Search results for

In a decision of March 17 2015, the Court of Appeal in the Hague confirmed the judgment of July 31 2013 of the first instance court in invalidating the Netherlands part of European patent EP 1224954 with respect to a fire extinguishing post (bluspost in Dutch). This judgment under appeal was based on a claim filed by the Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management (RWS) in the Netherlands. In the judgment, the Netherlands part of the patent was invalidated among other reasons for lack of novelty in view of a memo of the RWS as sent to one of the competitors of the patent owner Doebros.

Are you prepared for Europe’s patent revolution? Anthony C Tridico, Martin D Hyden and Leythem A Wall highlight the issues to think about now

The Australian courts have recently clarified what acts will constitute novelty destroying prior art. In Australia, patents are normally invalid where the idea was publicly used or known before the priority date of the application. This normally means a novelty-destroying act occurs when at least one member of the public is free to make use of the information obtained from the act.

A new law concerning protection for geographical indications and local and regional authorities, as well as the EU trade mark package, will give INPI more powers. Marie-Aimée de Dampierre explains why

In Argentina, legislation that regulates the protection of test data (Law 24,766 Confidentiality Law, Executive Order 150/92) does not provide adequate test data protection to pharmaceutical specialities as required in Section 39.3 of the TRIPs Agreement, because it allows third-party reliance on information concerning the safety and efficacy of a product – reliance that is not authorised by the originator of the data.

German Patent Law prohibits not only direct use of a patented invention, but also indirect use by delivery or offering for sale means relating to a substantial element of the invention, provided that the person making the delivery or offer knows, or it is obvious, that these means are both suitable and intended for use in practising the patented invention. This also applies to deliveries or offers imported to a customer in Germany.

Managing IP’s annual North America Awards dinner was held in Washington, DC in March, and attended by guests from all over the US and Canada

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

A recent ruling of the General Court of the EU shed interesting light on the subject of genuine use of a Community trade mark (CTM). As to the aspect of the (geographical) extent of the use, the General Court appeared to apply a lower threshold than the Court of Justice of the EU suggested in its Leno Merken ruling from 2012. This should be good news for trade mark owners.

The State Intellectual Property Office (SIPO) is reviving its effort to amend the patent law. A new version of the proposed amendment was released for public comments with a deadline of the end of April 2014.