Search results for

A recent case at the Delhi High Court has dealt with the overlap between copyright and design protection and its application to the fashion industry in India. The questions addressed by the case were, firstly, whether drawings or sketches are artistic works and, secondly, whether the object or commercial intention be tested while applying Section 15 of the Copyright Act 1957, which bars copyright protection in drawings which are repeated more than fifty times.

The Netherlands Patent Office has pioneered the concept of non-examined patents. James Nurton spoke to its president, Guus Broesterhuizen, about SMEs, reform in Europe and the proposals for a Community patent

What is the ideal way to resolve a dispute? For IP owners, the answers may vary, but words that often come up include: quick, non-disclosed, amicable and cost-effective.

In principle, a case record (including briefs and evidence submitted by either party) of a Japanese court is publicly available. However, upon request from a party alleging that the record contains a trade secret, a court may issue: an order to restrict third party inspection of a case record and/or an order to require the addressee, such as counsels and employees of the other party, to maintain confidentiality. Recently, the IP High Court and the Supreme Court decided on the issues relating to these orders.

Within a very short period of time, the ECJ had to answer two questions from the Austrian Oberster Patent- und Markensenat for a preliminary ruling. Both questions concerned Article 12 of the Trade Mark Directive, that is the genuine use of a trade mark, and in both cases the trade marks were used without gaining any profit by the trade mark owner. So one could assume that the answer to both questions should be similar – not at all!

The Full Federal Court has rebuffed an attempt to appropriate the international reputation of the Monster Energy brand drink in Australia in Hansen Beverage Company v Bickfords (Australia) Pty Ltd [2008] FCAFC 181.

On January 19 2009, the Supreme Court rendered its decision in case no GR 175769-70 denying the petition of ABS-CBN Corporation, which accused Philippine Multi-Media System Inc (PMSI) of violating its broadcasting rights and copyright. This case arose from a 2002 administrative complaint filed with the Bureau of Legal Affairs of the Intellectual Property Office (IPOPhil) by ABS-CBN, the Philippines' top broadcasting company, against PMSI, a provider of a direct-to-home television services using satellite, alleging that PMSI's unauthorised rebroadcasting of ABS-CBN's Channels 2 and 23 infringed on its broadcasting rights and copyright. ABS-CBN anchored its complaint on Sections 211 and 177 of the IP Code, which provides that broadcasting organisations shall enjoy the exclusive right to carry out, authorise or prevent the rebroadcasting of their broadcasts, and copyright or economic rights shall consist of the exclusive right to carry out, authorise or prevent the public performance of the work, and other communication to the public of the work.

Statistics show that in Argentina, as in the rest of the world, there is a constant growth of piracy related to copyrighted works, making adequate copyright protection increasingly relevant.

In a recent ruling by the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) of South Africa, Emirates Industries was ordered to withdraw the packaging of its Mister Bean Baked Beans product. The ASA Directorate found that the packaging contravened Clauses 8 and 9 of the ASA Code, in that it exploited the advertising goodwill, and imitated the packaging of, Tiger Brands' Koo Baked Beans.

Lawyers familiar with US rules on patent invalidation may find some familiar parallels, and some key differences, in the Japanese system. Yoshinari Kishimoto of Sughrue Mion provides a comparative guide