Search results for

The new provision for punitive damages for wilful infringement is now effective. The newly introduced punitive damages provision should contribute to stronger protection of patents and increase general value of patents in Korea. The new provision set forth below is now effective in Korea to deter unjust acts of patent infringement.

"I have existed from the morning of the world and I shall exist until the last star falls from the night. Although I have taken the form of Gaius Caligula, I am all men as I am no man and therefore I am a God"- Caligula, Roman Emperor

Intellectual property litigation attorneys, especially those in the patent field, are always looking for verdicts that can be viewed as landmarks in the interpretation and practical application of Vietnam's laws and regulations. One such verdict was issued by the People's Court of Binh Duong Province on July 17 2019 in a patent infringement case between a European pharmaceutical company and one of Vietnam's largest manufacturers of generic drugs. The court's judgment provided a number of tantalising "firsts" in terms of legal milestones, addressing questions about provisions found in legal documents that had previously never been enforced in practice.

Anna Holmberg, manager of The Vera Project at the Center for Intellectual Property, spoke at this year’s Corporate IP Strategy Summit about tackling unconscious bias and giving women better opportunities in IP

The Intellectual Property Office of Singapore (IPOS) and eight other ASEAN IP offices announced at IP Week in Singapore late last month that under a new ASPEC Acceleration for Industry 4.0 Infrastructure and Manufacturing (ASPEC-AIM) initiative, the nine ASEAN IP offices will prioritise patent application prosecution in technologies such as Industry 4.0 manufacturing, FinTech, cybersecurity and robotics. ASPEC-AIM is a two-year pilot project launched on August 27 2019 which is intended to allow businesses and innovators filing for patent protection in the ASEAN region to enjoy a short turnaround time of six months from requesting examination to a first office action.

In Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts Inc. v Goldsmith et al. No. 17-CV-2532, 2019 (S.D.N.Y. July 1 2019), the US District Court for the Southern District of New York addressed the question of whether Andy Warhol's (Warhol) use of a photograph of Prince Rogers Nelson, best known as Prince, constituted violations of the Copyright Act. Granting the Andy Warhol Foundation's (AWF) motion for summary judgment, the court found that although the at-issue photograph was protected by copyright, AWF had a viable fair use defence.

A trademark application No 2017709487 was filed by Young Living Essential Oils, a US company on March 16 2017 in respect of Class 3.

In July this year, the Taiwan Intellectual Property Office (TIPO) announced a modification to the practice regarding recognition of priority rights to foreign design applications with reference to patent practice in the US, Japan, etc. This modification, taking effect from August 1 2019, marks a leap toward harmonisation with international practice.

In Turkey, the prosecution of criminal offences relating to trademark law depends on a proper complaint filed by the trademark owner. Once the complaint and the evidence is submitted to the local prosecutor's office, the file is brought before the local criminal court. The criminal courts, however, have become more and more reluctant to issue decisions recently. Hence, it is now more important than ever for trademark owners to be well-prepared before filing a complaint, in terms of evidence gathering.

The Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines (IPOPHL) issued Memorandum Circular No. 2019-006 on the Rules of Procedure for IPOPHL Mediation Outside of Litigation, extending its mediation services outside of litigation, effective from September 2 2019. Before this circular, the parties went through mediation only after the filing of the verified answer, and this applied to inter partes cases such as oppositions and cancellations, and IP violation cases, e.g. infringement, unfair competition etc. Mediation of IP cases was introduced by the IPOPHL in 2011, and as of the end of 2018, the average settlement rate is 41.4%, indicating that mediation is an effective mode of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) for IP cases. There is no doubt that mediation is a more economic and quicker way of resolving disputes in comparison with litigation which could take over three years just at the first level and if appeals are to be considered, could last over 10 years. The new rules give potential disputants an avenue to resolve their conflict even before an actual suit is filed.