Search results for

The IP Code of the Philippines does not expressly state that patented products must bear patent markings which serve to notify the public and competitors that products are patented. However, Section 80 of the IP Code provides that "damages cannot be recovered for acts of infringement committed before the infringer knew, or had reasonable grounds to know of the patent. It is presumed that the infringer knew of the patent if on the patented product, or on the container or package in which the article is supplied to the public, or on the advertising material relating to the patented product or process, are placed the words Philippine Patent with the number of the patent." This simply means that notice of infringement may be served either actually, or constructively by said patent marking.

Singapore finance minister Heng Swee Keat delivered the Budget Statement to Parliament on February 19 2018. In his speech, Heng Swee Keat emphasised the importance of encouraging pervasive innovation throughout the economy and how crucial intellectual property (IP) has become for companies competing in a fast-paced business environment. To this end, the Budget Statement unveiled several initiatives such as tax deductions and funding aimed at boosting research and innovation.

In 1992, the Rio Convention on Biodiversity set the goal of fighting practices known as biopiracy and which are generally seen in developing countries. These involve identifying certain genetic resources of a country and indigenous traditional knowledge that may be linked to their use, developing them, protecting them through patents and extracting commercial gain without any benefit to the indigenous populations in question. The Nagoya Protocol, an extension of the Rio Convention, enshrines a move from mere declarations of intent to concrete measures.

In recent ex-parte appeal proceedings (decision 14 W (pat) 10/16 of January 23 2018), the German Federal Patent Court (GFPC) contributed to the interpretation of Article 3(a) of Regulation (EC) No 469/2009 (the Regulation).

In recent years, the protection system for trade mark rights has become more and more mature in China. Non-trade mark rights have also caught the attention of IP practitioners and even outsiders. After all, who can overlook the news that Disney has profited more from merchandise related to Frozen than publishing the movie and DVD? Even people who barely know anything about basketball or IP must have heard that the NBA superstar Michael Jordan has finally stopped a Chinese company from using his surname in Chinese as a trade mark in the Supreme Court. When posting pictures on WeChat's Moments has become a habit for thousands of Chinese people, it is astonishing to think that posting a picture of the night view of the Eiffel Tower could be an act of infringement.

The Thai Alcohol Control Act (ACA) B.E. 2551(2008) sets the legal framework for restrictions on alcoholic beverages in Thailand, as well as establishing governmental bodies to oversee such restrictions, i.e. the National Alcohol Beverage Policy Committee and the Alcohol Beverage Control Committee.

In 2008, a legislator's wig was ripped off at the Control Yuan of Taiwan, an incident which was recorded by photography by a number of reporters at the scene. As a newspaper company used a photograph taken by an on-the-spot reporter hired by another party without obtaining prior consent, the company was sued for violation of copyright law.

One of the two IP courts of Istanbul rejected a crucial precautionary injunction (PI) demand of a patent owner on the ground that the demand requires a full trial due to the pending invalidation action against the relevant patent.

Cialis® is a pharmaceutical product for the treatment of erectile dysfunction developed by Lilly ICOS, a joint venture of ICOS Corporation and Eli Lilly and Company. The active pharmaceutical ingredient (API) of Cialis®, tadalafil, inhibits the PDE5 enzyme, just like sildenafil in the better-known Viagra®.

The recent Kenyan High Court decision of Fibrelink Limited v Star Television Productions Limited is important. This is because it confirms that it is possible to oppose a trade mark application in Kenya on the basis of a common law or unregistered mark. The basis for such an opposition will be Section 14 of the Kenyan Trade Marks Act, which reads as follows: “No person shall register as a trade mark or part of a trade mark any matter the use of which would, by reason of its being likely to deceive or cause confusion or otherwise, be disentitled to protection in a court of justice, or would be contrary to law or morality, or any scandalous design.”