MIP Search | Managing Intellectual Property

Australia: Clarification of patent novelty limits

The Australian courts have recently clarified what acts will constitute novelty destroying prior art. In Australia, patents are normally invalid where the idea was publicly used or known before the priority date of the application. This normally means a novelty-destroying act occurs when at least one member of the public is free to make use of the information obtained from the act.

Managing IP Correspondent, April 21 2015

Utynam’s Heirs

A monthly column devoted to IP curiosities and controversies, named in honour of John of Utynam

Managing IP Correspondent, April 21 2015

Sponsored roundtable discussion: Arab trade marks

In this sponsored roundtable, Hisham Zahr and Hady Khawand of Saba Intellectual Property respond to questions about trade mark protection in the Middle East, the use of Arabic and the need for transliteration

Managing IP Correspondent, April 27 2015

China Patents: SIPO invites comments on patent amendments

The State Intellectual Property Office (SIPO) is reviving its effort to amend the patent law. A new version of the proposed amendment was released for public comments with a deadline of the end of April 2014.

Managing IP Correspondent, April 21 2015

China trade marks: Merchandise licensing: contractual arrangements

This is the second part of a two-part article introducing best practices in this sector. The first part focused on securing relevant IP. This part focuses on merchandise licensing arrangements.

Managing IP Correspondent, April 21 2015

Europe: Limited is sufficiently extensive

A recent ruling of the General Court of the EU shed interesting light on the subject of genuine use of a Community trade mark (CTM). As to the aspect of the (geographical) extent of the use, the General Court appeared to apply a lower threshold than the Court of Justice of the EU suggested in its Leno Merken ruling from 2012. This should be good news for trade mark owners.

Managing IP Correspondent, April 21 2015

India: Trade mark validity at the interlocutory stage

In Lupin Limited v Johnson and Johnson and Shakti Bhog Foods Limited v Parle Products Pvt Ltd, the Full Bench of the Bombay High Court, in a reference made to it on the question of law as to whether the court can go into the validity of the registered trade mark at an interlocutory stage in an infringement suit, has held that there is no bar to the jurisdiction and power of a civil court to consider the challenge to the validity of the trade mark at the interlocutory stage by way of prima facie findings.

Managing IP Correspondent, April 21 2015

EU trade mark deal struck, so what happens now?

Finally, after five years of debate, there is an agreement on reform to the EU Trade Marks Directive and CTM Regulation. While there is a cautious welcome for what has been agreed, we are likely to enter a new period of adaptation and scrutiny

April 21 2015

Is the prohibition on disparaging marks unconstitutional?

The Federal Circuit affirmed the USPTO’s rejection of an application for the The Slants mark on the grounds that the term was disparaging to Asians. After drafting the court’s opinion, Judge Kimberly Moore penned an “additional views” section questioning the constitutionality of Section 2(a) of the Lanham Act

April 22 2015

Indonesia: Patent abandonment: to pay or not to pay

The procedure of patent abandonment has been debated among IP attorneys, the Patent Office and the Ministry of Finance in the past few years.

Managing IP Correspondent, April 21 2015

Search results for