Header graphic for print
LimeGreenIP News

Tag Archives: CJEU

Provider liability: First YouTube, now “uploaded” – next case before the CJEU

Only two weeks ago, the Federal Court of Justice (BGH) referred various questions to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) concerning the liability of the video platform YouTube. There, the court’s queries focused on who is actually responsible for unlawfully uploaded content – just the uploader himself or the service provider as

German Federal Court of Justice submits copyright dispute over YouTube to CJEU

This week, copyright is all over the place. After the European Parliament voted on proposed copyright reform in Europe last Wednesday (12 September 2018), the long-awaited decision of the German Federal Court of Justice (BGH) on the question to what extent video platforms such as YouTube carry out their own acts of use, i.e. a

CJEU: Castles, candy, candlesticks – no happy end at Neuschwanstein?

Court of Justice of the European Union, 6 September 2018, Case C-488/16 P BSGE v EUIPO/Freistaat Bayern King Ludwig II. of Bavaria was without a doubt an architectural visionary. During his reign in the second half of the 19th century, he initiated the construction of various impressive buildings all across his kingdom which now form

Italy: Parallel imports – When a name change is a game changer.

The Administrative Court of Lazio (“TAR Lazio”) decided with judgment No. 09050 of 3 July 2018 (but published only few days ago) that, as a rule, the parallel importer does not have a right to change the trademark affixed on the product purchased in the country of origin in order to use a different trademark

Can a taste be protected by copyright in Europe?

This is, in essence, the fundamental question that has been submitted to the CJEU in the case C-310/17 (Levola Hengelo v. Smile Foods). The opinion of Advocate General Wathelet (read it here, no English version yet) released on 25 July 2018 is that the taste of food (in this case of cheese) is not protectable

A second market for “used” e-books – CJEU will decide

Ever since the European Court of Justice (CJEU) in its highly regarded UsedSoft ruling declared the resale of “used” software admissible (dated 3 July 2012, C-128/11), the discussion has persistently centered around the question whether the idea of the so-called exhaustion, upon which UsedSoft is essentially based, could or should be extended to other digital

The red sole has not been kicked out!

The long-awaited Louboutin judgment has finally been delivered (here). The judgment is not only interesting on a substantive level, but also surrounded by a variety of procedural peculiarities: The oral hearing was re-opened (which happens very rarely!), and as a consequence, the Advocate General had to issue a second opinion. Lastly, the judgment was issued

UK & EU Focus on non-traditional trade marks and overcoming the hurdles

Since its inception, the harmonised national EU trade mark legislation – and later the EUTM system – has opted for a flexible approach to non-traditional trade marks. In principle “any sign” capable of indicating origin may constitute a trade mark, resulting in several non-traditional marks being registered. These include colours, shapes, sounds, smells, patterns, holograms,

Have Christian Louboutin’s exclusive rights to red soles really been “kicked out” as some reports claim?

The long-awaited Advocate General’s second opinion in Louboutin (C 163/16) was delivered in February. In a nutshell, Christian Louboutin sued Van Haren Schoenen BV for trade mark infringement in the Netherlands of its Benelux trade mark shown below: Following Van Haren’s counterclaim that the above trade mark was invalid, the Dutch national court referred the

CJEU on designs which are solely dictated by technical functions

On 8 March 2018, the CJEU issued a preliminary ruling in a case that had been referred by the Higher Regional Court of Düsseldorf, Germany. The decision concerns Article 8 (1) of Regulation No 6/2002 which excludes the features of appearance of a product from protection which are solely dictated by its technical function. If all features

adidas victorious again in defending its rights to the Three Stripes

The General Court has once again upheld adidas’ oppositions against two copycat applications for two stripes positioned on a shoe. The two decisions issued on 1 March 2018 (in Cases T-629/16 and T-85/16) come as part of the long-standing trade mark dispute between adidas and Shoe Branding*. The cases involved Shoe Branding’s two applications for

Europe: Can new “hate speech” legislation set the mould for the Copyright Directive?

The phenomenon of so-called “Hate Speech” has been in the public eye for a while now, but particularly in German news. Hate speech denotes verbal attacks and accusations based on personal attributes such as race, religion, ethnic origin, sexual orientation, disability, or gender. Victims of such disgraceful conduct can be individuals or groups of individuals.

Advances in Polish IP Law, part 2: Trademarks – graphic representation, renewal, partial transfer & enforcement by licensees

The recently published draft of the Act amending the Industrial Property Law (14 November 2017) introduces fundamental changes in the provisions on trademark protection. Currently, the bill is being agreed upon in the Council of Ministers. The new regulations primarily result from the need to implement Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council

Brexit Bill – Impact on patents

The UK government’s draft EU Withdrawal Bill (the “Brexit Bill“) aims to incorporate EU directives and regulations into UK domestic law in their current form immediately following Brexit (“Retained EU Law“).  This article considers the impact the Brexit Bill will have on some key patent issues. The Brexit Bill and EU Decisions In addition to

UPC and Germany: Status update – Constitutional complaint, ratification timeline and more

Background The constitutional complaint against the UPC ratification that was lodged with the Federal Constitutional Court in Germany earlier this year has received a lot of attention over the past few months as it could have the potential to considerably delay the entry into force of the Agreement on a Unified Patent Court (UPCA). Pursuant