Bloomsbury IP/IT Law Briefing: April Teaser

Three complex patent cases lead this month’s briefing. Alcon Research LLC & Anor v Actavis Group PTC EHF & Ors concerned a patent for treating glaucoma and ocular hypertension, the validity of which was upheld.

In Mitsubishi Electric Corporation v Oneplus Technology (Shenzhen) Co, Ltd & Ors, a telecoms patent that forms part of Sisvel’s patent pool was found not to be essential to the LTE 4G standard. The judgment discussed infringement on a normal interpretation as well as by equivalents.

The third case, Claydon Yield-O-Meter v Mzuri Ltd & Anor, hinged on the prior use of a seed drill. The judge found that testing the prototype in an open field constituted making available to the public and the patent therefore lacked novelty.

There was an interesting ruling on damages following a 2019 case concerning copyright infringement of Eminem’s album ‘Infinite’. Following an inquiry, key part of the claimant’s claim were rejected and it was awarded the relatively small amount of £7,452.50.

Two EU General Court trade mark judgments of note in the past month were the MONOPOLY decision on bad faith, and a ruling in a case between Huawei and Chanel, in which the Court said that the comparison between the signs should be carried out based on the orientation in which the signs are registered, irrespective of any rotation in their use.

To round off this month’s briefing, we have news of the UK IPO’s One IPO transformation programme, and details of a new life sciences publication from Bloomsbury Professional.

The IP/IT Briefing is part of the Bloomsbury Law Online Service. The full briefing is available here.

Written by James Nurton

Subscribe to the Bloomsbury Professional Law Newsletter

Law Online

Bloomsburyprofessionallaw Online research for solicitors and barristers practising in English law Free Trial

Need Help?

Bloomsburyprofessionallaw If you need any help with finding publications or just ask a question. Talk to an Advisor: 01444 416119
or send us a message