Search results for

Is the hoarding of a competitor's product containers an act of unfair competition under the Intellectual Property Code of the Philippines? This is the issue addressed in the case of Coca Cola Bottlers Phils Inc vs Quintin Gomez, et al in case no GR 154491 involving two rival multinational soft drink giants; petitioner Coca-Cola Bottlers, Phils, Inc accused Pepsi Cola Products Phils, represented by the respondents, of hoarding empty Coke bottles in bad faith to discredit its business and to sabotage its operation in the Bicol region.

On March 6, the Supreme Court of The Netherlands (Hoge Raad) issued two decisions in patent cases.

In recent years the Italian Patent and Trade Mark Office has seen an increase in efficiency mainly due to a reorganisation of the work process and the introduction of online filing systems.

In a recent decision (T 1790/06-3.3.08), a Technical Board of Appeal (TBA) of the European Patent Office (EPO) has revoked a patent that was thought to be of fundamental importance in the highly competitive field of RNA interference (RNAi).

In a recent decision rendered following an infringement action brought on behalf of the Greek originator pharmaceutical company Uni-Pharma Kleon Tsetis Pharmaceutical Laboratories SA against a Greek generic company, the Full Bench Court of Athens held for the first time that obtaining a marketing authorisation (MA) for a generic pharmaceutical product that infringes patent rights does not legitimise the circulation of the generic product in the market.

Amendments to the following IP laws were published in the Official Gazette number 30/2009 and entered into force on March 17 2009:

Countries trying to tackle the menace of counterfeit drugs are taking various steps to check the entry of unauthorised drugs. However one problem arising from this is that counterfeit drugs are defined differently in various jurisdictions. Many countries consider products that are not registered there as being counterfeit.

The first term of registration of a trade mark in China is 10 years counting from the date of expiry of the three-month opposition period. For a trade mark application subject to opposition, it usually takes a few years for a decision to be rendered by the China Trade Mark Office (CTMO) and a longer period if the decision is subject to review by the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board (TRAB), and further appeal to the court. By the time TRAB or a court issues a decision allowing registration of the trade mark in issue, its first term of registration may have already expired.

Top copyright firms ranked in 19 jurisdictions. Plus: Eileen McDermott explores some areas in which the internet has highlighted a need for change in copyright law

The Federal Court of Australia, in Sunnyfield Association v Cronk [2009] FCA 33, recently provided further evidence that the fair basis requirement in Australia is being interpreted more liberally. Fair basis is analogous to the European requirement of sufficiency of description. A more liberal approach in this area is likely to benefit patentees, and that was certainly the case here, where the court upheld decisions of the Commissioner of Patents to reject oppositions filed against the grant of each of two accepted patent applications.