tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-55744792026-03-15T00:06:42.634+00:00The IPKatVerónica Rodríguez Arguijohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05763207846940036921noreply@blogger.comBlogger15142120tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-68032948399209214392026-03-14T16:42:00.000+00:002026-03-14T16:42:09.774+00:00Never too late! If you missed the IPKat last weekNever too late… while the internet debated whether Claude’s latest update might replace half the workforce, the IPKats on the other side had plenty of developments to catch up on.PatentsClaire Gregg reported that the High Court of Australia refused special leave in Doing important outdoor researchAristocrat, leaving the Full Federal Court’s decision on computer-implemented inventions as the Wissam Bentazarhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05090930478344959024noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-13408470164595337702026-03-14T10:50:00.000+00:002026-03-14T10:50:39.537+00:00Breitling for women? More like bad faith for women, says the EUIPORecently, the Fifth Board of Appeal (BoA) of the EUIPO affirmed the Cancellation Division’s declaration of invalidity of a trade mark under Article 59(1)(b) of the EU Trade Mark Regulation (EUTMR). While the BoA’s assessment serves as a useful summary and a concise application of the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) case law on trade mark applications made in bad faith, the defences submitted bySöğüt Atilla-Aydınhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03961082849150067855noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-21104826817370904342026-03-13T11:35:00.005+00:002026-03-13T11:35:57.046+00:00'Tang Gold' is not essentially derived from 'Nadorcott' plant variety, finds Patents CourtIn a rare plant variety rights decision, Asda supermarkets were (mostly) victorious in yesterday's judgment from the Patents Court: Nador Cott Protection SAS v Asda Stores Limited [2026] EWHC 553 (Pat). Mr Justice Mellor held that the 'Tang Gold' mandarin that was sold by Asda was not an essentially derived variety (EDV) of the 'Nadorcott' variety. But if it were, then the owners Jocelyn Bossehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14966228076523914309noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-16566623791556471642026-03-12T06:15:00.001+00:002026-03-12T06:15:46.926+00:00A twist too functional: General Court rejects hand-grip corkscrew trade markCan a corkscrew handle shaped like a human hand grip be registered as an EU trade mark, or is such a form purely functional? The General Court's judgment in Empreinte v EUIPO (T-437/25) offers a cautionary tale for designers hoping to protect innovative but technically driven product shapes. Background In March 2024 the French company Empreinte filed an application for registration of the Marcel Pemselhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06609359474931860987noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-13543348643600461432026-03-11T13:23:00.001+00:002026-03-11T13:25:06.123+00:00Guest Post - From Belgian Speculoos biscuits to one of the world’s most popular brandsThe IPKat is grateful to Natalia Basałaj (Hansberry Tomkiel, Poland) for the following Guest Post. "The story of Lotus Bakeries demonstrates that
global product success is often driven not only by taste, but above all by a
well-designed strategy.
The decision to move away from the generic name
“Speculoos” – referring to traditional Belgian biscuits with a distinctive
caramel-cinnamon Oliver Fairhursthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00944379545095103568noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-46524953740544528032026-03-10T08:00:00.000+00:002026-03-10T08:00:08.107+00:00Is authorship inherently anthropocentric? Thaler, human authorship and the contracts quietly filling the gapLast week the US Supreme Court denied a petition for a writ of certiorari filed by Stephen Thaler to appeal the US D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals decision in Thaler v. Perlmutter. The cases centres upon the US Copyright Office rejecting Thaler’s application to register an artistic work autonomously generated by AI titled A Recent Entrance to Paradise (below).Thaler designated the ‘Creativity Georgia Jenkinshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10796829969295635922noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-69596282163526804562026-03-09T20:14:00.000+00:002026-03-09T20:14:18.626+00:00Are AI-generated materials legally privileged? United States v. HeppnerLegal privilege ensures that you can share sensitive information with your lawyers without fear of it being used against you in court. This protection is critical in all fields of law. In patent law, without the assurance of secrecy, the ability of a patentee or a defendant to receive candid advice would be severely diminished. Now, with the growing ubiquity of AI in the legal industry, much Dr Rose Hugheshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04232611463781544102noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-9887322836497707302026-03-06T16:32:00.000+00:002026-03-06T16:32:00.601+00:00The future of the patent profession: Are we looking into an AI abyss? AI presents a huge dilemma for patent attorneys. There is no doubt that AI will have a dramatic impact on the profession and the business model that many firms have relied on for decades. Faced with this challenge, there is a growing divide in the profession between the firms and attorneys who are actively adopting AI, and those that remain stubbornly AI-sceptic. Amongst the AI adopters, Dr Rose Hugheshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04232611463781544102noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-88924017715327153252026-03-05T18:06:00.001+00:002026-03-05T18:06:29.604+00:00[Guest Post] Of Snakes and Artistic Value: Bologna IP Court Slithers Through Design, Shape Marks and Copyrights in a post-Cofemel landscapeThe IPKat has received and is pleased to host the following guest post by Katfriend Luigi Manna (attorney at Martini Manna & Partners), commenting on a decision from the Bologna IP Court. Here is what Luigi writes: Of Snakes and Artistic Value: Bologna IP Court Slithers Through Design, Shape Marks and Copyrights in a post-Cofemel landscape by Luigi Manna A recent ruling of the IP Court Marcel Pemselhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06609359474931860987noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-55378675405071062882026-03-03T20:13:00.004+00:002026-03-03T20:19:28.604+00:00BREAKING: Imminent new referral to the EBA on the relevance of G1/24 to added matterThe Board of Appeal in T 873/24 has decided to refer questions to the Enlarged Board of Appeal (EBA) on the application of G1/24 (claim interpretation) to the assessment of added matter. According to the minutes of oral proceedings, the Board of Appeal concluded that the case hinged on whether the order from G1/24 that the description and drawings should always be consulted for claim Dr Rose Hugheshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04232611463781544102noreply@blogger.com27tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-70628313101971058812026-03-03T15:56:00.002+00:002026-03-03T15:57:02.078+00:00[Guest post] A tale of David and Goliath in Gangnam style? Recently, the Supreme Court of Korea issued a decision on upcycling and trade mark law, as discussed in this guest contribution by Katfriend Nari Lee (Hanken School of Economics). Here’s what she writes.A tale of David and Goliath in Gangnam style?by Nari Lee Nari's Kat Tenny while taking a break from all the legal readingKorean consumers recently saw the former First Lady, Kim Keon-hee, Eleonora Rosatihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05629420303968805446noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-58443403742658467312026-03-03T12:46:00.004+00:002026-03-03T12:46:38.998+00:00[Guest Post] UK Assessment of Computer Implemented Inventions moves closer to EPO Practice - but by how far? (Emotional perception [2026] UKSC 3)Now the dust has now settled on the high profile UK Supreme Court decision in Emotional Perception AI Limited (Appellant) v Comptroller General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks (Respondent) [2026] UKSC 3. Katfriend Greg Corcoran provides in-depth analysis: Over to Greg:"In Emotional Perception, the UK Supreme Court (SC) found a new test should apply in the UK for determining theDr Rose Hugheshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04232611463781544102noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-70336776096055395042026-03-03T07:25:00.001+00:002026-03-03T07:25:16.100+00:00Vow Renewal in Silicon Valley? What the Microsoft-OpenAI Partnership Really SecuresLast week Microsoft and OpenAI publicly updated their partnership status to committed, but still complicated given their multi-cloud set-up. Jokes about Silicon Valley vow renewals aside, this statement quietly re-affirms a new legal order based on Microsoft’s exclusive licence over access to IP related to OpenAI models and products, agreement that Azure remains the sole infrastructure provider Georgia Jenkinshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10796829969295635922noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-91408720867409842202026-03-02T07:54:00.001+00:002026-03-02T07:54:00.118+00:00Otsuka seeks to appeal decision to deny PTEs for formulation patents in AustraliaThe Full Federal Court of Australia's recent decision to
deny eligibility for patent term extension (PTE) of formulation patents in
Australia sent shockwaves through the local pharmaceutical sector. Whether in
support of the decision in Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co Ltd v Sun
Pharma ANZ Pty Ltd [2025]
FCAFC 161 or not, it would be difficult to find someone with skin in
the game who wasn't taken Dr Claire Gregghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01138617100579889840noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-90303162291942050042026-03-01T02:03:00.000+00:002026-03-01T02:03:57.747+00:00High Court of Australia refuses special leave in Aristocrat: what this means for computer-implemented inventionsOne of the biggest issues in Australian patent law over the
past decade has been the criteria for eligibility of computer-implemented
inventions (CIIs) for patent protection. The long running dispute
between Aristocrat Technologies Australia Pty Ltd and the Commissioner
of Patents is a case in point, the latest (and final) development in which
unfolded last week.BackgroundIn a previous post (Dr Claire Gregghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01138617100579889840noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-43561166927129644362026-02-28T14:38:00.004+00:002026-02-28T14:39:54.770+00:00Description amendments can extend protection (T 439/22)The comments space for the last IPKat article on claim interpretation/description amendments appears to have maxed out. Sorry everyone, but maybe it's for the best. However, fear not, we now have a new decision to restart the debate! The decision in T 439/22 takes us back to our old friend, the definition of "gathered". Applying G 1/24, the Board of Appeal in the case is the second to find Dr Rose Hugheshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04232611463781544102noreply@blogger.com33tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-9571009448332924972026-02-27T21:30:00.004+00:002026-02-27T21:30:00.116+00:00The validity and value of cell therapy safety protocol inventions (T 1555/23)The patent in T 1555/23 is impressively broad. The claims covered a medical use invention comprising treating the side effects of CAR-T cell therapy using the now industry-standard class of cytokine inhibitor. The claim was not limited to any particular CAR-T cell therapy, target, type of cancer or specific inhibitor. The data supporting the claim, whilst clinical, was also relatively Dr Rose Hugheshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04232611463781544102noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-74596926799909753772026-02-27T15:11:00.003+00:002026-02-27T15:11:53.834+00:00Never Too Late: If you missed the IPKat last week!Before the thawIn this in-between season, still skating on winter’s thin ice while spring waits in the wings. Even as the shadows shortened, the IP docket didn’t slow its pace. Here’s your weekly glide through the developments.CopyrightGeorgia Jenkins took readers onto thin ice with her analysis of generative AI logos under German copyright law. The Munich court held that originality requires Wissam Bentazarhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05090930478344959024noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-15366106195803278742026-02-27T06:36:00.001+00:002026-02-27T06:37:37.440+00:00[Guest Post] Ceci n’est pas du Gruyère: Swiss origin claims and how to deal with themThe IPKat has received and is pleased to host this guest contribution from Katfriend Federica Pezza, who explores the legal framework governing Swiss origin claims in Switzerland and the EU. Ceci n’est pas du Gruyère: Swiss origin claims and how to deal with them by Federica Pezza Switzerland means luxury watches, chocolate and cows, fondue and raclette, Heidi and green mountains. Above all, it Marcel Pemselhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06609359474931860987noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-71129365283850612732026-02-26T15:07:00.001+00:002026-02-26T15:07:42.513+00:00[Guest post] Retromark Volume XVII: the last six months in trade marksDarren Meale of Simmons & Simmons presents the seventeenth volume of his rundown of notable trade mark cases over the past six months.Retromark Volume XVII: the last six months in trade marksby Darren MealeIt’s been nearly nine years since a much younger me (pictured in Volume 1) started Retromark. Fast forward from 2017 to 2026 and the cases keep coming thick and fast, with the Court of Eleonora Rosatihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05629420303968805446noreply@blogger.com0