We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
Lexology logo
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 51

Spiller v Joseph: defamation and “honest comment"

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • January 25 2011

The Supreme Court of England and Wales in Spiller v Joseph 2010 UKSC 53 has declined to alter radically the defence of "fair comment" in libel claims

National Guild of Removers & Storers Ltd v Christopher Silveria: damages assessed on the “user” principle

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • January 25 2011

In National Guild of Removers & Storers Ltd v Christopher Silveria 2010 EWPCC 15, His Honour Judge Birss QC, sitting in the Patents County Court, has found that damages assessed on the "user" principle are available in cases of trade mark infringement and passing off in the same way as in patent infringement cases

Unilever plc v Ian Alexander Shanks: calculating employee compensation

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • January 25 2011

Professor Shanks made an invention patented by his employer, Unilever UK Central Resources Ltd (CRL

Sui generis database rights and what constitutes a substantial part

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • November 3 2011

In Beechwood House Publishing v Guardian Products Ltd 2011 EWPCC 22, the Claimant’s database right was found to have been infringed when the Defendants extracted 6,000 records from the Claimant’s database of 43,000 records

Registrability of marks containing geographical indications of origin

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • European Union, Finland
  • -
  • November 3 2011

“Cognac” as a geographical indication (GI) cannot be used in a trade mark of a spirit drink not covered by that GI, as the commercial use of such a mark would harm the protected indication

The “innocent” copying defence: only applicable to works out of copyright

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • March 30 2012

In David Hoffman v Drug Abuse Resistance Education (UK) Ltd 2012 EWPCC 2, the Patents County Court of England and Wales assessed the use of the “innocent copying” defence under Section 97 of the Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988

Bezpečnostni softwarová asociace-Svaz softwarové ochrany v Ministerstvo kultury: copyright in a graphic user interface

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • Czech Republic, European Union
  • -
  • February 28 2011

The European Court of Justice has ruled that the graphic user interface (GUI) of a computer program is not protectable under the Software Directive (91250EC) but may be a copyright work in itself

JIH v News Group Newspapers Ltd: privacy, interim injunction, open justice and refusal to grant anonymity

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • January 25 2011

In JIH v News Group Newspapers Ltd 2010 EWHC 2818 (QB), the High Court of England and Wales refused to continue an anonymity order, despite the parties having agreed thereto, but agreed to continue an order to withhold all information concerning the subject-matter of the case

General Court upholds OHIM refusal of CTM application for shape of loudspeaker

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • European Union
  • -
  • November 29 2011

In Bang & Olufsen AS v OHIM T-50808 6 October 2011 (unreported), the General Court upheld a decision by the Office of Harmonization for the Internal Market (OHIM) refusing Bang & Olufsen’s Community trade mark (CTM) application for the shape of a loudspeaker, on the grounds that the mark consisted exclusively of the shape, which gave substantial value to the goods

Jurisdiction to award damages for online infringement of “personality rights” clarified

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • European Union
  • -
  • November 29 2011

The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has ruled that victims of infringements of “personality rights” by means of the internet can chose to bring actions before the courts of the Member State in which they reside in respect of all the damage caused