Search results for

A Polish company, GRAAL from Wejherowo, applied for registration of word-figurative trade mark Erafish (Number Z-340740) for goods in classes 29 and 31. The Polish Patent Office refused to grant the right of protection in class 29 and found that the mark is similar to a Community trade mark EvraFish CTM Number 4948618 in the name of Stek-Rol. GRAAL filed a complaint.

The Intellectual Property Office (IPOPhil) has declared January 31 to February 28 2011 to be a settlement period, during which the following cases shall undergo mediation by its newly created mediation office: (a) administrative complaints for violations of intellectual property rights, sich as infringement and unfair competition, (b) inter partes cases, such as cancellation, (c) disputes relating to terms of a licence agreement involving the author's rights to public performance or other communication of his works, (d) cases appealed to the director general, (e) and all other cases referred to mediation during the settlement period. The mediation office is accrediting practitioners as mediators to undergo further training this January, 2011.

The standard applied by the Norwegian Patent Office has until recently been based on a requirement for "a reasonable technical difference" from a prior art document. This has been considered a stricter standard for novelty than at the EPO. The practice as regards the assessment of novelty in Norway has, however, followed the German Supreme Court.

Since the early 1990s many discussions have focused on the possibility of a national judge issuing injunctions for infringement in another country: cross-border injunctions. This practice, starting in The Netherlands, was effectively halted with the decisions GAT v LUK (C-4/03) and Primus v Roche (C-539/03) at the Court of Justice of the EU. However, in cases where validity of the patent is not the issue, the CJ recognised that cross-border injunctions were still possible (Duijnstee v Goderbauer (C-288/82)).

In 2008, the Federal Court for Tax and Administrative Affairs (FCTAA) created a Specialized IP Court to decide all the cases related to IP rights, which started work in January 2009.

Prior art constitutes all information that has been disclosed to the public in any form before a given date, that might be relevant to a patent's claims of originality. It may include any patent related to the invention regardless of whether the patent is valid or not, as the act of publication or use of the patent would amount to a disclosure.

This autumn several new agreements have been signed with the executive direction of the Italian Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) aimed at combating counterfeits in Italy.

Dr Meir Noam, the Israel Commissioner of Patent announced his retirement as of December 31 2010.

In November 2010, the Indian Patent Office published the revised draft manual of patent practice and procedure, revising the draft manual 2008 – a version that remains a draft even today. In the revised manual, guidelines for the patentability of computer programs and related inventions have been revisited. Under the provision of Section 3(k) of the Patents Act, 1970, "mathematical or business methods or computer programs per se or algorithms" are not inventions and therefore, are unpatentable.

In judgment 1617/2010 the Athens Court of Appeals dealt with two important issues relating to the facts on which trade mark infringement may be assessed.