Search results for

The Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines (IPOPHL) issued Memorandum Circular No. 2019-006 on the Rules of Procedure for IPOPHL Mediation Outside of Litigation, extending its mediation services outside of litigation, effective from September 2 2019. Before this circular, the parties went through mediation only after the filing of the verified answer, and this applied to inter partes cases such as oppositions and cancellations, and IP violation cases, e.g. infringement, unfair competition etc. Mediation of IP cases was introduced by the IPOPHL in 2011, and as of the end of 2018, the average settlement rate is 41.4%, indicating that mediation is an effective mode of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) for IP cases. There is no doubt that mediation is a more economic and quicker way of resolving disputes in comparison with litigation which could take over three years just at the first level and if appeals are to be considered, could last over 10 years. The new rules give potential disputants an avenue to resolve their conflict even before an actual suit is filed.

Can extracts from local flora be patented in Malaysia? And how do intellectual property rights (IPRs) apply in traditional knowledge (TK)?

"I have existed from the morning of the world and I shall exist until the last star falls from the night. Although I have taken the form of Gaius Caligula, I am all men as I am no man and therefore I am a God"- Caligula, Roman Emperor

In Turkey, the prosecution of criminal offences relating to trademark law depends on a proper complaint filed by the trademark owner. Once the complaint and the evidence is submitted to the local prosecutor's office, the file is brought before the local criminal court. The criminal courts, however, have become more and more reluctant to issue decisions recently. Hence, it is now more important than ever for trademark owners to be well-prepared before filing a complaint, in terms of evidence gathering.

India, as a member of the World Trade Organization and signatory to the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) is obliged to align its intellectual property rights laws with the TRIPS agreement. The challenge comes not only from creating the laws but also their implementation considering the Indian government has to strike a balance between the needs of the country's citizens and the rights of patent holders. The issue has become all the more sensitive considering a bulk of patent applications in India are filed by foreign companies. As an example, the data provided by the Indian IP office in its annual report of 2017-2018 shows the applications filed by foreign applicants were more than double (32,304) compared to those by Indian residents (15,550).

A recent New Zealand High Court decision (Pharmazen Limited v Anagenix IP Limited [2019] NZHC 1520 (July 1 2019)) serves as a reminder of the subjective nature of the comparison of trademarks, with the court finding the marks “Actazin” and “ActiPhen” too similar, while on the same facts and evidence, an Australian hearings officer had decided the opposite.

If you work in private practice, it's likely that you've considered – even briefly – a change at some point in your career. Moving in-house is a well-trodden route (although some do go the other way), as many feel that a fresh start is needed. However, some shun such a move altogether, preferring life in private practice.

Erick Robinson of Dunlap, Bennett & Ludwig examines three underused patent strategies for companies, including those in the US, to succeed in China

When interpreting a patent claim, it must be taken into account that a patent's doctrine seeks to distinguish itself from the state of the art described in it. If the specification equates to known prior art with the claim's preamble, the features of the characterising portion of the patent shall – in case of doubt – not be regarded as being understood according to features which are found in the state of the art from which they currently should have been distinguished. (Guiding principle of the Court)

Ben Brigou and Jaap Mannaerts of NLO examine the different incentives the EU offers in order to encourage pharmaceutical innovation, including SPCs, regulatory measures and the Bolar exemption