Search results for

Although IP owners still suffer high levels of infringement in China, Xuemin Chen and Xiaoguang Yang of Zhongzi Law Office believe that 2005 saw a new level of commitment on the part of the government to boost innovation and protect IP

In order to protect and enhance the prestige of a licensed mark, trade mark owners, when drafting trade mark licence agreements, typically focus their attention on ensuring that they maintain the necessary level of approval over, and consistency in, the use of the licensed mark. Unfortunately, this desire often becomes a secondary concern as trade mark owners are blinded by the revenue-generating opportunities that may be derived from a proposed licence agreement and therefore, gloss over certain integral protections.

A recent decision by the Malaysian Courts in Shachihata & 18 others v Registrar of Industrial Designs & Ors, has in effect made redundant a recent circular issued by the Industrial Designs Registration Office (IDRO). The circular followed the advice of the Attorney General's Chamber and stated that designs registered under the UK Registered Designs Act 1949 which continued to have effect in Malaysia by virtue of their registration prior to the coming into force of the Industrial Designs Act 1996 (the Malaysian Act) on September 1 1999 would not be allowed to be extended beyond three five-year terms in Malaysia.

There are a number of instances where the monopoly under a patent is not absolute. Recently, the US-Singapore Free Trade Agreement (US-SFTA) required Singapore to amend the compulsory license provisions in the Singapore Patents Act to include a remedy for anti-competitive practices.

BIO 2006,

New Zealand's existing experimental use exceptions have been established through case law and a Bolar-type provision that was introduced into the Patents Act in December 2002. This provision essentially allows the reasonable use of an invention for the purposes of gaining regulatory approval. The case law attempts to clarify the distinction between research and use of an invention that is not for direct commercial gain, and research and use of an invention that is for commercial gain. The boundary between the two is unclear and at the moment the New Zealand courts are ultimately left to determine what activity constitutes legitimate experimental use and what constitutes infringement.

IP owners who expect China's enforcement regime to mirror that in Europe and the US may be disappointed. But as Patrick Coyne and Ningling Wang of Finnegan Henderson explain, the Chinese system still provides plenty of enforcement opportunities for foreign investors willing to look beyond the newspaper headlines

Italian law number 80/2005 introduced incisive measures to combat counterfeiting, including:

In a recent case concerning the admissibility of evidence and the construction of patents, the Irish Supreme Court endorsed the purposive approach to patent claim construction under Article 69 of the European Patent Convention and its Protocol. In upholding a decision by the High Court, the Supreme Court refused to permit the introduction of documentation used in arguments before foreign patent offices and in foreign proceedings concerning the scope of the patent at issue.

Li Jian, a judge in the IP division of the Supreme People's Court provides a guide to China's system of civil litigation and explains how recent developments will affect plaintiffs and defendants in IP lawsuits