Search results for

On May 22 this year, the US Supreme Court decided the most eagerly-awaited patent case in many years, Festo v SMC. The case addresses a key issue for patent holders: what protection is available under the doctrine of equivalents. But was the decision as important as many people have claimed? What effect will it have for patent applicants and litigants in the US? And what impact will it have on the US Patent and Trademark Office, the Federal Circuit and district courts? MIP invited six senior IP practitioners in the US to a round table discussion, held at the Washington DC offices of Finnegan Henderson, to discuss the implications of the Festo decision, as well as other recent patent cases. James Nurton moderated the discussion

Taiwan's Executive Yuan, or Cabinet, is beginning to act on promises it made in April to help the copyright industries tackle infringement.

In a surprise arbitration decision, Nike has lost its complaint over five domain names registered by a Korean company.

The UK Court of Appeal has cleared a rival of biotech heavyweight Amgen of patent infringement, in a decision viewed as restoring balance to the patent system.

Muhyiddin Yassin, Malaysia's Minister of Domestic Trade and Consumer Affairs, has denied that he said in a newspaper interview that the government was considering allowing some groups in Malaysian society to use pirated software.

Another celebrated name has disappeared from the US IP community with the closure on August 31 of the 101-year-old boutique Lyon & Lyon.

French actor Jean-Paul Belmondo has successfully prosecuted a shirt manufacturer over the illegal use of his name and image in advertising campaigns in Italy.

Domain name registrar Internetters will challenge a US arbitration decision in the UK High Court in one of the few cases of its kind.

The State Council respectively approved The Copyright Law Implementing Regulations and the Trade Mark Law Implementing Regulations on August 2 and 3 2002. Both will become effective on September 15 2002.

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's infamous Festo decision has led to countless debates as to how careful one should now be when amending the claims of US patent applications during prosecution before the USPTO. The US Supreme Court, in its judgment rendered in May 2002, has partially softened the harsh impact of the CAFC's original decision, which applied a file wrapper estoppel completely barring the use of the doctrine of equivalents in subsequent infringement proceedings as far as the amended portion of the claim was concerned.