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 22,227 results that match your search.22,227 results
  • Every week the Managing IP blog rounds up some of the interesting and unusual IP news appearing on the web. Here’s a selection of recent items
  • The Athens Single Member Court of First Instance recently granted a preliminary injunction based on a patent despite the fact that the Opposition Division of the EPO, a few days before the preliminary injunction hearing, had revoked the same patent.
  • Following on from recent Patent Office success in courts in rejecting business method patents, the Patent Office has released new guidelines on the patentability of computer implemented inventions.
  • Patent registration is becoming increasingly standardised through international treaties and systems. Yet Africa still retains some historical patent anomalies. Some of these present interesting opportunities.
  • In January, the US Supreme Court granted a petition for certiorari in Kirtsaeng v John Wiley & Sons, Inc to decide the standard for determining whether attorneys' fees should be granted to a prevailing party in a copyright case. The Supreme Court's decision on the issue will be closely monitored by prospective plaintiffs and defendants alike since the risk of fee-shifting may have a significant impact upon a party's decision-making with respect to both pursuing and defending a litigation.
  • When conducting a trade mark availability search, we often recommend adding visual elements in order to avoid a possible likelihood of confusion with prior trade marks.
  • The 2015 Patent Act amendment changed the long-established rule, and determined that the employer may select in advance whether the right to obtain a patent for an employee invention belongs to the employer or the employee when the invention is made. The amendment comes into force on April 1 2016.
  • It is established practice at the European Patent Office to offer accelerated processing of patent applications simply on request by the applicant, without the need to pay additional fees. This is in contrast to other patent offices, such as the USPTO or the UKIPO, which will only allow accelerated processing in specific circumstances (for example, when potentially infringing activity has been identified) or for particular categories of applications (for example, inventions having an environmental benefit).
  • A new collective agreement on employee inventions, negotiated between two major parties of the Swedish labour market, the Confederation of Swedish Enterprise (Svenskt Näringsliv) and the Council for Negotiation and Cooperation (PTK – being a body of 25 trade unions), has recently entered into force in Sweden. The new agreement, commonly known as The Inventor Agreement, applies to employee inventions reported to the employer as of December 1 2015.
  • Recently, the German Federal Supreme Court (BGH) had to decide on the request of a complainant, himself sued for patent infringement, to become a party in an ex parte reinstatement procedure concerning the allegedly infringed patent. After the European patent was maintained in opposition in amended form, the patentee failed to perform the required validation steps in time before the German Patent and Trademark Office (GPTO). Having been informed by the GPTO about the loss of his German patent, the patentee requested reinstatement and simultaneously performed the required validation actions.