Search results for

A recent example of the peculiarities of UK copyright law has brought into sharp relief how the length of some IP rights can outlive changes in statute and policy.

Since the beginning of this year following law n° 20104‐315 of March 11 2014 reinforcing the battle against counterfeiting, an article was introduced in the Intellectual Property Code regulating the IP profession stipulating that all qualified patent and trade mark attorneys (conseils en propriété industrielle) need to dedicate a significant part of their time to professional training.

In 2012, Michael Dewayne Brown, an American citizen, sued for copyright infringement American English Skills Development Center (AESDCI) and its shareholders Armilyn MorilloBujis, et al, for their unauthorised copying, use, reproduction and obtaining copyright registration in the name of AESDCI, of his work "Conversational English Study Guide (First Edition)", of which Brown claimed to be the creator and author.

Among Portuguese-speaking countries in Africa, one of the recent events regarding IP which deserves to be highlighted is the approval, in Mozambique, of the new Industrial Property Code (IPC) by Decree number 47/2015, published in the Boletim da República (Official Gazette) of December 31 2015, which comes into effect 90 days after its publication.

According to Article 49.2 of the Trade Mark Act, in a trade mark dispute, such as an opposition, invalidation or non-use cancellation action, the IP Office is required to serve a copy of the brief/counterstatement filed by each party on the other party for a response. Under such procedure, the parties can alternately submit observations. It is only when the procedure comes to an end that the IP Office will start examining the case and render a decision.

According to the Mexican Industrial Property Law (IPL) the following types of pharmaceutical-related claims are exceptions to patentability:

Indonesian IP laws have always required IP rights licences in Indonesia to be recorded at the Intellectual Property Office. This requirement is set out on the Copyright Law, Patent Law, Trade Mark Law, Industrial Design Law, Layout Designs of Integrated Circuits Law and Trade Secrets Law. However, such recordal mechanism has not been carried out due to the lack of implementing regulation, even though the legal consequence is that, if an IP licence is not recorded, it would not be binding on any third parties.

According to the Greek Code of Civil Procedure, while a main infringement action is pending, the defendant has the right to request that a preliminary injunction, previously granted for the same cause of action and between the same parties, be lifted on the basis of either an error in law or/and of an error in fact.

While the recently released EPO performance statistics for 2015 show an increase in the number of grants compared to the previous year and a decrease of backlog of searches by two thirds, delay in examination of pending cases is still of concern to some. A recent appeal decision rendered in the field of computer implemented inventions reveals that excessive examination delays do not amuse the Boards of Appeal. More specifically, in decision T 823/11 rendered in December 2015, Board 3.5.07 has ruled that duration of examination proceedings of more than 12 years must be regarded as excessive and amounts to a substantial procedural violation.

In the court decision X ZR 111/13 – Telekommunikationsverbindung, the German Federal Court of Justice (BGH) discussed the flexibility that the parties have to amend the issues of dispute in second instance nullity proceedings. The case being considered relates to appeal proceedings before the German Federal Court of Justice reviewing the first instance decision in terms of the revocation of a patent by the German Federal Patent Court (BPatG).