Original news and analysis on international IP policy
The German Constitutional Court today ruled in favour of the “freedom to sample” - or freedom to remix - in a case between the singer/songwriter Sabrina Setlur and the band Kraftwerk.
Fashion in the US generates over $330 billion in annual revenues, but it is more than a business. Fashion is a well-recognized art, displayed in numerous museum exhibitions throughout the world. This art, however, receives little IP protection in the US. But a case before the US Supreme Court could change that.
The establishment of the WTO Agreement on TRIPS (Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights) and the proliferation of plurilateral, bilateral and regional agreements have significantly contributed to the increasing complexities of the intellectual property system. The emergence of new actors, reflecting conflicting expectations and the adoption of new trade agreements that often exceed the standards set by the TRIPS agreement, have resulted in a new density of rules that have further fragmented the international system. These developments have unavoidably called for further analysis by academics and stakeholders.
From the BBC: Uniform packaging rules for tobacco will be introduced in the United Kingdom on Friday after a legal challenge against the new law was dismissed by the High Court.
The recent decision involving Moneyweb and Media24 (Moneyweb (Pty) Limited v Media 24 Limited & Another [2016] ZAGPJHC 81) is an important one for copyright lawyers in South Africa because it is the first time that two provisions relating to news reporting of the Copyright Act 1978 (the Act) have been judicially considered, namely, sections 12(1)(c)(i) and 12(8)(a). In fact, it is the first time that the application of the fair-dealing provision, section 12(1), has received any judicial consideration, whether in the context of news reporting or otherwise.
The International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) has released a report that examines specialised intellectual property courts around the world.
US President Barack Obama yesterday signed into law a measure aimed at strengthening trade secret protection including by allowing federal courts to hear cases involving trade secret theft.
A copy of the new Indian patent office order shows the details of the decision to reverse an earlier direction and grant a patent in India on the high-value hepatitis C drug. [Updated with response from Gilead]
Legislation authorising federal courts to hear cases involving theft of trade secrets passed the US House of Representatives on 27 April and is now headed for an expected signature by President Barack Obama. Final enactment of the “Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016” (DTSA), along with the 14 April adoption by the European Parliament of the EU Trade Secrets Directive, boosts protections on both sides of the Atlantic but not uniformly, intellectual property lawyers said.
The US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is not admitting defeat. It is still refusing to register trademarks that disparage people, even though this policy violates the First Amendment’s guarantee of free speech, according to a December decision by the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals. The USPTO has appealed the court ruling, and many experts expect the Supreme Court will soon rule on whether there is constitutional protection for disparaging marks. [Updated!]
Genius, brilliant, generous, wholehearted, warm, kind, funny, original, musician, art lover, brave, restless, these are few of the most suitable and recurrent attributes of Denis Borges Barbosa, who passed away on Saturday, April 2nd. Leading IP professor, researcher and attorney in Brazil, he was also the key international face of Brazilian IP, write Allan Rocha de Souza and Cláudia Chamas.
The controversial ruling was perhaps to be expected. The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals doggedly hewed to its existing interpretation of patent law. Unfortunately, the court’s decision in Lexmark International v Impression Products conflicts with recent Supreme Court jurisprudence, according to many experts – thus leaving unresolved some important questions about how much control patentees can maintain over their patented products.