As discussed in recent articles, the Retained EU Law Act came into force on 1 January 2024 and allows the UK courts to depart from earlier case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union moving forward. This may well have an appreciable effect on the law relating to designs and copyright in the UK.
The UKIPO have released an update in relation to their stance on enforcing address for service requirements, following concerns that have been raised over applications being filed with an ineffective or false UK AFS.
Whilst Brexit may seem to have been “done” on 1 January 2021, lawmakers have been working hard to ensure that it is finally done by devising legislation that would effectively erase from our laws the principle of EU law supremacy and general principles of EU law and directly effective EU rights.
On April 16, 2024, Canada’s Department of Finance tabled the 2024 Canadian Federal Budget (“Budget 2024”). Budget 2024 contains proposals about intellectual property ("IP") that will be beneficial to innovative Canadian companies, both big and small, that intend to pursue Canadian patent rights within the next several years.
For over two decades, the European Union's design regulations as set out in Council Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 have remained largely unaltered, yet technological advancements and the digital age have dramatically transformed the design industry.
Before Brexit, once goods had been legitimately placed on the market anywhere in the EEA, any applicable IP rights, such as registered trade marks, were “exhausted” so that the rights holder could no longer restrict further dealings in those specific goods anywhere in the territory (unless there were circumstances where the condition of those goods had been tampered with, for example).
Many designers of vehicles and vehicle components have been taking advantage of the UK and EU registered design system to obtain IP protection for their automotive innovations.
In the recent WIPO Domain Complaint of ALTILINK Real Estate Hungary KFT v. Domain Administrator, SK Creations, Inc., the Complainant (ALTILINK) was unsuccessful in proving the Respondent (SK Creations, Inc) had acted in bad faith in purchasing the disputed domain name <nestra.com> (the Domain Name). This case highlights the importance of appropriately evidencing that a domain name has been bought and is being used in bad faith and the importance of keeping on top of domain name renewals!