The IPKat covers developments and case law in intellectual property law, including patents, trademarks, copyright, and related procedural issues. It discusses judicial decisions from various jurisdictions such as the Federal Court of Australia and the European Union courts, focusing on topics like patent validity, genuine use of trademarks, confidentiality in patent law, and copyright protection boundaries. The blog also highlights events and webinars relevant to IP practitioners. Published by The IPKat, it provides updates on legal standards, interpretations, and practical implications in the field of intellectual property.
This is a review of the book Patent Claims:
Interpretation, validity and infringement (Federation Press, 2025) by
David Brennan, a Visiting Fellow at the University of Technology, Sydney (UTS)
Law Faculty.
This is a rare textbook that is worth reading…
The IPKat has received and is
pleased to host this guest contribution from Katfriends Pedro Marcos Nunes
Barbosa (Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro; Denis Borges Barbosa
Advogados) and Ryan Benjamin Abbott (University of Surrey; University of
California, Los…
Following the release of G1/25, questions have been circling as to what the decision means for the pending referral in G 1/26 and what the consequences (good or bad) are for applicants and patentees. On G1/26, some of the questions…
<!–[if !mso]>
v:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
<![endif]–><!–[if gte mso 9]>
<![endif]–><!–[if gte mso 9]>
Normal
0
false
21
false
false
false
DE
X-NONE
AR-SA…
G 1/25, issued today, holds that the description must be adapted only where an “inconsistency” between the claims and description causes non-compliance with another requirement of the EPC. Legal basis for adaptation of the description, says the Enlarged Board of…
In a copyright law dispute between Michael Hayden (claimant) and Jeff Koons (defendant), the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held that the claimant’s copyright infringement claim failed because of the statute of limitations: a ‘reasonable copyright owner’…
The list of courts willing to reach across
borders after BSH v Electrolux has a new entry. Katfriend Peter Ling
(Lenz & Staehelin) provides the following analysis of the Swiss Federal Patent
Court’s first cross-border preliminary injunction decision, in which…
A recent Australian Patent Office (APO) opposition decision,
voestalpine Rail Technology GmbH v Nippon Steel Corporation [2026]
APO 17, considered whether delivery of a product on consignment can
amount to novelty destroying prior use in Australia. This decision is a…
The IPKat has received and is pleased to host the following news item by Katfriend Edoardo Cesarini (GR Legal) regarding a recent first instance decision concerning the validity of a three-dimensional (3D) trade mark for a well-known yoghurt pot. Here’s…
Let us start with a little quiz. For which concept(s) of trade mark law are the following conditions relevant: A reputation of the earlier mark, a link between the earlier mark and the contested trade mark and free-riding on the…
