The USMCA – aka NAFTA 2.0 – has a Chapter devoted to intellectual property, which has been the subject much consideration and debate since release of the text on October 1, 2018. With some commentators lamenting that Canada “caved” to
2018
No deal better than a bad deal?

Latest guidance from the UK Government on implications of ‘no-deal’ Brexit for IP rights holders
On September 24, 2018, the UK’s Intellectual Property Office (IPO) published a further series of technical notices on how intellectual property (IP) rights holders might be affected if the United Kingdom (UK) leaves the European Union (EU) in March 2019 without an agreement.
Copyright, cryptocurrency and video games

Video games, such as Grand Theft Auto®, remain popular around the globe, and two recent matters made headlines on two different aspects of the games: copyright and cryptocurrency.
Copyright
On August 16, 2018, the federal trial court in Manhattan issued…
No use crying over spilt (plant-based-dairy-free-alternatives-to) milk?


Every trendy café these days seems to have a selection of dairy-free milk alternatives as long as a wine list, from the usual suspects like soy, coconut and almond, to more unusual new favourites like rice, hemp, pea, flax and…
Amended Australian IP laws receive Royal Assent with little fanfare


On 24 August 2018, the creatively named Intellectual Property Laws Amendment (Productivity Commission Response Part 1 and Other Measures) Bill 2018 quietly received Royal Assent, with some parts of the new Act entering into force the following day.
As the…
Cannabis packaging and labelling requirements: The challenge of building a strong brand
Canada’s Cannabis Act prohibits the selling of cannabis or cannabis accessories in a package or label:
(a) that could be appealing to young persons;
(b) that sets out a testimonial or endorsement;
(c) that depicts a person, character or animal;…
(Don’t) knock it off!
The prevalence of counterfeit goods in Canada reflects weak laws and almost non-existent criminal enforcement within the country, resulting in an appearance of very limited protection for the intellectual property rights of brand owners. As discussed in a recent post…
V Energy loses a mother of a battle over color trademark: Australia court’s decision in Frucor v Coca-Cola
We, as consumers, regularly associate colours with our favourite brands as we stroll down supermarket aisles and peer at billboards and banners in shopping centres. But for brand holders, gaining protection for proprietary colours is not a walk in the…
Public laws, private standards and copyright “fair use”

On July 17, 2018, the federal appeals court located in Washington, D.C. issued a ruling in a case involving an intersection of copyrighted material (standards) and non-copyrightable material (laws and regulations). The appeals court remanded the matter back to the trial court, to determine under what circumstances a non-profit organization could publish private standards as part of the organization’s publication of the laws. (American Society for Testing and Materials v. Public.Resource.Org, Inc., No. 17-7035 (D.C. Cir. July 17, 2018).)
Trademarks, social media and lessons learned

On June 14, 2018, a federal trial court in New York issued a decision relating to a restaurant owner’s claim that the restaurant manager was using the owner’s trademarks on social media in violation of the federal trademark law known as the Lanham Act. The trial court denied the owner’s claim, in a ruling that provides some useful lessons to anyone who licenses a trademark. (Thousand Island Park Corp. v. Welser, 5:18-CV-117 (N.D.N.Y. June 14, 2018 (2018 WL 29803231)).)