Early Nazi period newspapers, including the official Nazi publication Voelkischer Beobachter, can be reprinted in Germany, according to a ruling by a Read the rest of this entry »
Australian Patent and Trademark Agency Sacks 11 Contractors
March 25, 2009The Australian Patent and Trademark Agency, like that in Israel, US and Europe, operates as a closed agency, using income Read the rest of this entry »
Camtek Intends to Oppose Jury Verdict in Rudolph Patent Infringement Case
March 22, 2009Rudolph Technologies, Inc. has won a jury verdictinn their patent infringement case against Camtek Ltd., pending in the U.S. Federal District Court in Minneapolis, Minnesota. The verdict awarded damages of approximately $6.8 million in favor of Rudolph with regard to sales of Camtek’s Falcon products in the United States.
The alleged infringement refers to a U.S. patent only, and, thus any judgment or injunction, will have effect only in the United States. Meanwhile Camtek represented by Adv. Adi Levit and Orbotech represented by Adv. David Gilat are still slugging it out in Israel.
European Commission Calls for single EU Patent
March 19, 2009The European Commission has repeated its demand for a single European patent, stating that Read the rest of this entry »
Copyright in Chess Move sequences?
March 17, 2009The Bulgarian Chess Federation banned ChessBase, the world’s biggest online chess portal, from broadcasting a match live, citing copyright infringement.
This raises fascinating issues.
Generally, sports broadcasting has been copyright protected – see, for example, Israeli Supreme Court’s Tele-Event decision. Usually, some creativity on the part of the cameraman or editor is used as justification for awarding protection.
In this instance, ChessBase was steaming the moves using a text format notation and thus did not have any creative input whatsoever. If the moves themselves are considered copyright, then the rights are presumably property of the player and not the federation hostig a championship.
One assumes that noone is serious advocating that a move first played by someone cannot be played by another player until the creator has been dead for seventy years?
It does seem unlikely that a braodcaster requires the federation’s permission. On the other hand, why shouldn’t a hosting organization be able to maintain at least short term braodcasting rights of the moves?
”They issued a cease and desist, and we complied,” stated ChessBase co-founder Frederic Friedel. “It is too expensive, time-wise, to get involved in protracted lawsuits with Bulgarians, and there is little to gain, monetarily, from a victory.” Is this simply a case of copyright abuse?
Gucci loses Trademark for their Logo in Sweden
March 17, 2009The Swedish Court of Patent Appeals has upheld a registration for a trademark strongly resembling Gucci’s famous monogram that was filed by Gun Gabrielsson director of a tiny Swedish company in Gothenburg, Sweden. Gucci, suffers from pirate goods and now will have to manage without their famous double-G logo trademark protected in Sweden.
Back in 1954, Chanel won a trademark battle in Israel against a third party manufacturing perfume, where the judge ruled “Thou shalt not steal”, which, was, of course, plagiarism from the Bible.
Another related Israel Trademark case was Versace, where a third party registered the name and the fashion house started but abandoned opposition proceedings, arguably giving up rights and estoppelling themselves. Nevertheless, 20 years on, the Israel Patent Office allowed Versace to challenge the trademarks, accepted arguments and voided the marks.
In general, courts around the world may allow people to trademark businesses based on their name, so, for example, Lego couldn’t stop a Ms Lego opening an art gallery in Denmark, but monograms?
Posted by Dr Michael Factor 