Search results for

The European Observatory on infringement on Intellectual Property Rights has made a report in relation to the economic cost of infringements in spirits and wine in the European Union; this report aims to evaluate the consequences of counterfeiting in a concrete field, comparing the sales forecast and the actual sales.

Sometimes it is difficult to predict which is more lucrative – to toil over a trade mark and produce goods or do nothing but sue infringers. A CJSC Renna Holdin obtained trade mark registration number 421859 for a figurative trade mark with the word element "moo cow from Korenovka" (pictured; Korenovka is the name of a village).

Ahead of this year’s Annual Conference, Michael Loney spoke to ASIPI President María del Pilar Troncoso about the Association’s priorities, the Madrid Protocol and IP in the Dominican Republic

The senior legal director of JD.com tells Managing IP about its anti-counterfeiting efforts, growth in patent applications and tips for brand owners in China

Experts can play an important role in the outcome of patent cases in the UK. Liz Cohen and Chloe Dickson provide some tips on how to make sure you pick the right one, and how best to prepare them

In a recent decision that has been welcomed and criticised all at the same time, the Delhi High Court in The Chancellor, Masters & Scholars of the University of Oxford v Rameshwari Photocopy Services & Ors has given, as is argued by many, an expansive interpretation to copyright exceptions applicable to educational institutions.

In two decisions rendered by the Romanian Trade Mark Office (TMO) in June 2016, the examiners found that two national applications depicting fictional characters were lacking distinctive character and therefore rejected their registration in Romania for the generic class headings of the goods and services in classes 7, 9, 28, 35, 37 and 42 of the International Nice Classification.

Which courts have jurisdiction over online sales or offering to sale of infringing goods is becoming a perplexing issue in today's China IP practice. According to some of the latest decisions, different courts take different positions with some valid reasons, especially among the three specialised IP courts in Beijing, Shanghai and Guangzhou. The Supreme People's Court has made some efforts, but no binding decisions have come out yet on this particular issue. It is important to monitor the development in this area closely and adapt to the changes in the patent enforcement strategy.

October 4 2016 marked a new milestone for the IP arena in Singapore and India, as Singapore's Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and India's Prime Minister Narendra Modi witnessed the signing of a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between the Intellectual Property Office of Singapore (IPOS) and the Department of Industrial Policy & Promotion (DIPP) of India. The signing was one of the highlights of the Singapore leader's October visit to New Delhi. This agreement aims to promote creativity, innovation and technological growth in both countries, while expanding bilateral collaboration activities in IP rights, including patents, trade marks and industrial designs.

In case of a patent infringement, the patentee normally has an interest not only in obtaining damages from the infringer, but also that the infringer immediately stops the infringing action. A request for an injunctive relief against the infringer is therefore standard practice in patent litigation. In such a situation the infringer may have an interest in being granted a grace period in order to gain time to find a bypass solution or to deplete his stock of infringing products. Such a grace period for the infringer, known from copyright or competition law cases, has also been discussed in patent law literature as an exceptional measure. It may be granted by a court if an immediate cessation of sales of the infringing product were to lead to disproportionate disadvantages for the infringer. Granting such a grace period requires reflecting the overall circumstances of the individual case, and such a limited continuation of the infringing action must not cause unacceptable adverse effects on the infringed party.