Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Search results for

There are 22,425 results that match your search.22,425 results
  • Arturo D Reyes of Goodrich Riquelme argues that enforcement of data exclusivity protection is possible in spite of the lack of precedent from the courts and limited provisions regarding its scope of protection in Mexico
  • Emma Barraclough, London
  • Emma Barraclough, London
  • Tom Thomson, executive director, Coalition for Intellectual Property Rights
  • Individuals interested in creating an online forum to voice criticism about a particular company's product or service offering often register domain names which incorporate a company's trade mark to be used as so-called gripe sites. These individuals typically claim that their use of a third party's trade mark as part of a domain name constitutes a fair use of that trade mark, thereby creating a legitimate non-commercial interest for the domain name registrant in owning the domain name at issue.
  • Up until recently, in the UAE, an agency agreement had to be registered at the Commercial Agencies Register at the Ministry of Commerce and Industry to be enforceable. This had created a lot of difficulties in the past for foreign companies in terminating agreements where the local agent was not performing under the agreement, as the commercial agency law provided substantial protection to the commercial agents, especially in the context of termination. For example, if the principal terminated an unlimited term commercial agency without cause, the principal was obliged to compensate the agent.
  • Act 29/2006, of July 26, on Guarantees for and Rational Use of Medicinal and Health Products, which supersedes and repeals the former Medicinal Products Act 1990, was published in the Official State Gazette on July 27 2006. The new Act amends Patents Act Article 52.1, which provides for the exceptions to patent rights, that is cases in which a patent is not effective. The wording is:
  • Counterfeiting is widely seen as a major challenge for IP owners wishing to protect their investment in R&D and marketing in China. The large counterfeiting market is a big problem for brand owners and will most likely remain so for a long time, in spite of the efforts of the Chinese government to strengthen brand owners' opportunities to enforce their rights in China.
  • It is a common refrain in the international business community that India has a poor track record of IP enforcement. However, if a recent decision of the Delhi High Court is anything to go by, weak IP enforcement is a thing of past. This is because the Delhi High Court awarded punitive damages in a copyright infringement case and held that the defendants will not be let off with merely an award of compensatory damages against them.
  • The Intellectual Property Office of New Zealand (IPONZ) has released guidelines for patent claims covering methods of treatment and Swiss-style claims on its website (www.iponz.govt.nz). They have been issued in an attempt to give applicants some clarity about what may or may not be patentable. In its guidelines, IPONZ has said that each patent application will be considered on its merits and that the guidelines are simply that: guidelines.