were hot topics on the second day of the EUIPO’s 5th IP Case Law Conference

Globalisation and judicial cooperation were on the agenda during the morning sessions at the 5th IP Case Law Conference, which is taking place at the EUIPO’s headquarters in Alicante.

While yesterday’s sessions included an element of reflection, today’s focused on how case law can develop in the future.

Bridging borders

Eun-Joo Min began by providing an overview of WIPO’s Judicial Institute, of which he is director. The forum was set up for judges worldwide to discuss and learn from each other.

Around 3,000 judges are part of the network.

Min discussed how in recent years there has been a proliferation of cases heard across multiple jurisdictions, some of which have come to similar conclusions.

She referenced the ‘red sole’ trademark case involving fashion company Christian Louboutin and a standard-essential patent (SEP) dispute between Ericsson and Apple.

The Louboutin case was heard in courts in Brazil, China, France and the US – which all reached similar conclusions, namely that Louboutin’s trademark for the red sole of its shoes was valid.

“With globalisation brings harmonisation of legal issues,” Min said, adding that the decisions were an example of how courts can learn from one another.

Turning to the SEP dispute, Min noted that Ericsson and Apple’s battle was being fought across jurisdictions, including in Colombia and Brazil.

“Colombia moved first by ordering a preliminary injunction in favour of Ericsson [in 2022], Brazil then followed suit with a similar injunction and the parties then settled their dispute,” Min said.

“This illustrates how a decision of one national court can have an impact in other territories,” said Min, adding that the Judicial Institute could help shape future similar scenarios.

“We are not trying to encourage full harmonisation as such, but more dialogue across borders,” she explained.

Let’s talk

Increased dialogue was also on the wish list of another speaker during this morning’s session.

Myrtha Hurtado Rivas, general counsel for brands and anti-counterfeits at Nestlé in Switzerland, outlined a “corporate wish list” for how IP legislation should develop.

“We need to be able to think about how we can accelerate IP proceedings,” she said. “This [slow development of IP laws] is not just something that impacts emerging markets. We also face this problem in developed countries.

“It goes without saying that we cannot develop laws as quickly as technology develops, but collaboration across sectors to give more certainty to practitioners will provide more certainty.”

Copyright conundrum

Attention then turned to copyright, with panellists being asked to consider how copyright law has developed, its interplay with trademark law and whether an EU-wide copyright regulation is needed.

Eleonora Rosati, a professor of IP law at Stockholm University, said it’s undeniable that copyright law should be harmonised but that it is unclear how this could work in practice.

“The Court of Justice of the EU has on occasion criticised or declared unlawful how member states have transposed elements of the Copyright Directive,” she noted.

EU directives do not require adherence to the letter of the law. Member states are instead allowed to take account of the directive’s aims and adopt them into their national frameworks as they see fit.

The Copyright Directive entered into force in June 2019, giving member states until June 7 2021 to implement it domestically.

Rosati said a directive, which leaves room for manoeuvre nationally, was the wrong method for introducing copyright laws and that a regulation might have created tighter rules.

The EUIPO’s 5th IP Case Law Conference concludes today, April 30.

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Natasha Ahmed said she was drawn to the firm’s commitment to artificial intelligence and tech transactions
As it celebrates its 50th anniversary this year, the firm discusses private equity interest in IP, why the UPC is a key priority, and being a ‘strategic adviser’ to clients
Thomas Rukin discusses IP due diligence, his joy at seeing colleagues succeed, and taking inspiration from Marcus Aurelius
The UK-India trade deal doesn’t mention legal services, showing India has again failed to agree on a move that could help foreign firms and local practitioners
Eva-Maria Strobel reveals some of the firm’s IP achievements and its approach to client relationships
Lateral hires at Thompson Hine and Pierson Ferdinand said they were inspired by fresh business opportunities and innovative strategies at their new firms
The launch of a new IP insurance product and INTA hiring a former USPTO commissioner were also among the top talking points this week
The firm explains how it secured a $170.6 million verdict against the government in a patent dispute surrounding airport technology, and why the case led to interest from other inventors
Developments of note included the court partially allowing a claim concerning confidentiality clubs and a decision involving technology used in football matches
The firm said adding capability in the French capital completes its coverage of all major patent litigation jurisdictions as it strives for UPC excellence
Gift this article