Europe
Partner Ginevra Righini explains how she secured victory for the Comité Champagne in its fight against an EUTM application for ‘Nero Champagne’
Volkan Hamamcıoğlu joins us for our ‘Five minutes with’ series to discuss meditation, tackling deadlines, and taking inspiration from Hamlet
A $110 million US verdict against Apple and an appellate order staying a $39 million trademark infringement finding against Amazon were also among the top talking points
The insensitive reaction to a UK politician crying on TV proves we have a long way to go before we can say we are tackling workplace wellbeing
Sponsored
Sponsored
-
Sponsored by Bird & BirdIn its first decision to consider the Trade Secrets Regulations, the Court of Appeal upheld the decision of the High Court to grant an interim injunction under the regulations to prevent the import of allegedly “infringing goods” into the UK pending trial.
-
Sponsored by Gün and PartnersThis article aims to discuss similarity of goods and services in case of an opposition against a trademark application before the Turkish Patent and Trademark Office (the office).
-
Sponsored by Gorodissky & PartnersThe headline of this article might provoke amazement or concern among football fans. They might even wonder why Wikipedia missed this important event in the life of the famous footballer. The truth, however, is detailed below.
-
Sponsored by Patrinos & KilimirisIn a recent decision, the Athens Full Member Court of First Instance (IP Division) ruled that the successor-in-title of a patent is not entitled to a claim for damages regarding the time period between the patent’s transfer agreement and the corresponding recording thereof in the patent register. In essence, the court dismissed the successors-in-title’s claim for damages for the abovementioned time frame due to lack of legal standing, making it clear that damages can only be sought for the time after a patent transfer has been recorded .
-
Sponsored by Cabinet Beau de LoménieThe Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) dealt with the issue of acceptance of sales services in opposition procedures in the joined cases of C-155/18 and C-158/18 P, Tulliallan Burlington v European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and Burlington Fashion.
-
Sponsored by Bird & BirdRichard Vary, Clemens Heusch and Matthias Schneider reveal their views on component-level versus end-point licensing and Unwired Planet
European Jurisdictions