Expert Analysis

• EPO Decision Adds To Sparse Case Law On Core AI Patents

  

  The recent European Patent Office Board of Appeal decision in the Sparsely connected neural network/Mitsubishi case is remarkable for its technicality, and provides rare guidance for companies on the requirements for core artificial intelligence invention patents, says Alexander Korenberg at Kilburn & Strode.

• A Deep Dive Into EU Unified Patent Court Policy

  

  Robert Sterne at Sterne Kessler offers a detailed analysis of the EU's Unified Patent Court and the unitary patent, which go live on June 1, discussing what U.S. practitioners need to know from an enforcement and freedom-to-operate perspective.

• AI And Copyright: Tracking The Ownership Issues

  

  The rise of generative AI has created copyright and ownership challenges in creative industries, but contractual agreements, intellectual property law and AI-specific regulations can be used to address these issues, says Kimiya Shams at Devialet.

• How Ed Sheeran's Serenade May Have Swayed The Jury

  

  While Ed Sheeran's performance of his hit song "Thinking Out Loud" at trial could not protect him from the subconscious copying doctrine, it may have tapped into jurors' intuitions about independent creation, winning him the copyright infringement suit over the song, says Christopher Buccafusco at Duke University School of Law.

• An Overlooked Tool To Fight USPTO 'Restriction'

  

  Over the last several years, we have seen the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office more commonly impose flimsy restrictions on patent applications under the "one invention per application" rule, and practitioners underutilize petition as a means to challenge them, say George Chaclas and Emily Ferriter Russo at Day Pitney.

• Opinion

  AI-Generated Works Should Not Have Copyright Protection

  

  The U.S. Copyright Office has correctly determined that works created solely by artificial intelligence do not qualify for protection, as granting exclusive rights to such works would be unwise for a number of reasons, says Thomas McNulty at Lando & Anastasi.

• Examining The New UK Service Guidance For TM Proceedings

  

  A new much-anticipated U.K. Intellectual Property Office practice notice affects situations where there is no valid U.K. address for service of documents in trademark and registered design proceedings, and will mean rights holders are on notice at an earlier stage of proceedings, with limited time in which to respond, says Nina O'Sullivan at Mishcon de Reya.

• A Look At M&S' Registered Design Claim Win Against Aldi

  

  Adding to the long line of cases seeking to restrain Aldi's attempts to mimic market-leading products, Marks & Spencer's recent success in the U.K. High Court based on registered designs demonstrates that supermarket copycat products may no longer be able to sail so close to the wind, says Alex Borthwick at Powell Gilbert.

• UK Teva Ruling Brings Patent Remedy Into Question

  

  Arrow declarations have been considered an extremely effective tool for patent litigators, but following the recent U.K. Court of Appeal decision in Teva v. Novartis it appears that courts are looking to take a more conservative view, say David Holt and Tony Proctor at Potter Clarkson.

• How CJEU Case Shifts TM Liability For Platforms Like Amazon

  

  The EU Court of Justice's recent ruling on Amazon's liability for trademark infringement in relation to fake Christian Louboutin shoes advertised by third parties on its website may leave web platforms that sell third-party vendors' products alongside their own brands more vulnerable to infringement claims, say Louisa Chambers and Helen Reddish at Travers Smith.

• Europe's New Unitary Patent System Will Affect IP Agreements

  

  Marco Stief at Maiwald discusses key points in intellectual property agreements that legal practitioners will need to consider in Europe's soon-to-open centralized patent court, including regional exclusivity in different contracting member states.

• EU Medicine Reboxing Ruling Gives Guidance To Pharma Cos.

  

  The recent landmark decision of the Court of Justice of the EU in Novartis Pharma on repackaging medicines has provided pharma companies with a much-needed framework, with better protections for trademarks and clearer protocols for handling imported products, say Ulf Grundmann and Elisabeth Kohoutek at King & Spalding.

• A Look Ahead At Key UK Intellectual Property Cases

  

  Anticipated 2023 U.K. intellectual property decisions include robotics, artificial intelligence, and clean energy matters that have also been heard in the U.S., while other areas to watch include global fair, reasonable and nondiscriminatory issues, as well as COVID-19 patent litigation, say Tom Oliver and Claire Robinson at Powell Gilbert.

• Lessons That May Be Learned From The Demise Of Made.com

  

  With Made.com going into administration, companies that may face similar challenges should take on board that the earlier adequate preemptive planning is considered, the more financial and legal options there will be to avoid last minute firefighting and to focus instead on strengthening the business, says Eleni Michaela at Faegre Drinker.

• Teva Case Aims Europe's Pharma Crackdown At IP Loophole

  

  The European Commission's recent allegations against Teva signal not only the EU competition watchdog's continued focus on intellectual property violations in the pharmaceutical sector but also its new enforcement interest in exclusionary disparagement, say Robert Bell and Malgorzata Janiec at Armstrong Teasdale.