Q&As

Q&As

These Q&As seek to address common questions faced when dealing with IP matters.

The Q&As supplement and link to other more detailed content within Lexis®+ UK Practical Guidance, but are intentionally short. It is anticipated that a brief Q&A will be most helpful when you need a quick overview of an issue and its likely impact. This might arise, for example, for lawyers needing to provide advice, provide business development or training at short notice. The Q&A content on Lexis®+ UK Practical Guidance is date stamped. This date is the publish date

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

TAKE A FREE TRIAL

Latest IP News

CJC concludes comprehensive review of pre-action protocols with publication of final report (phase two)

The Civil Justice Council (CJC) has concluded its extensive review of pre-action protocols (PAPs) with the publication of its phase two report. The first phase of the final report, published in August 2023, examined the role of PAPs in the civil justice system and explored the potential for digitalising pre-action processes. The second phase was published in November 2024. In the second (and final) phase report the CJC has set out its recommendations for the reform of various existing PAPs, including those for Personal Injury, Housing, Judicial Review, Debt, Construction and Engineering, Professional Negligence and Media and Communications. The report also recommends the creation of two new PAPs, one for dealing with child abuse and one for Multi-Track Claims in the Business and Property Courts of England and Wales (with a draft included at Appendix 1).

A ‘Kwantum’ leap decision? Court of Justice on harmonising EU copyright protection for non-EU designs (Kwantum v Vitra)

IP analysis: In this decision, the Court of Justice’s weighed in on important principles and the EU-wide harmonisation of international copyright law. The Court of Justice confirmed the Advocate General (AG) Szpunar’s opinion that EU Member States do not have any discretion to limit EU copyright protection by applying the material reciprocity test enshrined in the Berne Convention, which provides that works of applied art originating in countries where they are only protected as designs (eg the US) may not, in other signatory countries eg Belgium and the Netherlands), also be granted copyright protection. In this context, the Court of Justice emphasised that a work shall enjoy protection under EU copyright law if it is ‘original’, regardless of its geographic origin within or outside the EU. The Court of Justice’s judgment can be expected to significantly impact the harmonisation of copyright laws within the EU, ensuring broader protection for works of applied art and potentially influencing future legislative developments. Written by Alexander Hofmann, attorney-at-law at Baker McKenzie Austria, and Marlies Kittinger, junior associate at Baker McKenzie Austria.

IP weekly highlights—21 November 2024

This week's edition of IP weekly highlights includes: a hand-picked summary of news analysis, updates and new content from the world of IP. These highlights focus on the key rights of copyright and associated rights, database rights, trade marks and passing off, designs, and patents as well as covering issues relating to confidential information, know-how R&D and IP disputes all mainly from a UK and European perspective.

No boundaries? European UPC confirms its international jurisdiction

EU Law analysis: The Court of Appeal (CoA) of the Unified Patent Court (UPC) ruled that the UPC has international jurisdiction for alleged infringement actions that originate outside the UPC’s Member States. Bianca Zagatta, associate at McDermott Will & Emery, discusses the decision in the case of Dish and Sling v AYLO.