http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/2024/05/never-too-late-if-you-missed-ipkat-last_13.html
If you were too distracted by looking for aurora borealis/australis last week (or just enjoying everyone else’s photographs of the phenomenon), here’s the summary of what you missed.
Trade Marks and GIs
| A Kat enjoying the night sky. Image from Pixabay. |
This Kat discussed the news that a $400 pineapple variety will soon be launched in the US market. The post explores the emerging branding strategies in the fruit industry that are shifting the relationship between trade marks and plant variety rights.
Anna Maria Stein analysed the recent EUIPO decision to refuse to register a position trade mark for footwear. It found that a band with a knot and ribbons with metal pendants affixed to the template of the upper part of shoes is very common in the footwear sector, such that the sign lacks distinctive character.
This Kat also outlined the recent decision from the Italian Supreme Court, which referred questions to the CJEU on whether wines that received national GI protection before 2007 (in this case, the Salaparuta PDO from Sicily) are subject to the principle of non-deceptiveness vis-à-vis well-known trade marks.
Copyright
Eleonora Rosati shared her comments from the 5th EUIPO Intellectual Property Case Law Conference last month (reported here), entitled “Should the EU unify copyright laws?” The contribution will be published as an editorial in the Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice.
Designs
Marcel Pemsel summarised the General Court’s decision (Case T‑654/22) on determining the informed user and how the informed user perceives the design of a specific product, which are important steps in the assessment of whether two designs produce the same overall impression. The informed user will not just look at the designs as they are but consider their use, and this may bring design elements to the informed user’s attention.
Patents
Guest UPCKats Agathe Michel-de Cazotte and Hiske Roos and members from the team at Carpmaels provided a roundup of how the UPC is treating confidentiality and third party access to court documents. This has raised many interesting questions, especially after the UPC Court of Appeal’s decision in Ocado on the protection of confidential information from access by third parties.
Content reproduced from The IPKat as permitted under the Creative Commons Licence (UK).