NIPC Law

  Jane Lambert Business and Property Courts, Intellectual Property List (Mr Justice Miles) Iconix Luxembourg Holdings SARL v Dream Pairs Europe Inc and another [2023] EWHC 706 (Ch) (28 March 2023) This was a trade mark dispute.  The claimant was the owner of the Umbro brand, one of the biggest and most famous in sportswear.  It holds a number of well-known trade marks in the UK including the following which is registered under trade mark number UK00000991668  for “articles of clothing for use in sports, athletics or gymnastics.” The claimant also holds this mark which was filed for footwear and clothing at the European Intellectual Property Office in 2003 and is now registered in the UK: The defendants distribute football boots and other footwear and clothing through Amazon and eBay,  Their goods are marked with the following logo as in the photo of the green football boot above.   The defendants have registered that sign as a UK trade mark for clothing and footwear.  The claimant s

Author Stacey Harris   Licence CC BY-SA 2.0   Source Wikimedia Commons   Jane Lambert Business and Property Courts, Intellectual Property List (Mr Justice Marcus Smith) Molavi v Gilbert and others    [2023] EWHC 646 (Ch) (23 March 2023) This was an application under  CPR 24.2 (1) (i) , by the writer, Virginia Gilbert, BBC Studios Production Ltd and the British Broadcasting Corporation for summary judgment in an action that had been brought against them by the screenwriter Dr Donna Molavi for copyright infringement and breach of confidence . They contended that the claimant had no real prospect of succeeding in her allegation that they had copied her storyline and other material for two episodes of the forensic pathology series Silent Witness .   Copying can be inferred where the following conditions are satisfied: there is an objective similarity between the original work and the alleged copy; and the author of the alleged copy had an opportunity to copy the original. It is then up t

Author  Interdigital  Licence   CC BY-SA 4.0   Source  Wikimedia Commons   Jane Lambert Patents Court  (Mr Justice Mellor)  Interdigital Technology Corp and others v Lenovo Group Ltd and others    [ [2023] EWHC 172 (Pat) (31 Jan 2023) This was Mr Justice Mellor's judgment in Technical Trial "C".  A technical trial is a proceeding to determine whether a patent is valid, essential to a technical standard and infringed.  If it is then the owner of the patent can apply to the court for an injunction to restrain the infringement subject to an undertaking that he or she may have given to the standard-setting organization to grant any person wishing to implement the standard ("an implementer") a licence to do so on fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory ("FRAND") terms. If the patentee and implementer cannot agree those terms, there has to be a further trial (known as a "FRAND trial") in which the court will determine them. Related Litigation I hav

Author Interdigital Licence CC BY-SA 4.0   Source Wikimedia Commons   Jane Lambert Patents Court (Mr Justice Mellor) Interdigital Technology Corp and others v Lenovo Group Ltd and others    [2023]   EWHC 539 (Pat) 16 March 2023 This was the second time that an English court had been called upon to determine what terms were fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory ("FRAND") in a licence between holders of patents that are essential for compliance with a technical standard ("standard essential patent" or "SEPs") and those wishing to use those patents to comply with the standard ("implementers").  The other time was in  Unwired Planet International Ltd v Huawei Technologies (UK) Ltd and another  [2017] EWHC 711 (Pat) ("UPHC").  Mr Justice Birss (as he then was) settled an agreement on FRAND  terms which he annexed to his judgment in  Unwired Planet International Ltd v Huawei Technologies Co Ltd and another [2017] EWHC 1304 (Pat), [2017

C ontains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0 . Jane Lambert The CEO of the Intellectual Property Office, who is known as "the registrar" in trade mark proceedings pursuant to s.62 of the Trade Marks Act 1994, exercises judicial as well as executive functions.  He or she adjudicates disputes between applicants for trade marks and examiners known as ex parte proceedings. The registrar also decides disputes between applicants or registered proprietors and third parties that are known as  inter pates proceedings". The registrar's judicial functions are performed on his or her behalf by officials known as "hearing officers" though they are not mentioned in the legislation.  I discussed ex parte hearings in If the examiner says "no" - ex parte hearings in the Trade Marks Registry   in NIPC London on 10 Aug 2015 and inter partes hearings in Oppositions in the IPO's Trade Mark Registry   in the same publicati