Search results for

At the time of ratifying the European Patent Convention, Greece filed a reservation based on article 167.2 EPC, prohibiting the patent protection of pharmaceutical products. This reservation remained in force until October 8 1992 and covered all patents for which an application was filed before that date. However, the TRIPs Agreement, which took effect in Greece as of February 9 1995, contains provisions for enhanced protection of pharmaceutical products.

One of the earliest products that may see a benefit from the paediatric SPC extension in Germany is Merck's Cozaar (losartan potassium). The German SPC is due to expire on September 2 2009, and Merck applied in due time for a paediatric extension with the German Patent Office on February 27 2009, filing an extensive compilation of supporting documents. In accordance with a Notice of the German Patent and Trade Mark Office dated January 28 2009, concerning the implementation and interpretation of the Paediatric Regulation Number 1901/2006, the request for paediatric extension included the results of all studies performed in compliance with the paediatric investigation plan agreed to by the EMEA and also a copy of an EU Commission decision that it has been verified that the application for the corresponding marketing authorisation includes these results.

Over the last few years, the courts have made it clear that obviousness-type double patenting applies in Canada and that divisional applications are vulnerable to such an attack. While there is no statutory protection in the case of enforced divisional applications, the Supreme Court of Canada has stated that patents granted on divisional applications "directed by the Patent Office" should not be open to attack by reason only of the original patent. For this reason, we generally recommend first including claims that an applicant may wish to file in a proposed voluntary divisional application in the parent application and awaiting a requisition from the examiner based on lack of unity of invention.

On March 3 2009 China Customs issued Decree no 183 to amend the existing Implementing Measures on the Regulations of Custom Protection of Intellectual Property promulgated by Customs on May 25 2004. These will come into force from July 1 2009.

Comparative advertising is a type of advertising in which one's own product or service is compared with a competing product or service. If such ads specifically mention or refer to the trade mark or name of the competing product or service, they are deemed explicit or direct comparative advertising. If neither the trade mark nor the name of the competing product or service are mentioned, but may be easily ascertained by consumers, this is known as implicit or indirect comparative advertising.

From Hara Kenzo, Harakenzo World Patent & Trademark

From Ilya Kazi, partner, Mathys & Squire, London

A Q&A guide to the OHIM fee changes that come into force this month

European Commission official was one of the key speakers at last month's Fordham IP Conference in Cambridge

Four men have been found guilty of copyright infringement in Sweden over their role in the Pirate Bay file-sharing website