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

http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/2024/01/never-too-late-if-you-missed-ipkat-last_13.html

If you’ve had a rough time staying on top of things this week, not to worry! Here’s the summary of what you missed:

Trade Marks

Clearly, this Kat is on top of things!
Image from Pexels.

Eleonora Rosati outlined the recent Board of Appeal decision about Prada’s application to register its “iconic” upside-down isosceles triangle pattern, which held that the pattern would not be inherently distinctive.

Nedim Malovic reported on the latest in the long line of cancellation actions directed at Bankys’s EU trade mark registrations representing his artworks – this time, the repeated application relating to one of his best known artworks, the ‘Flower Thrower’. The Cancellation Division held that the application was made in bad faith.

Marcel Pemsel examined the recent decision from the EUIPO’s Opposition Division about the famous tomb raider Lara Croft, whose name was held to have a strong reputation, to the degree that consumers would establish a link with the mark ‘LoraCraft’.

Patents

Rose Hughes discussed how UPC may approach patent claim interpretation. The recent decision of the Munich Local Division in SES v Hanshow seemed to go in an odd direction by using the application as filed and prosecution history in the claim interpretation.

Rose Hughes also speculated on the potential referral to the Enlarged Board of Appeal to consider how much the description should be taken into account for claim interpretation, given the confusing and contradictory case law on this important question.

Content reproduced from The IPKat as permitted under the Creative Commons Licence (UK).