Naughty ex-employee continues to use employer’s database in breach of...
Medical Innovations Ltd v Eakins, High Court The High Court has concluded that summary judgment was appropriate in a case concerning infringement of database rights and breach of a compensation...
View ArticleCool relations between rival ice cream vans over designs ends up in High Court
Whitby Specialist Vehicles Ltd v Yorkshire Specialist Vehicles Ltd, High Court In a dispute heard by the High Court, it seems that a refreshing treat on a hot day should have been the call to melt an...
View ArticleEU exhaustion of rights principle does not allow reproduction after change of...
Art & Allposters International v Stichting Pictoright, European Court of Justice Allposters markets posters and reproductions of famous painters. Pictoright is a Dutch collecting society....
View ArticleCourt of Appeal upholds Rihanna’s right to sue Topshop for passing off in...
Robyn Rihanna Fenty v Arcadia Group Brands Ltd, Court of Appeal Rihanna has succeeded in defeating Arcadia’s appeal to the Court of Appeal over a High Court ruling that Arcadia’s Topshop stores had...
View ArticleINVESTING FOR A NEW WORLD – or invest in a new word?
Blackrock, Inc v OHIM, EU General Court The European Union’s General Court has upheld a decision by the OHIM Board of Appeal that the slogan “INVESTING FOR A NEW WORLD” lacked distinctiveness and...
View ArticlePouring oil over troubled aqua in imperfect trade mark choice
BSH Bosch, EU General Court The OHIM Board of Appeal was wrong to decide that there was no likelihood of confusion between the AQUAPERFECT trade mark that was subject to a European Community Trade Mark...
View ArticleGENTLECARE too descriptive to be registered trade mark
Grundig Multimedia v OHIM, EU General Court The European Union’s General Court has upheld a decision by the OHIM Board of Appeal that GENTLECARE was too descriptive and not distinctive enough to be...
View ArticlePIANISSIMO lacking distinctiveness to be registered trade mark
Grundig Multimedia v OHIM, EU General Court You are not seeing double. This is another trade mark case that Grundig has lost before the European Union’s General Court. This one too – just like the...
View ArticleCourt emphasises implied terms should be included in contracts narrowly
Orvec v Linfoots, Intellectual Property Enterprise Court Orvec supplied blankets and pillows to airlines. It used Linfoots, an advertising agency, to create advertising material. Linfoots took photos...
View ArticleHigh Court applies design right infringement test in jeans case
G-Star v Rhodi, High Court G-Star sued Rhodi for unregistered design infringement in its Arc Pant jeans. The jeans complained of were Ibaraki, Bowral, Jurien, Vale, Carton, Maleny, Capel and Winton...
View ArticleNot a smooth process but INNOCENT manufacturers get refreshing trade mark...
Fresh Trading Ltd v Deepend Fresh Recovery Ltd, High Court In 1998, Fresh Trading engaged Deep End (a design agency) to help with the design for its new brand of INNOCENT smoothie drinks. The...
View ArticleNANO not allowed as registered trade mark for robots as OHIM entitled to base...
Innovation First Inc v OHIM, EU General Court The European Union General Court has rejected an appeal against refusal by OHIM (the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market) to allow the...
View ArticleSUPREME not the winner
Supreme Petfoods Ltd v Henry Bell & Co (Grantham) Ltd, High Court The owner of various UK and European Community Trade Marks has failed in its High Court bid to stop another pet food manufacturer’s...
View ArticleBlind hope not the answer over COLOURBLIND trade mark wrangle
Pangyrus Ltd v OHIM, EU General Court A Mr C left Pangyrus after being a director and shareholder there. He set up a new company, which bought the rights from him to the COLOURBLIND trade mark. The new...
View ArticleGovernment proposes revamp of groundless threats provisions
The Government has proposed updating the law on legal action against people who make groundless threats for infringement of intellectual property rights. The groundless threats provisions seek to offer...
View ArticleCoke still got the fizz as EU General Court upholds strength of the mark
Intermark v OHIM, EU General Court One of the biggest fears of established trade marks is whether they would be seen to have become generic and lost their distinctiveness. In this case, the owners of...
View ArticleCompany vicariously and jointly liable for passing off by employee in...
Vertical Leisure v Poleplus, Intellectual Property Enterprise Court In 2014, the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court ruled that an employee of Poleplus had been involved in passing off by...
View ArticleHigh Court blocks access to Popcorn Time sites
Twentieth Century Fox v Sky, High Court The High Court has granted an injunction in favour of the applicant members of the Motion Picture Association of America and owners of copyright in films and...
View ArticleEU trade mark cost changes on the way
The cost of applying for or renewing a European Community Trade Mark may be about to change. The current trade mark application cost of €900 for an application in up to three classes on the register is...
View ArticleOnly some limited use of trade mark not smart enough to preserve ownership...
Naazneen Investments Ltd v OHIM, EU General Court A previous owner registered SMART WATER as a European Community Trade Mark for beverages, namely water with dietary supplements, and the ownership was...
View Article