WIPO Magazine, Ausgabe Ausgabe 4/2008 Juli/August [WIPO]
Inhalt:

• Spectator Sports – Breaking Records in IP Revenues
• Technology, Innovation and Grit: Faster, Higher, Stronger in Disabled Sports
• Scoring Domain Name Wins at WIPO
• Spotlights on Shanghai International Film Festival
• Shedding Light on the Life Sciences: Patent Landscaping for Public Policymakers
• OAPI Joins International Industrial Designs Treaty
• International Home Decoration Market Beckons Africa’s Designers
• IP and Business: How to successfully buy or sell a business with IP assets
• Committee Meetings
• Inter-Regional Forum on Development and Service-Oriented IP Administration
• In the News
• Letters and comment
• Book Review: Understanding and Profiting from Intellectual Property by Deli Yang

Amtsblatt EPA, Jahrgang 31, Heft 8-9 [EPO]
Inhalt:

• Administrative Council
  Report on the 114th meeting of the Administrative Council of the European Patent Organisation (17 to 20 June 2008)
• Decisions of the boards of appeal
  Technical boards of appeal
  T 1093/05 - 3.5.01 - Multiplier circuit/Infineon Technologies
  “Interpreting a decision to grant a patent” – “Correction of a decision to grant a patent (no)” – “Amendments after the communication under Rule 51(4)”
• Information from the EPO
  List of holidays observed by EPO filing offices and the national patent authorities in 2008
  Triway Pilot Programme between the United States Patent and Trademark Office, the European Patent Office, and the Japan Patent Office
• Representation
  European qualifying examination
  Examination Board for the European qualifying examination
  Examination results
  List of professional representatives before the EPO
  PRAKTIKA INTERN 2009 - Reminder
  In-house training programme for patent professionals
  CEIPI
  New Director appointed
  epi
  Council of the Institute of Professional Representatives before the European Patent Office
• Fees
  Guidance for the payment of fees, expenses and prices
• Calendar of events
  Calendar of events

• This report provides readers with statistical indicators that shed light on issues such as the functioning of the patent system and its use by both developed and developing countries. The statistical information provided in this report allows users to analyze and monitor the latest trends in patent activity based on objective and detailed information. [mehr]

Blatt für PMZ, Heft 7 / 2008 [blpmz.de]

• Deutschland
  Hinweis auf eine Änderung der Weinverordnung
  Ausstellungsschutz
• Ausland
  Japan: Patentgesetz Nr. 121 vom 13.4.1959 i. d. F. des Gesetzes Nr. 55 von 2006
• Europäische Union
  Verordnung (EG) Nr. 355/2008 der Kommission vom 21.4.2008 zur Änderung der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 1239/95 hinsichtlich der Verwendung elektronischer Kommunikationsmittel für das Verfahren vor dem Gemeinschaftlichen Sortenamt
  Verordnung (EG) Nr. 417/2008 der Kommission vom 8.5.2008 zur Änderung der Anhänge I und II der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 510/2006 des Rates zum Schutz von geografischen Angaben und Ursprungsbezeichnungen für Agrarerzeugnisse und Lebensmittel
  Hinweis auf die konsolidierten Fassungen des Vertrags über die Europäische Union und des Vertrags über die Arbeitsweise der Europäischen Union
• Mehrseitige Internationale Abkommen
  MHA. Inkrafttreten für den Iran, die ehem. Bundesrepublik Jugoslawien und die Republik Moldau; Notifizierung der Rechtsnachfolge durch Montenegro
  LKA. Inkrafttreten für Armenien, Aserbaidschan, Belgien, Bulgarien, Griechenland, Kasachstan, Lettland, Mexiko, die Mongolei, Turkmenistan, Uruguay, Usbekistan und das Vereinigte Königreich; Notifizierung der Rechtsnachfolge durch die ehem. Bundesrepublik Jugoslawien und Montenegro
  EPÜ. Bekanntmachung vom 14.4.2008 über Änderungen der AusfO EPÜ und der GebO der EPO
  Beschlüsse des Verwaltungsrats vom 25.10.2007 und vom 14.12.2007 zur Änderung der GebO
  Beschluss des Verwaltungsrats vom 6.3.2008 zur Änderung der AusfO EPÜ
• Zweiseitige Internationale Abkommen
  Hinweis auf das Inkrafttreten des deutsch-jemenitischen Vertrags über die Förderung und den gegenseitigen Schutz von Kapitalanlagen
• Entscheidungen
  Bundesgerichtshof: AKZENTA – ACERBON – TUC-Salzcracker – Ramipril
  Bundespatentgericht: Umschreibungsverfahren – GALLUP II
  Andere Gerichte: Presserechtliches Warnschreiben – Urheberrechtsschutz von Webseiten – Ausländische Wahrnehmungsgesellschaft
  Europäische Gemeinschaften: FIRST DEFENSE AEROSOL PEPPER PROJECTOR
• Vertreterwesen

BARDEHLE PAGENBERG IP Report 2008-III [Bardehle]

• Firm News
  Jochen Pagenberg voted for the second time Germany’s leading lawyer for patent and trademark legal expertise in “The International Who’s Who of Business Lawyers 2008”

• Patent Law
  1. German Federal Supreme Court on validly claiming the priority for claim with a limiting feature which was not disclosed in the priority documents (Decision of January 30, 2008 Case X ZR 107/04 – “Betonstraßenfertiger”/”Machine for producing concrete roads”)2. European Patent Office: Amendments in opposition proceedings and objections to lack of clarity (Technical Board of Appeal 3.2.03, decision of February 21, 2008 – Case T 1459/05, not foreseen for publication)

  3. Düsseldorf Appeal Court: In a pharmaceutical case, the Court granted a preliminary injunction against the offer and sale of drugs containing the active ingredient “Olanzapine” (Decision of May 29, 2008 – Case 2 W 47/07 – “Olanzapine”)

• Trademark Law
  4. European Court of Justice on comparative advertising and trade-mark infringement (Decision of June 12, 2008 – Case C-533/06 – O2 Holdings Ltd v Hutchison 3G UK Ltd – “O2”)5. European Court of Justice on likelihood of confusion, complex trademarks, inherent and increased distinctiveness (Decision of July 17, 2008 – Case C-488/06 P – L & D SA v OHIM – Julius Sämann Ltd – “Aire Limpio”)

  6. EFTA Court abandons rule of international exhaustion in trademark cases (Decision of July 8, 2008 Joint Cases E-9/07 and E-10/07 – L’Oréal Norge AS & L’Oréal SA v Per Aarskog AS [Case E-9/07], Nille AS [Case E-9/07] and Smart Club AS [Case E-10/07] – “REDKEN”)

  7. German Federal Supreme Court: Genuine use of a service mark requires that the consumers or end users will recognise that the mark does not only identify the company, but also specific services (Decision of October 18, 2007 – Case I ZR 162/04 – “AKZENTA”)

  8. German Federal Supreme Court on “smell-alikes” (Decision of December 6, 2007 – Case I ZR 184/05 – “Duftvergleich mit Markenparfum”/”comparative lists of perfumes” – and decision of June 6, 2008 – Case I ZR 169/05 – “Imitationswerbung”/“Imitative Advertising”)

  9. German Federal Patent Court: The designation “Bio Bär” (“Bio Bear”) for gummy bears serves to designate the kind of goods, i.e., biologically manufactured gummy bears and is devoid of any distinctive character (Decision of April 2, 2008 – Case 28 W [pat] 187/07 – “Bio Bär”/“Bio Bear”)

  10. German Federal Supreme Court applies agent’s marks rules on business relationship which goes beyond mere exchange agreements, and clarifies other limits for applying agent’s marks rules (Decision of April 10, 2008 – Case I ZR 164/05 – “audison”)

  11. German Federal Supreme Court: Injunctive relief may be claimed against online-auctioneers if vendors offer forgeries on the internet platform (Decision of April 30, 2008 – Case I ZR 73/05 – “Internetversteigerung III”/”online-auctioneering III”)

• Design Law 12. Alicante Commercial Court: Joint action against Community trademark and Community design infringement (Decision of Dec. 4, 2007 – Case 152/2007 – L’ORÉAL SA v YESENSY ESPAÑA SL)

Hier kurz die Highlights:

“Worldwide patent activity increased by 4.9% between 2005 and 2006, mostly due to increased filings by applicants from China, the Republic of Korea and the United States of America

• The total number of applications filed across the world in 2006 is estimated to be 1.76 million, representing a 4.9% increase from the previous year. Between 2005 and 2006, the number of filings worldwide by applicants from China, the Republic of Korea and the United States of America increased by 32.1%, 6.6% and 6.7% respectively.
• The United States Patent and Trademark Office was the largest recipient of patent filings, for the first time since 1963, with a total of 425,966 patent applications filed in 2006. There was a small decrease in the number of patents filed at the Japan Patent Office in 2006 (408,674). The patent offices of China (210,501), the Republic of Korea (166,189), and the European Patent Office (135,231) also received a large number of filings.
• Patent applicants tend to come from a relatively small number of countries of origin. For example, applicants from Japan, the United States of America, the Republic of Korea, Germany and China accounted for 76% of total patent filings in 2006. Chinese residents increased their share of total worldwide patent filings from 1.8% to 7.3% between 2000 and 2006, mostly due to increases in domestic patent filings.
• Although the number of patent applications filed across the world has increased at a steady pace, the rate of increase is less than the rate of increase observed for other economic indicators such as GDP and trade.
• In 2006, approximately 727,000 patents were granted across the world. Similar to patent filings, patent grants are concentrated in a small number of countries. Applicants from Japan, the United States of America, the Republic of Korea and Germany received 73% of total patent grants worldwide. Between 2000 and 2006, the number of patents granted to applicants from China and the Republic of Korea grew by 26.5% and 23.2% a year, respectively (average annual growth rate).
• There has been an increase in the level of patenting activity in emerging countries. The patent offices of India, Brazil and Mexico all received a large number of filings in 2006. However, for the majority of the reported emerging countries, non-resident applicants accounted for the largest share of total filings in these countries. There has also been an increase in the use of the PCT System by emerging countries for international filings.” [WIPO]

Gefunden auf: WIPO Releases 2008 Worldwide Patent Report [Peter Zura’s 271 Patent Blog]

Die Benutzung des Wörtchens effektiv ist für einen Informatiker wie mich ein gefundenes Fressen, da letztere die Verwendung von effektiv und effizient sehr genau nehmen. Das Wörterbuch von spiegel.de sagt dazu anschaulich:

“Effektiv bedeutet wirkungsvoll im Verhältnis zu den aufgewendeten Mitteln, effizient bedeutet leistungsfähig, wirtschaftlich. Das eine bezieht sich also auf das Ergebnis (hat die Sache einen Effekt?), das andere charakterisiert die Art und Weise einer Umsetzung (hat sich die Sache gelohnt?).

Eine Flasche Champagner auf eine umgestürzte Kerze zu gießen, ist effektiv, denn das Feuer ist danach gelöscht. Effizient ist es hingegen nicht, denn ein Glas Wasser hätte es auch getan.”

Ist die Devise von Herrn Buchanan also, dass man für mehr Geld von ihm auch mehr Patent bekommt, egal, ob es Sinn macht oder nicht? Wünschen sich Mandanten nicht vielmehr eine effiziente Beratung? Soll heißen, die Portfoliobildung folgt den Grundsätzen der Leistungsfähigkeit und vor allem der Wirtschaftlichkeit?

Ich bin mir allerdings sicher, der Herr Buchanan folgt in seinem effektiven Schaffen genauso dem Grundsatz der Effizienz, was seine Kernprinzipien verdeutlichen.

Dies nur als Spitzfindigkeit am Rande, bin dann mal efficientip.com registieren. Aber da war schon jemand schneller…

Heute, am 26. April 2008, ist World Intellectual Property Day. Kamil Idris, WIPO Director General gibt dazu folgendes Geleitwort:

World Intellectual Property Day is rapidly growing in popularity. Since its launch, eight years ago, increasing numbers of governments and organizations are joining WIPO in the annual celebrations on 26 April.

The man or woman in the street might wonder just what makes intellectual property worth all this effort. What, they might ask, do the workings of copyrights, patents, industrial designs or trademarks have to do with the really big issues, like how to stop global warming; or with the things that add spice to life, like watching their favorite athletes perform in this year’s Olympics? The answer is that, without intellectual property rights, many new technologies developed to tackle global problems would never see the light of day and the great sporting events, which entertain and unite us, would not be broadcast into homes across the globe.

On World Intellectual Property Day we are celebrating not only the enormous power of human creativity, but also the intellectual property rights that help to fuel and channel it, making it such an important driving force for economic, cultural and social development.

The ingenuity of our species has propelled us from the invention of the first wheel, to effortless air travel and the latest generation of clean fuel technologies. It has led us from the creation of drawings on a cave wall, to the printing press, and on to the Internet, which puts the world literally at our fingertips. It has given us technical advances which allow pole-vaulters to soar ever higher, footballers to shoot ever further and millions of ordinary people to have a level of well-being which would have been unimaginable only a few generations ago. WIPO is committed to using intellectual property as a means of harnessing and spreading the power of human creativity and innovation so that the people of every country, of every community, can share in their bounty.

And so, on World Intellectual Property Day, we pay tribute to the inventors and artists, great and small, who enrich our existence with the fruits of their innovative thoughts and creative vision. And we remember why it is that their intellectual property rights, the rights that they have earned through their individual and collective talents, deserve our admiration, our protection, and our respect. -Message for World IP Day 2008 [WIPO]

Weiterführende Informationen gibt es auf den Seiten der WIPO.

Happy IP-Day 2008!

Quelle: Aktuelle Ausgabe Blatt für PMZ [MarkenBlog]

Quelle: Europäisches Patentamt: Anmelderumfrage 2007

Ergebnisse: Die Gesamtzahl der Anmeldungen wird für 2007 auf insgesamt 217.444 veranschlagt (222.680 wurden zuvor geschätzt). Für 2008 wird eine Gesamtzahl von 247.052 Anmeldungen (ca. +11 %) prognostiziert, sowie 255.343 Anmeldungen für 2009 (ca. +3 %).

Befragt wurden insgesamt ca. 2.600 Anmelder, darunter Großanmelder, eine Zufallsgruppe, sowie erstmals eine Gruppe Kleinanmelder (mit nicht mehr als zwei Einreichungen in 2006). Dies erscheint sinnvoll, da diese Gruppe in 2006 fast 81 % der gesamten Anmeldungen ausmachte. Die Rücklaufquote der von synovate durchgeführten Umfrage betrug 40,5 %.

Den 9-seitigen Bericht gibt es auf den Seiten des EPO zum Download.

Quelle: Future patent filings [EPO]