Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

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

Search results for

There are 21,957 results that match your search.21,957 results
  • Nine years of preparation come to fruition
  • As yet another supermarket challenges a brand owner over grey goods, Sandra McDonald analyzes the results of a new survey on the attitude of businesses towards exhaustion
  • In a major victory for a foreign patent owner, Pfizer has stopped a local company infringing its patent for fluconazole.
  • Collaborations can be the most effective way to exploit new technologies
  • What duties, if any, do company directors have to maximize the value of intellectual property rights owned by their companies?
  • Last year we witnessed celebrations of significant anniversaries connected with patent offices and IP rights in Germany and Austria. Meanwhile, the Czech Patent Office quietly marked the 80th anniversary of its foundation in 1919.
  • Trade marks which, either intrinsically, or because they are popular on the market, have a clear distinctiveness, enjoy a broader degree of protection than trade marks which are less distinctive. This criterion emerged from the ruling handed down by the ECJ on November 11 1997 in the Puma v Sabel case. The question of when a trade mark is well-known has remained unanswered for some time. However, although this question has a bearing on the application of Article 5, Paragraph 2 of the Trade Mark Directive and of Section 13A, Subsection 1 under c of the Uniform Benelux Trade Marks Act which stipulates that the owner of a well-known trade mark can oppose the use thereof or of a similar sign for dissimilar goods or services if such use can result in an unfair advantage being derived from the trade mark or the distinctiveness or reputation of the trade mark being impaired.
  • Biotech leader Genentech has an R&D budget of over $300 million.
  • US: A federal judge in San Francisco ruled December 7 that a patent for DNA analysis owned by Swiss biotechnology company Hoffman-La Roche was obtained by deliberately misleading the USPTO and is invalid. US District Judge Vaughn Walker upheld a challenge by Promega which argued that scientists got the patent in 1990 through false claims. Those scientists worked for Cetus, which sold rights to the patent to Hoffman La Roche in 1991. The patented substance is called Taq DNA Polymerase. Cetus inventors had convinced the patent office that they had a substance better than those developed in the 1980s. Hoffman-La Roche is appealing, and contends that the ruling invalidates the patent for only one form of Taq, and not for the more common and lucrative recombinant Taq.
  • In today's fast-moving markets, successful new products and services are the key to success