Some weeks are busier than others for our readers, while others are very busy for our blogging team. That's why Kat colleague Alberto Bellan was not too greatly taxed to put together the relatively slim round-up of last week's substantive Katposts. The coming week may prove to be quite a different kettle of fish, notes Merpel. Anyway this week's summary of the immediate past features on this weblog -- the 70th such summary -- reads like this:Nikos reports the General Court of the EU's ruling in Case T-309/13 Enosi Mastichoparagogon Chiou v OHIM, Gaba International Holding GmbH, which addressed the two trade marks "ELMA" and "ELMEX" used for chewing gum which has some sort of medical effects. My mum has always said that such products simply do not exist.
The IPKat notched up its 16 millionth page view. The selfsame IPKat says 16 million thanks to our readership.
Jani covers the US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit's decision in Tomaydo-Tomahhdo LLC v George Vozray et al, Case No. 15-3179, which dealt with the restaurant Tomaydo-Tomahhdo, and a subsequent cookbook bearing the restaurant's eccentric name.
Recent discussions on "lookalike" or "parasitic" packaging, covered in this post by guest Kat Darren Meale, have compelled Nicola to put in her two cents. Lookalikes are symbiotic, not parasitic, she says.
If the concern a decade ago was how to regulate the downloading of a movie or a song, today it is how to regulate the downloading of a digital file containing all the instructions to make a perfect copy of a product, Neil says.
"It is the number of complaints filed against a single organization, the EPO, rather than the rise in the overall number of organizations having accepted its jurisdiction, that represents the main challenge for its effective functioning", says the Geneva-based International Labour Organization of its current situation. You bet, replies Merpel.
******************
PREVIOUSLY, ON NEVER TOO LATE
Never Too Late 69 [week ending on Sunday 25 October] – The 10 Commandments of IP Dispute Resolution | Republic of Cyprus v OHIM on halloumi | Case C-20/14 BGW Marketing- & Management-Service GmbH v Bodo Scholz | Passing off at common law and statutory passing off | Coty v Stadtsparkasse, back to Germany | EU Trade Secrets Draft Directive | “GREASECUTTER” and General Court | IP in the Fashion Industry | AIPPI 46th World IP Congress.
Never Too Late 68 [week ending on Sunday 18 October] – Hedge funds, pharma patents and thorny issues: a word on IPRs following Lialda | Battistelli v EPO Enlarged Board | Flynn Pharma Ltd v Drugsrus Ltd and Tenolol Ltd | EPO's special treatment for Elizabeth Hardon | Unjustified threats to sue for IP infringement | Cases T-624/13, T-625/13, 626/13 and 627/13 The Tea Board v OHIM | Brands, trade marks, and the UK Government | Who's down with TPP? | How cool is TMView | The "crowded field" in trade mark law | Genetic patents | US Court of Appeal for the 2nd Circuit and Google Books.
Never Too Late 67 [week ending on Sunday 11 October] – Eponia rumours | Batmobile and copyright | EPO and human rights | Gucci v Guess | NOCN (Formerly National Open College Network) v Open College Network Credit4Learning | New CJEU reference on linking and copyright | Viennese waltz may be the last dance for Board members | Richard Perry v F H Brundle & Others | Safe harbour and the Schrems case | Economics of Domain names | Biodiversity | Roederer v J Garcia Carrion S.A. & Others | pie-based dispute over "Square".
Never Too Late 66 [week ending on Sunday 4 October] – Punitive damages and Enforcement Directive | IFRRO v European Copyright Society | A Decade of JIPLIP, the event | The Global Innovation Index 2015 | South Africa new copyright law | The IPKat and his friends | IP Publishers' and Editors' Lunch 2015 | EPO queue and SMEs | 3D Printing and IP damages | Paywalls and Robin Hoods | The Basmati saga | Greek Court on linking | Glenn Gould and the case for moral rights in sound recordings.
