Posts in International

IPWatchdog LIVE 2025 featured a standout session on Sunday, March 2, titled “The Global IP Landscape,” where legal experts and policy advisors shed light on ongoing shifts in patent law—and the global forces behind them. Speakers from Brazil, Germany, Korea, and the United States discussed data from the latest International IP Index while tackling topics like patent office efficiency, standard-essential patents (SEPs), and cross-border enforcement trends.

A number of sessions on the second day of IPWatchdog LIVE examined the state of U.S. IP policy and the potential for change under the Trump Administration, including one in which retired U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) Judge Randall Rader said the biggest failure with respect to innovation policy has been an institutional one—with the greatest blame placed at the feet of his former court.

The recent case of Deckers Outdoor Corp. v. Wolverine Group Pty Ltd. serves as a cautionary tale for brand owners on the importance of pursuing foreign trademark protection early and often. The case revolves around who can use the term “UGG.” For many in the United States and other parts of the world, “UGG” is widely recognized as a specific brand of sheepskin boots. However, in Australia, “UGG” is a generic term referring to a style of sheepskin boots rather than a specific brand.

Yesterday, a group of 1,000 UK musicians, including popular artists such as Imogen Heap, Kate Bush and Annie Lennox, released an album titled “Is This What We Want?” in protest to the UK government’s announcement in December 2024 of a consultation on copyright and AI, which is considering exceptions to copyright infringement liability for some artificial intelligence (AI) purposes, including training AI models. In stark counterpoint to the musicians’ concerns about their economic livelihood is a comment filed the same day by the International Center for Law & Economics (ICLE), which argues that reservation-of-rights approaches favored by many creator advocates hinders new modes of monetization for artists that could be enabled by AI technologies.

Many people know about trademark filings, but have you ever heard about trademark refilings? Before 2023, registering a trademark in China often involved filing several iterations of the same trademark application consecutively (so-called “refilings” of the original mark) before one of the marks proceeded to registration. This was often quite frustrating for those not used to the practice. To add to this headache, many brand owners have been told they should refile a trademark after it has already registered. As a result, it isn’t unheard of to have 5-10 filings for the same mark (and the costs definitely add up).

Innovation in artificial intelligence (AI) is transforming industries and everyday life. Given its growing importance, many jurisdictions, including Brazil, the United States, and Europe, are establishing specific guidelines to legally protect AI inventions. Although each region seeks to protect innovation, the approaches differ significantly, particularly regarding patentability requirements, inventiveness, and technical disclosure.

Consumer device giant Apple has earned trillions of dollars and cornered near monopoly levels of market share by implementing a corporate strategy focused on gaming proceedings in the federal judiciary and administrative agencies with the intent to devalue patent rights. That is the major takeaway from a recently launched campaign raising awareness into the alleged growing chokehold that Apple has gained over the global innovation industry over the past two decades, and the resulting stagnation in the cellular mobile communications ecosystem.

The European Commission yesterday announced that it is withdrawing a controversial proposal for regulating standard essential patents (SEPs). The Commission officially announced the proposal in April 2023, although it was leaked well before that. The draft rules were purportedly meant to repair a system that “has suffered from a lack of transparency, predictability, and lengthy disputes and litigation.” Communication on standard-essential patents.

Lord Justice Jacob noted the temptation to treat patent-eligible subject matter like an elephant: “you know it when you see it, but you can’t describe it in words.” He went on, however, writing that “[a]ctually we do not think that is right – there are likely to be real differences depending on what the right approach is. Billions (euros, pounds or dollars) turn on it.” These comments could not have been more correct. Huge outcomes depend on the approach taken to determine patent-eligible subject matter.

Generative AI is one of the most transformative technologies of our time, reshaping the way businesses create, innovate, and compete. As organizations integrate AI into their operations, they must navigate an increasingly dynamic business environment, driven by technological advancements and evolving market demands.

The U.S. Senate held a nomination hearing to vet Donald Trump’s pick for Secretary of Commerce, Howard Lutnick, this past week. While much of the hearing focused on issues outside of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), Lutnick touched on several key points relevant to the intellectual property system.

When companies come together to set a standard – for universally adopted technologies like Bluetooth or WiFi – they are allowed to cooperate together as competitors and define a market. As a tradeoff, these rivals must each promise to license patents encompassing technology necessary to the standard, namely the notorious standard essential patents (SEPs), to all who wish to practice the standard. That promise to license may be for free, like Bluetooth, or under fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (FRAND) conditions, like WiFi. Without such a promise, the monopoly power inherent in a patent encompassing a globally agreed-upon technology would enable unchecked monopoly power over the entire market for access to the standard.

In recent years, the pharmaceutical industry has undergone significant changes in the focus of its innovation, research and development efforts. Historically, oncology and immunology were the primary targets for pharmaceutical companies, with most resources and capital allocated to developing new technologies in these areas.

The evolution of content distribution has been both a boon and a bane for the entertainment industry. From physical formats like CDs and DVDs to digital streaming over satellite, fiber-optic networks, 5G, and Wi-Fi, the rapid technological advancements have brought unmatched convenience to viewers. The shift feels seamless: connect a smart TV to Wi-Fi, and the days of waiting for the cable guy are over. For television show producers, however, the transition has come at a steep cost.

On January 20, the United Kingdom’s Court of Appeal issued a ruling in Thatchers Cider Co. Ltd. v. Aldi Stores Ltd. expected to have major impacts on the availability of lookalike products in British supermarkets. In Thatchers, the Court of Appeal reversed a ruling by the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court (IPEC) dismissing trademark infringement claims filed by Thatchers over competing brands of cloudy lemon cider sold by German supermarket chain Aldi.