Search results for

One of the cornerstones of the copyright system is the idea/expression dichotomy, which sets forth that only the original expression of ideas is to be protected, rather than the ideas themselves. This principle poses important challenges for the creative industries, since the distinction between an idea and the expression of that idea is sometimes unclear.

The first search reports carried out by the European Patent Office (EPO) on Italian national patent applications are finally reaching the applicants. Applicants may either entrust an agent to go to the Italian Patent and Trade Mark Office (PTO) to collect the documents (and, in so doing, relieve the PTO of some of its workload as it is being flooded by hundreds of searches coming in from the EPO), or wait for the PTO to send the searches by registered mail. It seems, therefore, that for the time being the PTO has set aside the option of transmitting the searches online.

As a measure to help tourism businesses in Croatia to successfully address the financial crisis, the Croatian government adopted an action plan by which it proposed a 50% reduction in the royalty fee paid to copyright owners for public performance of their copyrighted musical works. Apparently those members of the government responsible for the plan believe that the reduction of copyright royalties will benefit hotel/restaurant businesses, which in past years have complained about the need to pay royalties for public performances of copyrighted works.

In a recent judgment (Number 229/2009), in the context of provisional measures proceedings, the Athens Single Bench Court of First Instance granted an injunction against a hotelier who was using the composite sign "Athens Easy Hotel" in white lettering with an orange background in the course of his business. The EasyGroup company owned by Stelios Haji-Ioannou, the serial entrepreneur, which owns the easy brand including various CTM registrations, such as Easy Hotel and Easy Hostel, sought injunctive relief against the defendant.

Pursuant to section 45 of the Canadian Trade-marks Act, any person may request that the Registrar give notice to a registered owner that the owner must show use of its mark in association with the goods and services identified in the registration. Such cancellation notices may be sent at any time following three years of registration. The procedure, administered by the Trade-mark Opposition Board, generally through specialised hearing officers, is aimed at the efficient and expeditious removal of deadwood from the register. Deadwood is particularly a problem owing to the lengthy term of initial protection, namely fifteen years, as opposed to the more common ten years.

During 2007, the Dubai Court of First Instance was called on to confirm the validity of the trade mark Aqua, used in respect of metal drain covers and the cancellation of the trade mark Aqua M BBM used and registered in respect of identical goods. The court dismissed the action, a decision that was confirmed by both the Courts of Appeal (Number 631/2007) and Cassation (Number 95/2008).

The Russian Patent Office refused registration of the trade mark In God We Trust, which was filed by a Russian company for goods in class 16 (paper and paper products) and services in class 37 (insurance, financial activities and related services). The applicant did not agree with the rejection of the Patent Office and appealed the official action. The Court then cancelled the decision of the Patent Office. In its turn the Patent Office filed a complaint against the decision of the lower court to the Court of Appeal, which cancelled the decision of the court of first instance based on the following arguments.

A patent confers exclusivity upon the patentee to exploit an invention and to produce, sell or import the patented product or process for a limited period. However, there are some limitations to this exclusive right, such as research exemptions, providing some information to the authorities and the Bolar exception. The Indian Patents Act, 1970 incorporates these exceptions under Sections 47, 100 and 107A.

Managing IP reports on highlights from the sessions, the keynote speeches and the receptions in Seattle last month

In May 2009, Vietnam's National Office of Intellectual Property (NOIP) vowed to clarify various ambiguities surrounding patentability of use claims in Vietnam. At present, the NOIP interprets the relevant provisions of Vietnam's Law on Intellectual Property as prohibiting use claims. Each patent examination division in the NOIP treats this matter in different ways.