Local Insights

James Davies and Vishen Pillay at Adams & Adams discuss IP protection strategies and ownership considerations for AI

Werina Griffiths and Nontando Tusi at Adams & Adams discuss the implications of the adoption of AI in Africa and globally

Matthew Costard of Spoor & Fisher Jersey provides a guide to the key updates as Rwanda expands the scope of its intellectual property protection regime

Son Thai Hoang and Linh Thi Mai Nguyen of Tilleke & Gibbins highlight the strict stance taken by the Intellectual Property Office of Vietnam on assignments conflicting with trade names and join the calls for clearer guidance

The Central Intellectual Property and International Trade Court has confirmed that a design’s overall appearance should be considered when determining its eligibility for patent protection, report Nuttaphol Arammuang and Tanapong Pongburanakit of Tilleke & Gibbins

Min Son of Hanol IP & Law reports on a decision that should provide improved guidance in determining whether patents or approved drugs are eligible for a patent term extension in South Korea

The general limitation period for juridical actions in Austria is 30 years. However, particular laws can stipulate shorter or longer limitation periods. For example, for claims in patent infringement cases, the limitation period is generally three years. This period begins from the time when knowledge of the infringement and the infringing person is obtained.

An example of an international trade mark that Austria considered for registration is Access the Inaccessible for goods and services all connected to mountaineering, climbing and work at height. This English language word mark had, among others, a designation for the UK and for Austria. In the UK, the trade mark was finally registered in spite of some difficulties. The Austrian Patent Office and the appellate court did not find it relevant that the mark was approved in the UK. Registration in a foreign country, even in a country where the relevant language is the official language spoken by the whole population, can never be binding for Austria. The reasons behind this are not only formal legal reasons (for example, territoriality), but also that the English authorities examine the trade mark from the viewpoint of English consumers while the Austrian authorities examine the same trade mark from the point of view of Austrian consumers. These perspectives might well be different since the understanding of the meaning of the foreign words might not be identical to that in a foreign country.

Paris will welcome the summer Olympic Games in 2024. This is a huge challenge for the Organising Committee.

Roberta Arantes of Daniel Law looks at how the Brazilian legal landscape has responded to shifts in the concept of branding and its related levels of protection

Kene Gallois and Guilherme Coutinho of Daniel Law explain how the success of the plan will pave the way for Brazil to attract further investment and opportunities

André Oliveira of Daniel Law considers how IP infringement and brand protection has evolved in Brazil amid the pandemic

Alejandro Salas of OLIVARES questions whether requiring the submission of original objects for comparison is hindering the proper enforcement of trademark rights and represents an ‘improper interpretation’ of the criminal statute

With TikTok videos frequently using music created by popular artists and adding a personal touch to trends, Jaime Ortega of OLIVARES answers a central question regarding whether the videos constitute original creations or reproductions

Three years after a new industrial property law took effect, the time has come for an important action to become available regarding contested trademark registrations. Emmanuel Chávez of OLIVARES heralds a ‘positive’ development