A recent decision by the European court of justice (ECJ) in Luxembourg means that the four finger Kit Kat chocolate and biscuit bar is set to lose its protected trademark status, opening up the likelihood of ‘copy-cat Kit Kat’s’ from rival manufacturers. The ECJ’s advocate general advised judges to throw out manufacturer Nestle’s appeal, and whilst the advocate generals advice is not binding, it’s very likely that it will be followed.

A recent announced by the IPO (the UK Intellectual Property Office) as confirmed that the UK has now finalised and ratified an agreement that will make it easier for the owners of intellectual property to register designs in multiple jurisdictions and territories, and for them to take appropriate legal action if required to protect such designs.

As the UK moves steadily closer to March 2019’s formal exit from the European Union, it is important that businesses across all sectors and of all sizes understand the impact that Brexit may have on their intellectual property and trademarks, and to make necessary changes now to help mitigate against possible legal action and litigation in future. SME’s (Small and Medium size Entities) make up over 98% of the UK’s 5.7m private sector businesses, employing over 16m people and representing £1.9 trillion in turnover p/a. The main issues for SME’s to consider and address in the run-up to Brexit from an IP and trademark perspective include:

Over the years here at Advantage Litigation Solutions, we have looked at many claims and counter claims involving patents and patent infringements. With the increasing importance of intellectual property and brand identity in our globalised business world, effective legal protection of a patent is extremely important.

In amongst the recent flurry of political activity that resulted in last week’s phase 1 Brexit agreement, solicitors and law firms throughout the UK are generally pleased with the impact that the current direction of travel should have on UK law.

The Brexit effect – looming problems with patent and intellectual property law

German intellectual property lawyer Ingve Stjerna has succeeded in a court action which effectively puts the European patent regime on hold, having described the UK’s desire to remain a member of the new system – the Unified Patent Court (UPC) - as ‘astonishing’.

Apple have been fine circa £350 million for three patents relating to iTunes - the media player, library and mobile device management application.

Subject to an appeal, which is likely, the iTunes creators will now have to pay $530 million (£342 million) to Smartflash after a Texas jury concluded that Apple copied Smartflash’s patent (at least in part) and should pay for damages for such wrongdoing.

The UK Intellectual Property Office (UKIPO) Patent Opinions Service has been in place since 2005 to offer opinions on the validity of patents, and whether any patent infringes UK and EP(UK) patents. Opinions cost £200 and are non-binding in nature, but can assist in dispute resolution prior to litigation. But where litigation is unavoidable, opinions from the Patent Opinions Service can still be useful in helping parties in their case.

However, as of 1 October 2014, the UKIPO has had the power to revoke a patent of its own initiative, if the Patent Opinions Service finds it is not new and/or inventive, where previously it would be up to a third party to begin revocation proceedings, which can be costly and time consuming.