Never Too Late: if you missed The IPKat last week

It seems the world of IP has officially got back into the swing of things after the winter break, with new cases of 2020 starting to emerge that The IPKat is all too keen to keep you up-to-date with!  But, before we do that…

The IPKat is looking for IP enthusiasts to fill InternKat positions! InternKats are responsible for round up posts, Never Too Late posts, Around the IP Blogs posts, updating the events calendar, and providing monthly reports regarding statistics and analytics concerning The IPKat blog. InternKats are also invited to write independent posts on average once a month. The position will last 6 months and there are no geographical restrictions. However you will need to have your employer’s permission to be a part of The IPKat team. (This InternKat hopes the next group of InternKats will enjoy the position as much as she has!) You can find further details on how to apply here.

Monday 13 January 2020 marked the first day of the CRISPR Board of Appeal hearing at the European Patent Office on the issue of priority, and GuestKat Rose Hughes provided excellent coverage in a collection of posts spanning the 4-day hearing. Before the day kicked off, Rose considered another controversial aspect of EPO case law, namely selection inventions. This preceded a full background to the CRISPR appeal case, set out in ‘The Broad Institute’s CRISPR patent appeal hearing: Day 1, Setting the Stage‘. Day 2 and 3 of the hearing brought premature reports that the the Board of Appeal would be referring questions on priority to the Enlarged Board of Appeal (EBA), with Day 4 ultimately bringing the conclusion that Broad Institute’s appeal would be dismissed, due to their patent being found to lack priority.

SpecialKat Chijioke Okorie examined the decision of the Constitutional Court of South Africa in Ascendis Animal Health (Pty) Limited v Merck Sharp Dohme Corporation and 2 Others [2019] ZACC 41, which ruled on the issue of whether a defendant who has unsuccessfully challenged the validity of a patent in revocation proceedings may be permitted to raise the issue of patent validity as a defence in infringement proceedings.

GuestKat Léon Dijkman looked at two important patent developments: from Germany, the proposed amendments to the German Patent Act; and from the Netherlands, new decisions in the Philips v ASUS/Wiko FRAND litigation in the Hague.

GuestKat Thomas Key looked into the decision of the Ninth Circuit of Appeals in Great Minds v Office Depot, regarding the interpretation of permitted, non-commercial activity under the Attribution Non Commercial 4.0 (CC BY-NC 4.0) licence.

GuestKat Peter Ling examined the decision of the CJEU in IT Development SAS v Free Mobile SAS (Case C-666/18), where the Court addressed the question of whether the Enforcement Directive (Directive 2004/48) and the Software Directive (Directive 2009/24) are applicable to cases in which the infringement of IP rights also constitute a breach of contract between the parties. The facts centred around the alleged modification of software in breach of a licensing agreement.

Readers who follow all things trade marks will be aware that every 6 months, The IPKat hosts a round-up of the most recent trade mark decisions as prepared by Darren Meale (former GuestKat) at Simmons & Simmons: Retromark. The IPKat is glad to say Retromark will be returning for its third year with another afternoon of trade mark law and practice on Tuesday 24 March 2020! The event will take place at Simmons’ London office in Moorgate from 2pm to 7:30pm, and you can find further information here.

SpecialKat Chijioke Okorie reviewed ‘3D Printing and Intellectual Property’ by Lucas S. Osborn. The book, which explains the technical aspects of 3D printing in plain language before going on to address how various aspects of IP laws (copyright, trade marks, patents and design law) confront the issues raised by 3D printing technology. 

The IPKat sent its congratulations to the two newly-minted QCs with appropriately silky IP skills: Andrew Norris (Hogarth Chambers) and James Segan (Blackstone Chambers)!

Never Too Late 248 [Week ending 12 Jan] IPKat Book of the Year Awards 2019 winners announced! | Never Too Late: if you missed The IPKat last week | Sale of second-hand goods not genuine use of Aiwa trade mark | AIPPI UK Event Report: Roundup of 2019’s Patent Cases | Trademark infringement and Google PLA ads – Lessons from “Ortlieb”? | Sheeran v Chokri Part 2: Admission of similar fact evidence | New Year, Same Creative Authorship Requirement in US Copyright | Reader discount for IPKat book award titles! | Around the IP Blogs | TuneIn to the sound of communication to the public (Part 2) | TuneIn to the sound of communication to the public (Part 1) | Book Review: A Practitioner’s Guide to European Patent Law by Paul England | [Guest Post] Remember the case of Ai Weiwei v Volkswagen? | Book Review: Positive Freedom and the Law | Book Review: Law of Remedies – A European Perspective | Trade mark functions, repairs and collective marks: Dutch Supreme Court to refer questions to CJEU