Law 2121/1993 on Copyright, Related Rights and Cultural Matters (the Copyright Law) does not provide for a fair use or fair dealing defence.(1)
Nevertheless – and in compliance with the EU Information Society Directive (2001/29/EC) – the Copyright Law contains an exhaustive list of specific statutory exceptions and limitations on authors’ economic rights. Continue Reading
The tragic killings of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor and Ahmaud Arbery this year, among others, have reinvigorated the Black Lives Matter movement, resulting in powerful nationwide conversations about racial injustice in the United States, with far-reaching ripple effects. Businesses across industries — such as sports, entertainment, consumer products and higher education — have reevaluated certain aspects of their legacy brands and have announced that they will discontinue the use of names, trademarks and logos with racist origins. Continue Reading
Introduction
In March 2020 – during the lockdown imposed by the government to combat the COVID-19 pandemic – Greece adopted a new Trademark Law (4679/2020), which replaced the previous Trademark Law (4072/2012). The purpose of adopting this new law was to implement the EU Trademarks Directive (2015/2436/EC) into Greek law.
By virtue of this new law, the Greek trademark regime is now largely similar to that of the European Union. The new Greek Trademark Law essentially follows EU Trademark Regulation (2017/1001), rendering the Greek legal system more familiar and friendly to foreign entities, many of which are already acquainted with the EU framework. Continue Reading
Personal data (PD) protection is becoming the main topic of the recent days, so the Russian legislation in this sphere changes rapidly. The article represents an overview of updates on personal data regulation for the 3rd quarter of 2020.
ATTEMPTS TO COUNTER THE CONSUMERS’ PERSONAL DATA COLLECTION
Russian Agency for Health and Consumer Rights has developed amendments to the Law of 07.02.1992 No. 2300-1 “On Protection of Consumer Rights”, hindering unfair behavior of business entities, which collect customers’ PD for purposes not related to the conclusion and execution of contracts. Continue Reading
The Supreme Court of Canada has denied leave to appeal of the Ontario (Energy) v Quality Program Services Inc.1 Federal Court decision, thereby bringing finality to whether public authorities are immune to trademark infringement claims arising from use of their official marks. This Federal Court case law confirms that registered trademark owners will continue to enjoy the rights conferred upon them under the Trademarks Act (the “Act“), regardless of whether a public authority is involved and suggests that the strength of an official mark is greatly dependant on when public notice is given.
Quality Program Services Inc. (“QPS“) brought a Federal Court action against the Government of Ontario, specifically the Minister of Energy (the “MOE“), seeking damages and other relief for trademark infringement, passing off and depreciation of goodwill under the Act. QPS is the registered owner of the “EMPOWER ME” trademark, registered in 2014 in association with energy awareness, conservation, and efficiency services.2 In 2015, QPS became aware that the MOE had launched a website with the name/mark “emPOWERme” to educate Ontario residents about the province’s electricity system.3 Continue Reading
When granted with a patent right, the patentee may file a request for amending the description, claim(s) or drawing(s) of the granted patent. Hence, once an alleged infringer has presented prior evidence sufficient to establish that the patent at issue lacks patentability in a patent infringement litigation case, the patentee is likely to file post-grant amendment requests with the Taiwan Intellectual Property Office during the litigation proceedings in order to overcome the defects in the validity of the patent at issue. At this point, pursuant to Article 32 of the Intellectual Property Case Adjudication Rules, “trial and adjudication of the principal case may directly proceed if the amendment application obviously shall not be granted or if the amended scope of claim(s), once approved, does not constitute an infringement of right.” Continue Reading
At heart, and still, I am a non-singing Jersey Boy, and one who grew up reading Sherlock Holmes stories and watching Star Trek, the Original Series (before it even needed that modifier), in reruns in the 1970s while also keeping up with the real Rocky. And, I have been writing for ILN IP Insider for five and one half years (first article appeared in March 2015), and have shown my Star Trek chops and character knowledge here on several different occasions, like bouncing from planet to planet. So, to paraphrase that famous opening, I have tried exploring “Law: the final frontier. These are the voyages of ILN’s enterprise. Its continuing mission: to explore strange new cases. To explain new rights and new rationalizations. To boldly show where lawsuits have gone before!” Continue Reading
In Greece the main legislative instruments regulating copyright and related rights are:
Recent changes in consumer behaviour due to the COVID-19 pandemic mean that few businesses can afford to ignore the internet, and the opportunities for efficiencies and scale that it offers. Operating a business online presents tremendous opportunities for growth by opening up new geographical markets, however it also creates new challenges for businesses in ensuring that their key intellectual property assets, which are made available online, are adequately protected.
So how can businesses manage their intellectual property, and ensure they are not infringing on the intellectual property rights of others, when trading online? Continue Reading
“Use it or lose it” is a staple expression known to Canadian trademark lawyers. Once a business successfully registers a trademark in Canada, it must “use” its registered mark in Canada or it may lose the protections provided by the Trademarks Act (the “Act“). With the advent of e-commerce, many non-Canadian businesses can now advertise their services to Canadians online. Demonstrating use of the mark in association with such services online by the non-Canadian business may prove challenging. Continue Reading
