Waterfront are proud to announce that partner and joint head of intellectual property and disputes, Matthew Harris, is the author of the UK chapter of the newly published textbook Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights in the EU Member States. The book, edited by Flip Petillion, deals with both the enforcement of IP law in each of the 28 EU Member States, and the impact of the European IP Enforcement Directive (2004/48/EC).
The book maps the complex maze of regulatory frameworks for the enforcement of intellectual property rights in each of the 28 EU Member States. Lawyers from top-tier law firms of all Member States provide a extensive overview of the national procedures, measures and remedies available to intellectual property rights owners – including important case law, useful observations and comments to aid the reader. The publication is an impeccable resource for businesses, legal practitioners and inhouse counsel who require a clear understanding of the applicable regulatory regimes of EU Member States, allowing them to identify and compare possible actions and procedures in those states before taking action in cross-border or parallel intellectual property proceedings.
A table of contents can be found here.
Matthew Harris, recently lauded by the World Trademark Review as one of the best intellectual property law litigators in the United Kingdom, spoke at a seminar held in Brussels on 14 February 2019, to celebrate the launch of this new publication (see Matthew and some of the other authors in the picture above). His topic: the impact of Brexit on IP Enforcement in the United Kingdom. It remains to be seen how Brexit will impact the text of the 2nd Edition!
The textbook is published by Intersentia and can be purchased here.
The current legal framework in the UK does not allow copying of copyright-protected material for training generative AI models, except where it is carried out with permission of the copyright owner or done in a research or study context and for purely non-commercial purposes.
This matter deals with the Claimant’s (‘TVIS’) allegation of infringement and misrepresentation in relation to its “VETSURE” trade mark by the Defendant (‘Howserv’s’) “PETSURE” trade mark, used for pet insurance. In the first instance decision, the claim was dismissed due to the marks being highly descriptive and “not…