IP Update – March 2013 Issue 19

IP Update – March 2013 Issue 19

This edition’s Case Studies explain why Google is not liable for displaying misleading AdWords advertisements, while a Facebook user is liable for posting disparaging comments about a competitor (Seafolly). We also discuss why SUNNY ROO is deceptively similar to SUNNY BOY, and whyuse of a trade mark in a domain name redirecting consumers to a third party website is an infringement (DRH Holdings).

A printer cartridge compatibility chart is an original literary work, says the court in Tonnex. We review that decision, plus the saga of Lundbeck’s extension of patent term application and the forthcoming High Court case on the patentability of treatment of the human body (Apotex).

See our Practice Updates to learn why the America Invents Act has been revised, and to understand Europe’s forthcoming unitary patent system. And read our Insight to see why Europe’s next reform should be a patent grace period.

In this issue


Case studies

Feature article

Practice updates

DCC Update