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 22,598 results that match your search.22,598 results
  • A monthly column devoted to IP curiosities and controversies, named in honour of John of Utynam – who received the world’s first recorded patent in 1449 diary@managingip.com
  • Both Syria's repealed 1946 and current 2007 trademark law use the term "distinguishing mark" in Arabic as the term for "trademark", perhaps emphasising the importance of a mark having some degree of distinctiveness. Yet some of the marks being advertised in the official journal would suggest that distinctiveness may not always be a requirement for registration.
  • On September 1 2010, new anti-pirating legislation aimed at curbing the pirating of DVDs and CDs entered into effect. The new regulations are set forth in Decree No 75/2010/ND-CP Providing Regulations on Administrative Penalties in the Area of Culture (Decree 75), which was promulgated by the Government on July 12 2010. Further guidelines for the new regulations were prescribed under Circular No 09/2010/TT-BVHTTDL of the Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism, which was issued on August 24 2010.
  • The Russian companies Russky Standart Vodka, LVZ Topaz and Sibirsky LVZ produce vodka and are competitors in the market. Topaz and Sibirsky produce and sell vodkas like Green Mark Traditional Recipe, Green Mark Rye and others. The neck of every bottle of those brands carries a collar reading "Vodka No 1 in Russia". It is obviously implied that Topaz and Sibirsky produce the best quality vodkas on the Russian market. The Russian Antimonopoly Service is a watchdog for incorrect marketing practices and directed its attention to that statement.
  • It is established practice to judge the inventive step of an invention using the problem-solution approach developed within the European patent office. Under this approach, a claimed invention has to add an extra feature to the closest prior art. This additional feature defines the problem to be solved by the person skilled in the art. Starting from the closest prior art and facing the problem to be solved, the skilled person has to find a technical solution for the problem. Whether or not he can do so is part of the inventive step discussion.
  • Statistics show that the number of cases handled by Norwegian Customs involving goods infringing intellectual property rights, as well as the number of articles seized, is high. Counterfeit products and IP theft have real-world consequences.
  • According to the current wording of the Mexican IP Law, injunctions can be imposed during the course of an infringement action related to trademarks, patents or slogans, and the plaintiff has to post a bond of an amount fixed by the Patent of Trade Mark Office (IMPI) in order to secure possible damages arising from those injunctions, if the infringement is eventually denied. Likewise, the injunctions can be immediately lifted if the alleged infringer obtains and files a counterbond in favor of the plaintiff.
  • Under the Korean Patent Act, the inventive step is determined by judging whether the invention could be easily conceived from the prior arts by a person having ordinary skill in the art.
  • Sherry Knowles spent four years as chief patent counsel at GlaxoSmithKline after more than a decade in private practice. She tells Emma Barraclough what the experience taught her about working for pharmaceutical and biotech companies
  • R&D-based companies in the life sciences sector face a difficult time. Blockbuster drugs are coming off patent, the pharmaceutical sector continues to face scrutiny from regulators on both sides of the Atlantic, and public scepticism about their right to seek IP protection over innovations related to plants and animals is growing.