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

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

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

Cookies Settings

Search results for

There are 43,002 results that match your search.43,002 results
  • Dyan Finguerra-DuCharme and Giovanna Marchese explore the circumstances under which jewellery may qualify for protection under US copyright and trade mark laws and discuss the shortcomings associated with each
  • In Dart Industries Inc & Anr v Polyset Plastics Pvt Ltd & Ors, a single judge of the Delhi High Court's vide order dated August 1 2018 confirmed an ex parte ad interim injunction in favour of the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs, Dart Industries Inc and its Indian subsidiary, filed two separate suits against the defendants for infringement and passing off the company's registered design of bottles and caps and other designs which amounted to an obvious imitation of the plaintiffs' registered designs. The plaintiffs also filed applications under Order 39 Rule (1) and (2), Civil Procedure Code (CPC) seeking an ex parte ad interim injunction against the defendants, and this was allowed in favour of the plaintiffs on the first day of the listing of the suit. The defendants, on being served with a copy of the summons filed applications under Order 39 Rule (4), CPC for vacation of the ex parte ad interim injunction.
  • Managing IP is compiling its list of the 50 most influential people in intellectual property. Who do you think should be included?
  • The owner of an internet connection used for copyright infringement through file-sharing cannot escape liability by naming a family member who may have used the connection, the CJEU holds
  • Sponsored by HANOL ClassHankyul IP & Law
    In 2015, the Korean Supreme Court cleared the patent eligibility hurdle for dosage regimen inventions, and announced that dosage regimens are patentable if they satisfy other patentability requirements including novelty and inventiveness (Supreme Court en banc decision 2014Hu768, May 21 2015). In the first case where the inventiveness of a dosage invention was at issue (Patent Court decision 2015Heo7889, February 3 2017), the Korean Patent Court denied inventiveness on the ground that optimising dosage regimens to achieve the reduction of toxicity or improvement of efficacy is considered routine experimentation or work of a person having ordinary skill in the art (PHOSITA). This shows that Korea has a strict standard for the inventiveness of dosage regimen patents.
  • In September 2017, the Malaysian government exercised its right to exploit Gilead's patented drug, Sofosbuvir, used for the treatment of Hepatitis C without Gilead's authorisation. The Malaysian government proceeded with the exercise of its rights despite Gilead's announcement of the extension of its voluntary licensing scheme for the supply of licensed generic Sofosbuvir to Malaysia. This is the second time that Malaysia has exercised its government rights to exploit a patented invention without the authorisation of the rights holder. The first time was in 2003, when the government exercised its rights for the supply of affordable HIV/AIDS drugs patented by GlaxoSmithKline and Bristol-Myers Squibb after failed lengthy price negotiations with the patent owners.
  • The direction of drug discovery has moved from focusing on low molecular weight compounds to biopharmaceuticals, and the percentage of biopharmaceuticals being sold is increasing. The first biosimilar patent litigation was also filed.
  • In Deckers Outdoor Corp. v Australian Leather Pty. Ltd., the US District Court in Illinois addressed the issue of whether a term found to be generic in Australia should compel the conclusion that such term is generic in the US, and whether the doctrine of foreign equivalents should apply to a term used in another English-speaking country.
  • The Ninth Circuit’s Stairway to Heaven opinion has already been cited in an Ed Sheeran dispute. Copyright practitioners discuss its impact and issues to watch in the retrial
  • With the cloud of uncertainty around what Brexit will look like, it is worth clarifying the effect, or lack of effect it will have on European patents and the UK.
456
of
4301