Never Too Late: If you missed the IPKat last week!

Did you chase your tail last week and miss the IPKat? Cheer up and read the 119th edition of Never Too Late.

Whaaat, is it Wednesday already?

Around the IPKat’s Cousins Blogs

A round-up post of some highlights from IPKat’s cousin blogs.

With free trade and globalization under attack, can IP licensing come to the rescue?

Neil Wilkof reflections about how to understand the possible threat to IP with globalization and free trade under attack.

The new French law targeting “automated image referencing services”: does EU law allow it?

Eleonora Rosati discusses the compatibility with EU law of the new French law on freedom of creation, architecture and cultural heritage.

Unauthorised communication to the public in an online environment as a criminal offence in the UK?

Eleonora also analyzes the Digital Economy Bill 2016 (still at Committee stage), which contains criminal liability, potentially a 10-year prison sentence for unauthorised communication to the public ("does it apply even for a trivial infringement?).

Friday Fantasies

A round-up post of week’s news and forthcoming events.

Meet the Trade Mark Judges (Part One)

GuestKat Rosie Burbidge recaps the annual IBIL and MARQUES event, which enabled attendees to learn first-hand about daily life at the courts.

HHJ Hacon amplifies the law on EU trade mark jurisdiction: AMS-Neve v Heritage Audio

David Brophy discusses this case, which dealt with jurisdiction over a UK/ EU trademark infringement and passing-off dispute, when the damages incurred and the acts of infringement took place in two different countries.

Launch of IP Pro Bono scheme

Darren Smyth covers the scheme launched by the Intellectual Property Office (UKIPO) that is designed to provide free legal representation to small business and individuals on IP litigation issues.

Lundbeck v European Commission - a rotten decision or effective competition law enforcement?

GuestKat Eibhlin Vardy discusses this case in which the Ninth Chamber of the General Court of the European Union dismissed the action for annulment of the Commission decision that ‘pay-for-delay’ agreements between Lundbeck and generic companies breach EU competition rules.

PREVIOUSLY ON NEVER TOO LATE

Never Too Late 118 [week ending on Sunday 16 October] | Rome Court of First Instance rules that copyright exceptions for news reporting and criticism/review do not apply to entertainment TV programmes | It's a gas! The Nobel Memorial Prize in Economics | Around the Brexit Blogs and Related Events | Is there a competition law issue lurking on the horizon of cloud computing? | Thursday Thingies | Do declarations of non-infringement work for trade mark litigants? | A close look at survey methodology for proof of acquired distinctiveness | BGH rules for patentees on appeal – again| A croissant-doughnut by any other name| General Court confirms that body-builder silhouette cannot be registered as a trade mark for nutritional supplements| The proposed press publishers' right: is it really worth all this noise? | Servier successful before Henderson J in introducing defence based on the Department of Health's prescribing/reimbursement practices | Can the Curve combat piracy? | Academics stress importance of preserving consistency and integrity of EU framework on content monitoring

Never too late 117 [week ending on Sunday 9 October] | The Commission's DSMS and CJEU case law: what relationship? | Generic marks as valuable commercial information | Other people's computers | Compared to Svensson, GS Media is not that bad after all | Introducing our new InternKats! | C-223/15: no EU-wide confusion, no EU-wide injunction

Never too late 116 [week ending on Sunday 2 October] | Book Review: WTO Dispute Settlement and the TRIPS Agreement | The IPKat team news: new arrivals and farewells | Brexit - who has the power to change UK law? | Book review: Computer Crimes and Digital Investigations | European business urge continued UK involvement in UPC on eve of Competitiveness Council meeting | Wednesday Whimsies | Book review: Global Governance of Intellectual Property in the 21st Century

Never too late 115 [week ending on Sunday 25 September] | Book Review: Arnold reviews “Economic Approaches to Intellectual Property” | The English approach to obviousness – It all depends on the facts? | AIPPI Congress Report 3: Biosimilars – similar but different? | AIPPI Congress Report 4: Lawyers who lunch – role of experts in litigation and the EPO in the 21^st Century | Law & Economics – The Italian Edition | Friday Fantasies | Latest thoughts about Brexit and the UPC | Eye ‘should’ve’ done that! – Specsavers nears approval to trade mark single word “should’ve” & “shouldve” | A song of Ice and Ice | ChIPs Global Summit Report 3: Congratulations – your patent has been allowed, when is it finally final?