Spot the Scaredy-Kat
This Kat was interested to see the variety of stories around the IP blogs this week, and hopes readers are too.


Should any readers be in need of new sound effects for non-commercial use, IP Draughts has annotated part of the BBC’s licensing terms recently published to accompany the making available of 16,000 sound effects from its archives.

The IP Watchdog reports on the oral argument in Google v. Oracle in the US Supreme Court, with both sides arguing that a judgment in favour of the other in this computer code copyright case would harm innovation. 


A new article in the PatentlyO Law Journal argues that the patent-holder’s right to exclude in the US has been impinged upon by federal courts misunderstanding and misapplying the landmark 2006 decision in eBay v. MercExchange.

FOSS Patents characterised the UK judgment in Unwired Planet v. Huawei/Conversant v. ZTE as having encouraged territorial overreach in patent litigation, leading to a spate of extreme measures such as anti-anti(ad nauseam)-suit injunctions.

Michael Geist assesses recent Canadian innovation policy, finding provincial policy skewed in favour of patents and away from alternative, more open models of incentivising innovation – but a flicker of light in the federal government’s legislation to set aside patents where necessary for the distribution of vaccines or other pharmaceuticals. 

Trade Marks

To what extent might trade mark or copyright law protect a stylised ampersand? The Fashion Law considers these and other issues in reporting on a recent unjust enrichment suit filed against Banana Republic.

SpicyIP hosted a guest post suggesting that trade marks with a discriminatory meaning should be refused registration in India, in light of recent controversy around the ‘Fair & Lovely’ skin whitening cream.

Photo by Aleksandr Nadyojin from Pexels
Content reproduced from The IPKat as permitted under the Creative Commons Licence (UK).