http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/2024/05/never-too-late-if-you-missed-ipkat-last_20.html
If you were too busy enjoying the May sunshine last week, here’s the summary of what you missed:
Patents
| Image from Pixabay. |
Rose Hughes shared that the USPTO has issued a request for comments regarding the impact of AI on evaluations of patentability, including what qualifies as prior art and the capabilities of the person skilled in the art. Comments are due by 29 June 2024. Details here.
This Kat reported on the progress of the WIPO Diplomatic Conference on Genetic Resources and Associated Traditional Knowledge, which runs from 13 to 24 May. Its purpose is to undertake the final stage of negotiations for an international legal instrument that aims to (amongst other things) introduce a disclosure of origin requirement for patents.
Tian Lu updated readers on the fate of the DABUS patent applications in China, where the invalidity of the patent application was recently upheld on the grounds that an ‘AI system’ cannot be defined as the inventor.
Rose Hughes evaluated the recent Board of Appeal decision (T 0629/22) that considered how the credibility/plausibility of a claimed invention should be addressed in the face of contradictory evidence for the technical effect relied on for inventive step. The case considered the patentability of an invention related to vegan cheese, in light of prior art describing a vegan cream cheese that contained the same ingredients and was made using a similar manufacturing process.
Trade Marks
Anna Maria Stein commented on the decision of the General Court (T-320/23) that the sign “NOT MILK” is descriptive of the products, and that the graphical elements do not significantly alter its descriptive nature. The case illustrates the challenge for companies that produce dairy-free products to differentiate their goods while still communicating their characteristics to consumers.
Marcel Pemsel considered the recent EUIPO Cancellation Division decision, in which Louis Vuitton successfully opposed the registration of a trade mark that was similar to its earlier “monogram” mark. The EUIPO accepted that Louis Vuitton had made genuine use of the mark, that the LV mark enjoyed a reputation, and that consumers would make a link between the marks.
Copyright and Designs
Kevin Bercimuelle-Chamot discussed the recent judgment of the Tribunal judiciaire of Lyon. The case concerned a short film produced by a student, whose film and audiovisual school’s guide allow the school to use the students’ work. When a former student sued for copyright infringement, the Tribunal held that there was no valid authorisation because, amongst other things, the guide was drafted in an ambiguous, extremely broad and contradictory manner.
Katfriend Jack Cooper (Addleshaw Goddard) reported on the recent Fashion Law London event ‘Fashion Reborn: The Age of AI’. The discussion focused on the role of artificial intelligence in the fashion industry, including questions of authorship, data protection, and the impact of the EU AI Act.
Content reproduced from The IPKat as permitted under the Creative Commons Licence (UK).