Firm
IP attorneys share how the Cox v Sony ruling impacts their counselling strategies, and if the case could influence how courts may assess liability for AI platforms
Natasha Daughtrey shares how firms can help their women litigators take the lead on trials, and why she is seeing a convergence of tech and life sciences disputes
Ruth Hoy will join the firm's IP practice alongside Huw Cookson, who will also become a partner
IP boutique firm says its platform will help navigate ‘scattered’ decisions by bringing case law, commentary and research under one umbrella
Sponsored
Sponsored
-
Sponsored by Januar Jahja & PartnersDespite the widespread social, health, and economic devastation caused by COVID-19, it has largely been business as usual at the Indonesian IP Office (DGIP) since the start of the pandemic. While there certainly have been some minor disruptions and corresponding adjustments, overall the impact so far appears to have been minimal.
-
Sponsored by Griffith HackIn early 2019, IP Australia initiated a comprehensive research phase exploring Australia’s design ecosystem, including voices from the industry, design forums, economic analysis and business surveys. Following this 12-month exercise, the regulator has proposed the following changes:
-
Sponsored by Hanol IP & LawRecently, the Korean Patent Court rendered a favourable decision on the patentability of medical use inventions in which strict scrutiny was employed for two aspects of the enablement and inventiveness requirements.
-
Sponsored by Smart & BiggarKwan Loh and Jamie-Lynn Kraft of Smart & Biggar review the changes made to Canadian trademark law and offer tips on how to navigate the road ahead
-
Sponsored by MaiwaldIn the present case, the German Federal Court of Justice again had to deal with the question of how a representation of information within the meaning of Article 52(2)(d) EPC is to be distinguished from a technical feature.
-
Sponsored by InspicosThe Enlarged Board of Appeal of the EPO (EBA) has recently issued opinion G 3/19, which concludes that plants and animals exclusively obtained by “essentially biological processes” are exempt from patentability. This finding only affects patents derived from patent applications filed after July 1 2017.