Kluwer Copyright Blog

APRIL 5, 2022

In Gtflix , the CJEU held that when a claim relating to the dissemination of allegedly disparaging remarks on the internet is brought, the compensation for the resulting damage from that claim in one Member State may be sought before the courts of that same Member State. UK Intellectual Property Office, UK’s future exhaustion of IPR regime.

Copyright Law 60

Copyright Law Copyright Law Music 60

SpicyIP

AUGUST 30, 2021

Topical Highlight. Domex Advertisement: Product Disparagement or Nominative Fair Use? Sun Pharma v. Cipla: Madras HC Rejects COVID as an Excuse for Passing Off. In this guest post , Kedar Ganesh Dhargalkar analyses the recent case of Sun Pharmaceuticals Industries Ltd. Cipla Ltd. , Other posts.

Non-Fungible Tokens 105

Non-Fungible Tokens Fair Use Advertising Advertising 105

SpicyIP

NOVEMBER 13, 2023

In this month’s edition, he looks into topics including copyright and education, transparency and clinical trial data, Google ad-word cases, and more! The dispute pertained to alleged infringement and disparagement of Patanjali trademark by the defendant who had uploaded a parody video on Youtube.

Trademark 59

Trademark Copyright IP Registration 59

SpicyIP

FEBRUARY 12, 2024

Last week we published 9 posts on topics such as our comments on the proposed Trademarks (1st Amendment) Rules, the Madras High Court’s decision with respect to patentability of business methods, and Union Minister of State for Commerce’s response on ability of the current IPR regime to cater concerns arising out of AI generated work.

Trademark 103

Trademark Social Media Registering Trademarks Copyright 103

SpicyIP

DECEMBER 30, 2023

As in previous years, we have divided these developments into five categories: a) Top 10 IP Judgements/Orders (Topicality/Impact) b) Top 10 IP Judgements/Orders (Jurisprudence/Legal Lucidity) c) Top 10 IP Legislative and Policy Related Developments d) Other IP Developments; and e) Other Notable Developments. RDB and Co.

IP 124

IP Copyright Trademark Intellectual Property 124

LexBlog IP

JULY 21, 2021

Juliet Dee, Sweet baby Jesus, the band who must not be named, and friends U can’t trust: Disparaging, immoral and scandalous trademarks in the United States and the European Union, 53 First Amendment Studies 91, 93 (2019)]. So a lot is implied in, or possible from, the title ( as is often my intent on this blog ).

Intellectual Property 52

Intellectual Property Invention Trademark Copyright 52

LexBlog IP

MARCH 12, 2023

Staying on the topic of Rule 12(b)(6) motions, during the course of my review of these cases each month, I am seeing a trend by federal courts denying these motions on the trade secret claims but sometimes dismissing other tort claims.

Blogging 52

Blogging Litigation Ownership Reporting 52

The IPKat

JULY 20, 2021

Chapter 10, by Laura Heymann , utilizes naming theory to review doctrines surrounding deceptive, abandoned or disparaging marks [earlier work here and here ]. It will accommodate both students searching for a thesis topic and veteran academics interested in how their colleagues have brought their seminal papers 'up to date'.

Trademark Law 96

Trademark Law Law Trademark Registration 96

The IPKat

DECEMBER 5, 2021

While one could debate this topic from a non-legal standpoint (and perhaps we will return to it), one (unsolicited) question might be: What would have happened if Spotify had not agreed to remove the " shuffle " feature at Adele's request and she had decided to take her reasons to the legal level?

Moral Rights 143

Moral Rights Music Television Copyright 143

Patently-O

DECEMBER 12, 2021

Nonetheless, the bar is a content-based restriction because “its reach is defined simply by the topic (subject matter) of the covered speech” [8] – here, the topic being the famous person in question. 1052(a) is unconstitutional with respect to the bar on disparaging marks), aff’d , Matal v. available on Pacer). [5]

Registration 69

Registration Government Advertising Advertising 69