Never Too Late: if you missed the IPKat last week

Missing The IPKat’s posts as they come in doesn’t mean missing out: catch up on last week’s news and views in this edition of Never Too Late.

Copyright

In a guest post, KatFriend Hanne Kirk (Gorrissen Federspiel) considered the application of the CJEU’s Cofemel decision by Denmark’s Supreme Court and whether a certain style of black rubber boots with red laces would merit copyright protection.

Chijioke Okorie, the IPKat’s Africa Correspondent, reported on the decision of South African President Cyril Ramaphosa to refer the Copyright Amendment Bill (CAB) and Performers’ Protection Amendment Bill (PPAB) back to the National Assembly on constitutionality grounds.

Patents

The adequacy of damages question arose once more this week, with GuestKat Léon Dijkman summarising the recent judgment of the Court of Appeal of England and Wales in Neurim Pharmaceuticals v. Mylan, upholding Marcus Smith J.’s decision to deny an interim injunction against a generic company which launched at risk.

Fellow GuestKat Rose Hughes reported on the judgment of the UK Supreme Court in Regeneron v Kymab, which found Regeneron’s patents to be invalid for insufficiency, overturning the Court of Appeal decision and confirming the UK’s strong sufficiency requirement.

Trade Marks

PermaKat Neil J. Wilkof recounted a recent visit to Caffè Nero (which, rather prosaically, simply means ‘black coffee’ in Italian) to illustrate how even misplaced consumer perception may benefit a brand, especially where a mark may have multiple meanings in different languages.

In a big week for the IP protection of boots, KatFriend Federica Pezza (HoganLovells) discussed a recent cancellation decision of the EUIPO in relation to a 3D trade mark for the moon boot style of shoes.

The Swedish Patent and Market Court of Appeal’s application of the CJEU’s answers to the preliminary questions referred in the Textilis case came under scrutiny. KatFriend Hans Eriksson  discussed the issues arising in relation to the application of Article 7(1)(e)(iii) of Regulation 2017/1001 (EU Trade Mark Regulation (EUTMR)) to a pillow design dispute.

Other

PermaKat Eleonora Rosati gave an overview of the approach of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) to website blocking under the Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) freedom of expression right in Vladimir Kharitonov v Russia.

Finally, readers will be pleased to learn that Informa’s popular ‘Standards and Patents’ event will be returning for a 2020 edition in a digital format between 1-3 September this year, with an IPKat reader discount available.

Never Too Late 270 [Week ending June 21] Italian Supreme Court rules that technical regulation (drafted by an IP lawyer) may be *in principle* protected by copyright | US Copyright Office Review Board allows registration of Abercrombie & Fitch’s Store Front Sculpture | French Constitutional Court (partly) quashes Avia law on notice-and-take down for illegal speech | General Court annuls EUIPO Board of Appeal decision on invalidity of Louis Vuitton chequerboard pattern

Never Too Late 269 [Week ending June 14] Conversations with FRANDs: top courts in UK, DE and NL to decide key issues relating to SEP’s | BREAKING: CJEU rules that a functional shape may be protected by copyright in so far as it is original | [Guest post] Digital Culture Consumer Tracking Study – Week 6 of 6 | “Doh” may be a female deer and “re” a drop of golden sun, but “me” harmony be the basis for copyright infringement? | The IPKat and Merpel stand against racism | ERA’s Summer Course in European IP Law now taking place online (and still coming with a 25% IPKat discount) | [Guest Book Review] Resolving business disputes – how to get better outcomes from commercial disputes | The inexorable rise of streaming and the sunset of the cinema: celebration or sorrow?

Image: Takashi Hososhima – Flickr: Hey, what are you up to? CC BY-SA 2.0