As outlined in art. 1247 of the Russian Civil Code, any applicant may choose one of the options how to be represented before Rospatent:
- directly, or
- by a Russian patent attorney, or
- by another representative (e.g., attorney-at-law)
The list is significantly shortened for foreign applicants: under art. 1247 (2) of the Civil Code, foreign citizens and legal entities may be represented before Rospatent only by Russian patent attorneys, unless otherwise envisaged by an international treaty.
Continue Reading
Are apples different from pears? Or are they both just fruit? Or, as cockney rhyming slang would have it, are they stairs? These are the questions (excepting the last one) that the distinguished judges of the Court of Justice of the European Communities (CJEU) have been gr-apple-ing with in the recent case of Pear Technologies v EUIPO – Apple [2019] EUECJ T-215/17. Aside from offering opportunities for highly amusing wordplay, this recent decision includes some useful guidance on the CJEU’s approach to the visual and conceptual comparison of signs in trade mark disputes.
Apple, the technology giant which runs successful Apple Stores all over the world, announced that it will close its only two stores in eastern Texas by Friday, April 12. 
On 26 February 2019, the Hellenic Copyright Organization (Greek acronym: “OPI”) launched a new online service for “electronic timestamping” of all types of works.
Recent amendments to the PBR Act have strengthened PBR rights and have aligned aspects of PBR with other intellectual property laws in Australia.
There is a popular vintage Harley Davidson t-shirt that says “
The Federal Court recently handed down its decision in Calico Global Pty Ltd v Calico LLC1. This decision highlights the potentially fatal consequences of not updating the IP Australia register to reflect a change in trade mark ownership.
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) recently decided that agreements reached by 1-800 Contacts, Inc. with a number of its competitors to settle claims that the competitors’ online search advertising infringed on 1-800 Contacts’ trademarks unlawfully restricted the competitors’ ability to engage in search engine marketing, to the detriment of both consumers and search engines.
On November 6, 2018 a remarkable blow was delivered to online piracy in Greece. On that day, the newly-formed “Committee for Online Copyright Infringement” – informally and more descriptively also known as the Greek “Anti-Piracy Committee” – published its first decisions, ordering, by one of those (Decision No. 3/2018), all Internet Service Providers (ISPs) in Greece to block the access to 38 domains names that corresponded to websites with copyright infringing content. The decision was most welcomed by copyright holders in Greece and was also widely shared among Internet users, many of whom were taken by surprise by the new development as the Committee’s establishment had not, until then, become known to most people not associated with the intellectual property field. 
