Search results for

The US Supreme Court has rejected the argument that a good faith belief in a patent’s invalidity is a defence against liability for inducement to infringe

A recent UK decision provides some practical tips on drafting settlement agreements in IP cases and, in particular, how to avoid compromising future claims

With diplomatic relations between the US and Cuba slowly being restored, many US companies are keen to register their trade marks in Cuba. But, says Erica Gould, they need to watch out for pirates who have got there first

The Swiss company Capri Sun owns an International registration (number 677879), also designating Benelux for a 3D mark representing a silver reflecting pouch meant as a container for liquid, such as fruit drinks, also known under the trade mark Capri-Sun (marketed as pictured).

In a first for Australia, a copyright owner has been successful in forcing an internet service provider (ISP) to hand over the contact details of internet account holders of about 4,700 IP addresses that have been identified as having been used to download pirate versions of the movie 'Dallas Buyers Club'.

A monthly column devoted to IP curiosities and controversies, named in honour of John of Utynam

McDonald's opposed the trade mark McBerg for clothing et al in class 25, for services for education, entertainment et al in class 41 and for providing food and drinks, provision of accommodation in class 43. Likewise it opposed four other trade marks McMountain, McTyrol, McTirol (figurative) and McTirol (word) registered for the same goods and services. The opposition was based on several registered trade marks namely Mc (figurative), Ronald McDonald, McDonald's, Ronald McDonald Playland, McBurger, MacSki (figurative) and McKids. The first five trade marks are registered in classes 41 and 42 (among others), the last one only in class 25.

The PRC Trade Mark Office (TMO) has recently adopted important changes in the handling of non-standard descriptions of goods and services that require a fresh review of how applicants respond to objections. The changes also warrant a re-think in how applicants draft local specifications and perhaps also for priority filings made elsewhere.

As we described in our briefing of March 2013, the clarity of a European patent is not itself a ground for opposition before the EPO. However, a patent that is amended during opposition proceedings must meet the requirements of the European Patent Convention (including the requirements of clarity), according to Article 103(3) EPC.

Patent practitioners have always known it: the judge is finally the expert. In a recent decision (X ZB 19/20), the German Federal Supreme Court (BGH) emphasised that the judges of the German Federal Patent Court (BPatG) do have sufficient technical knowledge, and knowledge gained by experience in their field of expertise, to allow them to decide patent cases without the need to obtain external expertise (in the form of an expert opinion from an independent technical expert). Thus, the technically qualified judges of the BPatG may decide patent cases falling in their area of responsibility without external technical expertise.