IP Cases & Articles
When a band’s residual goodwill falls short: INXS fails to prevent registration of IMXS
A recent UKIPO decision (O/0829/26) highlights that even a well-known band with significant residual goodwill may not be able to prevent the registration of a similar trade mark where the parties operate in fields that are only tenuously linked.
Balancing trade marks and free speech: can freedom of expression justify using another’s trade mark?
The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has provided its assessment on how freedom of expression, under Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), can be relied upon as “due cause” under EU trade mark…
English Whisky secures protected status: implications for producers and brand owners
English Whisky has recently been granted geographical indication (GI) status, formally recognising its distinct identity, reputation and innovation. The new status places English Whisky alongside Scotch, Welsh and Irish whiskies as a recognised and protected whisky category. The decision reflects…
Roadget v Whaleco: intermediary liability and the temporary copies exception
In Roadget Business Pte Ltd v Whaleco UK Ltd (Shein v Temu), the High Court dismissed Shein’s copyright infringement claims concerning photographs appearing on Temu’s UK marketplace. The decision provides useful guidance on the temporary copies exception under s.28A of…
Do you look under your bike’s saddle? Bundespatentgericht considers visibility and validity
A design must meet certain basic requirements to qualify for protection, notably novelty and individual character. For component parts of complex products, an additional requirement applies: the component must be visible during normal use.
Business and Property Division of the High Court established: BPD replaces Chancery Division of the High Court
The structure of the UK High Court has been modernised by the recent establishment of the Business and Property Division (BPD). Since the start of October 2026, the BPD has combined the Business and Property Courts, which previously sat across…
IPEC insights: Marshall Group AB v OWGH Limited – counterfeits, solicitor withdrawal and defendant absence
The claimants, Marshall Group AB and Marshall Amplification PLC, sued OWGH Limited for infringement of three UK trade marks for MARSHALL and MAJOR, each mark being registered for, among other goods, headphones.
Playing the patent game: what European case law teaches us about video game patentability
When considering the question of video game patentability, Article 52 of the European Patent Convention (EPC) is the natural place to start. This section of the EPC, defining patentable inventions, carries explicit exceptions for schemes, rules, and methods for playing…
IPEC insights: Charles And Ivy Ltd v Chelsea Supplies - reasonable licence fees, flagrancy and additional damages for copyright infringement
A recent copyright decision provides useful guidance on assessing a reasonable licence fee and when additional damages may be justified.
Vibe coding and intellectual property: why copyright is not enough to protect software
For many software businesses, copyright has traditionally been an important part of intellectual property protection. Write original software code and, subject to the applicable national law, copyright protection generally arises automatically. But the increasing use of AI to develop software…
How to mitigate the risk of central revocation: want to avoid committing to a unitary patent? Here’s how to say “it’s not UPC, it’s me”
The Unified Patent Court (UPC) can be a valuable tool for patent proprietors. A shiny new unitary patent, unlike a classic European patent granted by the European Patent Office (EPO), provides uniform protection rather than a collection of national patent…
Page 1 of 178
Next Page