Search results for

Last month DLA Piper hired IP partners on both east and west coats of the United States.In New York the firm added former Orrick Herrington & Sutcliffe IP litigator Paul Gupta (far left) as a partner. He focuses on intellectual property, information technology, cyber-security, privacy and business litigation in the technology sector.

The world's leading copyright firms, ranked across 21 jurisdictions

Canada's Minister of Industry, Christian Paradis, has introduced legislation that would crack down on counterfeits, redefine the term trade mark and allow for so-called divisional trade mark applications. Bill C-56 had its first reading in the House of Commons last month. Among the most significant changes it proposes is a new definition of a trade mark that would recognise non-traditional marks, including colour, smell, taste and texture marks, as well as confirm the registrability of sound and hologram marks.

US politicians have reintroduced a bill that would force patent trolls who sue and lose to cover defendants' legal costs. The SHIELD Act 2013 – an acronym for Saving High-Tech Innovators from Egregious Legal Disputes – was introduced by Representatives Jason Chaffetz of Utah (right) and Peter DeFazio of Oregon. The bipartisan bill, which was originally proposed last year, aims to prevent patent trolls from abusing the court system. In many countries, such as the UK, whichever party loses a case is typically ordered to pay the winner's legal fees. In the US, however, unless a judge decides that an egregious abuse of the system has occurred, each side generally covers its own bills. Since defendants know they will probably have to cover their costs even if they win a case, patent trolls use the high price of litigation as leverage to negotiate settlements.

Supreme Court overturns in Schütz v Werit New definition of "makes" in changing patented product Implications for Nespresso case The UK's Supreme Court has again overturned the Court of Appeal and decided, in its own particular way, that all previous courts got it wrong. The ruling in the Schütz v Werit dispute means patent owners now have guidance on what is meant by the word "makes" in the UK Patents Act 1977, which is welcome. But are supreme courts in the UK and elsewhere undermining consistency in IP litigation?

Petitions accepted, but only on some claims Litigation usually stayed Oblon Spivak handles most cases As of February 22, there have been 142 petitions for inter-partes review (IPR) and 15 petitions for post-grant review of covered business methods (CBM) filed at the USPTO – but how are they being decided? And what effect have they had on litigation?

Seen as benefiting foreign companies Lack of trade mark oppositions Slow take-up in Colombia too The Madrid Protocol came into force in Mexico in February, but the government's failure to introduce a trade mark opposition system has created problems, especially for domestic companies.

Natco licence confirmed Government report says prices too high Three cancer drugs up next It keeps getting worse for patent owners in India. Last month the IP Appellate Board upheld the compulsory licence issued to Natco over a Bayer drug, Nexavar, and then a government report recommended more.

It is a little strange that, with all the focus on the IP activity of Chinese companies in recent years, no one has yet collected all the relevant information about them in one place. That's what two of our staff – group editor Emma Barraclough and Asia reporter Peter Leung – began doing a few months ago, and the first fruits are laid out from page 30.

This list of PCC cases, the parties and rulings, runs from the first cases under the new procedural rules to March 2013.