IPPro The Annual 2018/19 by IPProMagazine

Penetrate the pool of patent information with PatBase Speed up your research with access to 106 patenting jurisdictions on one platform. • Search global patents intuitively and comprehensively • Explore the landscape and turn data into intelligence with integrated Analytics V2 • Monitor competitor’s patents with the comprehensive Legal Status Viewer • Identify potential licensing opportunities with Citation Explorer Visit www.minesoft.com for more information. Minesoft oﬃces worldwide: USA: +1 703 931 1597 UK: +44 (0)20 8404 0651 Germany: +49 (0) 211 7495 0930 Japan: +81 3 54039191

Editor’s Note Back to the future The beating heart of the world is reaching new heights in innovation, with technology coming to the forefront in 2018 as an enabler of efficiency and automation. In the intellectual property industry, artificial intelligence, machine learning, and blockchain are beginning to shape the burgeoning technology services landscape, and exciting opportunities for both inventors and law firms alike are beginning to present themselves.

Editor: Becky Butcher beckybutcher@blackknightmedialtd.com +44 (0)203 750 6018 Deputy Editor: Barney Dixon barneydixon@blackknightmedialtd.com +44 (0)203 750 6026

However recent regulation, such as the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation has drawn a line in the sand for enforcers, resulting in far reaching consequences across continents, and leaving brands open to attacks from those wanting to hide behind anonymity on the internet.

Junior Reporter: Ben Wodecki benwodecki@blackknightmedialtd.com +44 (0)203 750 6017 Designer: James Hickman jameshickman@blackknightmedialtd.com +44 (0)203 750 6021 Contributors: Rebecca Delaney, Jenna Lomax, Ned Holmes, and Maddie Saghir IP Portfolio Manager: Serena Franklin serenafranklin@blackknightmedialtd.com +44 (0)203 750 6025

All this, and more, is discussed inside IPPro: The Annual, which features comment and analysis from the world’s leading IP associations. We hope you like it’s new coat of paint and, as ever, if you have any feedback or suggestions, don’t hesitate to get in touch.

Publisher: Justin Lawson justinlawson@blackknightmedialtd.com +44 (0)203 750 6028 Office Manager: Chelsea Bowles accounts@blackknightmedialtd.com

Barney Dixon Deputy editor IPPro

Intellectual Property .That's it.

IP anov

AT T O R N E Y S AGENTS & A S S O C I AT E S

Create, Manage & Monetize intellectual wealth. With anovIP, it's amazingly easy!!

INDIA, MALAYSIA, THAILAND, PHILIPPINES, SRI LANKA, BANGLADESH & NEPAL Patents, Trademarks, Copyrights & Domain Names Filing, Prosecution, Strategy, Licensing & Litigation. Our in-house team of over 180 attorneys, agents, associates, subject matter experts and support staff is always excited to tame and turn South East Asian intellectual property tides in your favour.

anovIP Asia ANOVIP, 45/1, LEVEL -3, CORNER MARKET, MALVIYA NAGAR, NEW DELHI - 110017, INDIA

Please write to us at info@anovip.com P +9111-4183-5550 F +9111-4183-5551

E I N F O @ A N O V I P. C O M W W W W. A N O V I P. C O M

Inside IPPro: The Annual

The value of tradition and the digital future

A strategic plan

GRUR’s Stephan Freischem and Sandra von Lingen discuss a good year for the association, as it celebrates its 127th year

INTA president Tish Berard sets out the progress made in the past year on each leg of the association’s strategic plan

p44

IPO

IACC

ECTA

The IPO’s Mark Lauroesch discusses the current climate for IP in the world as it turns increasingly nationalistic

The IACC breaks down how it has responded over the last 12 months to a worldwide rise in counterfeiting

Sozos-Christos Theodoulou describes ECTA’s recent efforts, which include a renewed focus on thought leadership

p10

p14

CIPA

IPzen

AIPPI

Kristina Grinkina of CIPA runs through an eventful year for the association

IPzen’s Emmanuel Harrar explains the potential applications of blockchain in IP

Sarah Matheson of AIPPI describes the association’s broad outlook

AIPLA

LES

PIPCU

AIPLA president Myra McCormack explains the association’s move to digital and more

Bill Elkington, president and chair of the Licensing Executives Society, describes the latest for the association

Detective inspector Nick Court runs through PIPCU’s 2018 successes and looks forward to 2019

p16

p12

IPPro: The Annual

p26

p20

p30

p22

p34

Corporate Brand Services

Corporate Brand Services Everything you need in a brand proteccon partner Domain Name Portfolio Management

Monitoring & Enforcement Services

Registraaon & consolidaaon Renewal management Porrolio review Privacy, proxy and trustee soluuons New TLD launches

Domain & trademark monitoring UDRP/URS Cease & Desist leeers DMCA take-downs Case research and invessgaaon

Domain Acquisition Services

Security & Tools

Professional and discreet Experienced and knowledgeable negooators Assessment and valuaaon services Escrow and clearing services

Proteccon with mull-layered security 2-factor authenncaaon Private Registraaon Registry locks DNSSEC

US 877.983.6624 Int ++1 760.444.8674 www.101domain.services

Feature · GRUR

Embracing the value of tradition and the digital future GRUR’s Stephan Freischem and Sandra von Lingen discuss a good year for the association, as it celebrates its 127th year Since its foundation in 1891, the German Association for the Protection of Intellectual Property (GRUR) has become the largest and oldest non-profit, non-lobbying association in Germany devoted to the protection, academic advancement and development of IP law. With over 5,200 members hailing from 60 countries, GRUR offers a forum for a wide range of IP professionals: lawyers, patent attorneys, judges, academics, enterprises, associations of enterprises, and German and European IP offices, as well as international IP authorities and their respective staff members and representatives. In fulfillment of its statutes, the association provides assistance to legislative bodies and authorities competent for IP issues, organises conferences and workshops, and offers continued education courses for lawyers and patent attorneys. Over the past century, GRUR has become better known under its abbreviation (based on its German name) and the name Grüner Verein (Green Association), a nod to the distinctive, green covers of its four leading German IP law journals: GRUR, GRUR International, GRUR-RR and GRUR-Prax. Moreover, it offers access to thousands of additional edited court decisions through its online resource tool GRUR-RS, which is hosted by the platform Beck-Online, of GRUR’s long-standing, renowned legal publisher Beck-Verlag which also hosts and presents all GRUR publications online via the GRUR Plus Module.

IPPro: The Annual

At the basis of the GRUR Association is the General Assembly to which all major decisions are submitted for discussion and decision. Projects and decisions are prepared and managed by the General Council in accordance with the principles laid down by the General Assembly. The executive committee, appointed by the General Council and headed by the president, currently Dr Gert Würtenberger, and up to three vice presidents—Prof Dr Reto Hilty, Prof Dr Jochen Bühling and Ludwig Schaafhausen—conducts the regular affairs of the association. The executive committee is supported by the secretary general, Stephan Freischem, the vice secretary-general, Dr Anke Nordemann-Schiffel, the treasurer, Dr Gunnar Baumgärtel, and their business office staff in Cologne, which act as contact point for members, execute the boards’ management decisions, organise the various meetings and GRUR events, and develop new project ideas. At a local level, GRUR members are organised into seven regional groups, covering all areas of Germany. The academic statements, research projects and event programmes of GRUR are developed by eleven special expert committees and working groups in charge of all areas of IP law as well as competition, antitrust and data law.

GRUR · Feature The core work GRUR´s academic business year ends and restarts in September of each year, when the GRUR Annual Meeting takes place, and subsequently runs for a twelve-month period until the next yearly conference. Looking back on the past period between 2017 and 2018, it was a busy year indeed. At the core of GRUR´s work, there are the association´s advisory opinions and position papers. They are drawn up in the GRUR Special Committees and highly regarded due to their competence, neutrality and wellbalanced considerations. From September 2017 to August 2018, GRUR submitted nine advisory opinions on draft legislation at national and EU level. It also submitted international treaties, questions of the application of the law and pending court proceedings to the competent ministries, authorities, committees or courts, such as to the European Court of Justice—participating in a role as competent third party—or to the German Federal Constitutional Court with regards to the pending constitutional complaint against the Unified Patent Court (UPC) ratification in Germany. At regional level, over 70 expert lectures were organised by the seven GRUR Regional Groups (so in average, one lecture per regional group every month)—another cornerstone of GRUR´s work. Event-wise, the GRUR Annual Meetings, which took place at the end of September 2017, attracted over 700 participants from more than 30 jurisdictions. Later in the year, in November 2017, GRUR and Oxford University Press held the 8th GRUR Int/Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice (JIPLP) Joint Seminar in London within the framework of the publication partnership established between their IP journals GRUR Int and JIPLP in 2013. Over 250 participants attended this event to discuss the topic of “A Distinctive Mess? Current Trade Mark Law and Practice in the EU and UK”. In the first week of June, a GRUR delegation visited representatives of the European Commission’s DirectorateGeneral GROW for an exchange of views on current issues of patent, trademark and design law in particular. In the same week, GRUR held its 9th GRUR meets Brussels Workshop in the EU capital, a one-day international event with 10 high-level speakers and over 150 attendees exploring

questions related to “Artificial Intelligence, Robotics and IP— What is at stake?”. Shortly thereafter, GRUR council members met with American IP Law Association representatives at the Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition in Munich for an update on US, European and German IP law. In the same month, the traditional annual meeting of representatives of the GRUR executive council and the special committee with representatives of the Federal Ministry of Justice and Consumer Protection (BMJV) took place in Berlin to discuss topical IP, antitrust and data law issues as well as the new German Government’s visions and work agenda in the field of IP law. Like in previous years, GRUR participated as observer and user association in various meetings, cooperation projects and conferences of the World Intellectual Property Organization, EU IP Office, the European Patent Office and the German Patent and Trademark Office. For several decades now, GRUR has continuously offered training seminars for IP professionals in cooperation with the DeutscheAnwaltAkademie, the German Bar Association (Deutscher Anwaltsverein) and the German Chamber of Patent Attorneys (Patentanwaltskammer). Special courses are held for lawyers and patent attorneys wishing to qualify as specialists in IP law and related fields of law. In the framework of its academia support programmes, the GRUR Academic Fund continued supporting, among other projects, the yearly conferences of the Circle of European Trade Mark Judges (CET-J), and co-funding three professorial university chairs (in some cases including members of their scientific staff) in order to support the development and strengthening of academic IP hubs in different parts of Germany. In that context, funds were granted to the chair of civil law and IP law at the University of Munich (the so-called GRUR chair), the chair of civil law, IP and German and European Civil Procedural Law at the University of Osnabrück and the chair of civil law and IP law, especially Patent and Trademark Law at Leibniz University Hannover. The GRUR Young Academics Fund once again supported the annual conference and subsequent conference publication of the GRUR Young Academics group, which was established in 2016 and aims to ehance the research, debate and exchange of knowledge amongst young IP scientists and practitioners.

Feature · GRUR

GRUR has taken on the vision and challenge of becoming a platform and `academic think tank´ for the promotion of research, exploration and discussion of the impact of `digital topics´ on the future of IP and related fields of law in the coming decade and beyond. To create a framework for GRUR´s various activities in this new area of academic research and discussion, GRUR established the GRUR Special Committee on Data Law at the end of 2016, which, since then, organised two GRUR meets Brussels Workshops (in 2016: “Towards a connected Digital Single Market—what about a new ‘industrial data protection right’ for companies?” and in 2018: “Artificial Intelligence, Robotics and IP—What is at stake?”) and also set the foundation for the design of the GRUR 2018 Annual Meeting on “Digital Future”. This year, the GRUR annual conference, which will take place from 26 to 29 September 2018 at Hotel InterContinental in Berlin, will strongly focus on the digital issues and challenges. The sessions of our expert committees will provide in-depth analysis from the various angles of IP, competition, antitrust and data law, including industry, judicial and practice perspectives. So far, over 700 participants from 35 countries have registered for our conference and registrations are still coming in, so we are expecting vivid and inspiring encounters, exchanges and debates. Later in the year, GRUR will, of course, also continue its activities in the more traditional fields of IP, although many of them are, in fact, shifting towards and impacted

IPPro: The Annual

It goes without saying that in all its activities, GRUR will continue to co-operate and exchange views with befriended IP associations, especially International Association for the Protection of Intellectual Property (AIPPI) and the national groups of AIPPI, the members of the European Sister Associations—a group of European trademark and design associations active as EU IP Office user associations—as well as IP offices, institutions and legislative bodies in Germany, Europe and beyond.

Secretary general GRUR

How will—or rather, may—artificial intelligence and robotics, machine learning, digital mobility, virtual reality, algorithmdriven marketing and opinion making, 3D Printing, and digital markets affect, change, and shape the future of our law and practice? What are the actual technologies behind these new developments? In how far, and at which stage, do they call for legislative action at national and/or EU level?

Stephan Freischem

The digitalisation of the world affects society and all areas of life. New technologies are constantly arising at increasingly shorter intervals, posing new and exciting legal questions and challenges—many of them yet unknown—to IP, competition, trade secrets, antitrust and data law, and, of course, the enforcement of the respective rights.

Senior manager international affairs and publications GRUR

Meeting challenges

by digitalisation. To give an outlook, the 9th GRUR Int/ JIPLP Joint Seminar which will take place at IndustrieClub, Düsseldorf, on 28 November 2018 will be dedicated to the topic “the EU approach to standard-essential patent (SEPs)—Huawei, its aftermath and potential developments”, aiming at presenting the perspectives from patent and antitrust experts from academia, private practice, jurisprudence and EU policy makers a year after the release of the EU Commission’s communication on SEP licensing. Last but not least, GRUR will bring forward the internationalisation of its professional journal GRUR Int, with the aim of transforming it into a fully English-language journal in the near future.

Sandra von Lingen

Funds were also granted to participants of the Munich IP Law Center (MIPLC) programmes and selected other continued courses. Moreover, young IP academics are being financially supported in their participation in the upcoming GRUR Annual Meeting 2018 Digital Future in Berlin.

Feature · IPO

Looking into the crystal ball The Intellectual Property Owners Association’s Mark Lauroesch discusses the current climate for IP in the world and whether increasingly nationalistic tendencies might serve to set back the harmonisation of IP laws These days, making predictions is quite a challenge. We are continually surprised by what we wake up to: new scandals, tweets, and stock records, to name a few. Anticipating what is on the horizon in the world of intellectual property is no different. It is important to position ourselves as IP professionals for what is coming next, so we’re giving it a shot.

The Supreme Court’s interest in IP reveals a tension between legal and business/IP philosophies Over the last several years, the US Supreme Court has taken up a markedly increased number of IP cases for review. In the past, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, which hears all patent appeals cases, was generally considered the court of final resort for patent issues. Many believe the uptick in Supreme Court activity represents the court’s distinct interests in addressing IP policy concerns and conforming Federal Circuit precedent to Supreme Court jurisprudence. Some speculate that the rumbling about so-called “patent troll” litigation did not fall on deaf ears, believing that judicial activism resulted in several earthshaking decisions around patent subject matter eligibility. As the Federal Circuit has been repeatedly reversed over the last few years, it has become apparent that the Supreme Court disfavours objective patent law rules that arguably provide businesses with more certainty and predictability, instead preferring “totality of the circumstances” approaches, believed to provide more flexibility and fairer jurisprudence. Looking into the crystal ball, there is nothing pointing away from this trend. After denying two petitions for certiorari on

10 IPPro: The Annual

the constitutionality of the US Patent and Trademark Office’s (USPTO) Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) post-patent grant proceedings, the Supreme Court took up the issue in Oil States v Greene’s Energy. This sent patent lawyers scurrying to pull their dusty constitutional law textbooks from the shelf to make predictions about how the case should be resolved. Patent lawyers pontificated on this complex aspect of constitutional law. Some hoped the court would eliminate the proceedings, which they believed to be outright unfair. Others defended the proceedings as an efficient mechanism for eliminating ill-granted patents. Others urged that patents should be recognised as personal property rights, concerned that the Supreme Court decision would diminish the right recognised in article 1, section 8 of the constitution. Ultimately, the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the proceedings, but noted that its decision was to be read narrowly and “should not be misconstrued as suggesting that patents are not property for purposes of the due process clause or takings clause”. The constitutional door is ajar, and we will likely see new challenges to these proceedings. Justices Gorsuch and Roberts dissented in Oil States, and the next new justice could be more amenable to such new challenges.

Will the result of the “patent troll” narrative be to curb patent abuse or to disincentivise innovation? It is often the swamp image of Washington politics that convinces people that congress won’t change its point of view, but sometimes it is simply a narrative captured in congressional heads.

IPO · Feature More than five years ago, there was near-universal support by IP and business leaders for the narrative that non-practicing entities (so-called “patent trolls”) were pervasively abusing the patent system by falsely accusing consumers of infringement, asserting patent claims with unjustifiable scope and using unethical litigation tactics. The narrative was persuasive, and a good deal of action was taken. The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure were changed to require plaintiffs to more definitively state the basis for their cases. The Leahy-Smith American Invents Act was enacted with an objective to address trolls, and the Federal Circuit and Supreme Court issued several decisions to help curb abuse. Judicial activism, however, led to a series of pivotal cases that dramatically changed the scope of patent subject matter eligibility. Consequently, some extremely deserving inventors can unfortunately no longer receive patent protection and no longer have an incentive to invest in such innovation. Can congress fix it? Yes, but the “troll” narrative persists, in part because there still is some truth behind it. Patent litigation abuse still exists and does need to be addressed. Many are concerned, however, that Congress might “fix” the troll problem by stifling innovation. Some label the troll narrative as disingenuous, intended to facilitate more “efficient infringement,” where companies disregard others patent rights and litigate for a more favourable outcome only if necessary. Others say that patents inhibit innovation, perhaps because it is costly to license the many different inventions their products aggregate. Of course, it is more costly to pay to use others’ inventions, just like it is costly to absorb the expense of abusive patent litigation. But will we swallow the patent abuse narrative at the cost of allowing some companies to steal others’ technology?

Will the new USPTO director address criticism of inter partes review proceedings or decide the patent trial and appeal board has it right? For a while now, many in the IP community have been critical of the PTAB post-patent grant proceedings that consider the validity of issued patents. The previous director was disinclined to address those concerns by changing the regulations governing the proceedings. New director, Andrei Iancu, has shown a willingness to address these concerns about fairness. Iancu has already asked for comments on changing the claim construction

standard used in the proceedings from broadest reasonable interpretation to the Phillips standard. This change would reduce the possibility of inconsistent claim construction determinations by the PTAB and federal courts and possibly increase the predictability of patent validity disputes and promote confidence in the patent system. Iancu is also looking at additional changes to address the patent community’s perceptions. He is a litigator by background and, despite being new to the organisation, ensuring procedural fairness with litigation-esque rules is something he will likely be comfortable taking on.

Will progress on harmonising international patent laws be affected by nationalism? In recent years, optimism has abounded that many countries around the world would develop and implement harmonised laws concerning patent examination. Optimally, innovators would not have to follow different rules and provide different information in each country where they seek patent protection. They could instead use one harmonised process and provide the same information to meet patent filing obligations in each country. Money saved by creating efficiency through harmonisation could be reinvested by inventors into further innovation. Harmonised laws would also provide patent offices with opportunities to reduce duplication of efforts, which should result in cost savings for governments. Recently, however, there has been a rise in nationalistic tendencies around the globe. After decades of globalisation, many countries are looking inward. As a result, multilateral treaties are being deemphasised in favour of bilateral treaties, with each country looking for concessions from its trading partners to maximise its own gains. Where does this trend leave the effort to harmonise patent laws? The harmonisers, the world’s most prolific patent offices and representatives of their constituencies, are still actively engaged in efforts to reach an accord, albeit with setbacks that are to be expected in this age where compromise seems so hard. Harmonising patent laws serves every country’s interest and does not diminish any country’s self-interest. A more efficient and cost-effective system would be a win-win situation for all involved, benefitting both innovators and patent offices.

Feature · IACC

Elevating the fight against fakes The IACC breaks down how it has responded over the last 12 months to a worldwide rise in counterfeiting Solidifying strategic partnerships In response to the increase in counterfeiting around the globe, the International AntiCounterfeiting Coalition (IACC) has elevated its efforts to combat counterfeiting and piracy over the last year. Founded in 1979, the IACC is the world’s longest-standing organisation devoted solely to the fight against piracy and product counterfeiting. As a memberdriven organisation, the IACC’s unique collaborative approach has been the cornerstone of its success. To find innovative and effective ways to protect its members and consumers from counterfeiting, the IACC engages all sectors, from rightsholders to governments or intermediaries. In addition to educating, training, and advocating for stronger policies against counterfeiting, the IACC has created several innovative programmes with intermediaries to tackle online counterfeiting. With cybercrime rates climbing worldwide and the scale of online counterfeiting growing, the IACC was especially active this year in finding collaborative ways to establish a more trusted online environment. In 2018, the IACC’s payment processor initiative, RogueBlock, continued to report illicit online merchants to the world’s largest payment processors, including Mastercard, Visa International, Visa Europe, PayPal, American Express, Discover, Western Union, PULSE, MoneyGram and Diners Club. RogueBlock is an IACC initiative in partnership with the payment processing industry that allows members to report suspicious online activity in a streamlined way. So far, RogueBlock has terminated more than 5,500 counterfeit merchant accounts, which were linked to over 200,000 fraudulent websites. By targeting counterfeiters’ abilities to make a profit, this programme hits them where it hurts the most: their wallets. In that same vein, the IACC signed a memorandum of understanding with the European Registry for Internet Domains (EURid) this June to solidify a partnership to fight cybercrime in the .eu and .ею domain namespace. This agreement, which was signed at this year’s Europol IP Crime Conference, is the IACC’s first-ever partnership with an online registry to tackle cybercrime and aims to rid the internet of fraudulent domain names to create a safer environment for all online users. In the last three years alone, EURid has suspended more than 70,000 fraudulent domain names.

12 IPPro: The Annual

The MarketSafe Expansion Programme continued to build a bridge between rightsholders and Alibaba Group, providing rightsholders with the tools and resources needed to achieve effective enforcement on Alibaba platforms, including the takedown of online counterfeit merchants and the removal of in-store counterfeit products. After completing the programme, companies are then eligible to enter Alibaba’s Good Faith Programme, which grants them a seal of trust from Alibaba, leading to an expedited takedown and removal process. Another major partner with whom the IACC collaborated with this year was Amazon. Through the signing of a memorandum of understanding, the IACC and Amazon initiated a new brand engagement programme to enhance collaboration and anticounterfeiting efforts between Amazon and IACC members.

A global voice in IP policy In addition to its collaboration efforts and strategic partnerships, the IACC continues to provide insight on important intellectual property policy to both government and industry stakeholders around the world. The IACC regularly comments on relevant IP matters around the globe in a variety of ways, including contributing to the US Trade Representative’s annual Special 301 Report, partaking in the Chinese government’s ongoing development of ecommerce legislation and participating in ICANN’s IP Constituency. As part of its global outreach efforts during the past year, the IACC has been increasing its engagement in Asia. This May, the IACC participated in the second China Brand Development Forum in Shanghai. Additionally, in July, IACC president, Bob Barchiesi, gave a keynote address at the opening ceremony of the Quality Brand Protection Committee’s (QBPC) 2018 China Forum on Criminal IP Protection in Jiangsu. The QBPC, along with Jack Chang and other leaders, has been a strategic partner to the IACC over the last few years in promoting IP rights protection in China. Further, Barchiesi was invited to become a vice chair of the World Brand Alliance, headed by Liu Pingjun, president of the China Council for brand development. The IACC has also looked to increase its engagement in Latin America and the Caribbean. In May, Barchiesi met with

IACC · Feature

Tailored education The foundation of the IACC’s collaborative approach is its anticounterfeiting educational events and training programmes. To advance awareness, the IACC hosts events, conferences, panels, in-depth discussions and networking sessions each year for IP professionals, such as the IACC’s annual Spring Conference in Seattle, Washington in May 2018. The event gathered 500 attendees from over 40 countries under the theme ‘bridging the divide: global collaboration and new partnerships to fight counterfeits’. The conference agenda featured discussions with a number of high-level government attaches as well as a fireside chat series with intermediary company representatives from Alibaba, Amazon, eBay and select payment processors. The speakers shared their unique anti-counterfeiting experience and knowledge with attendees, which in turn led to discussions about resources and enforcement tools. In June, together with Europol, the Hungarian National Tax and Customs Administration, and Underwriters Laboratories, the IACC co-hosted the second annual Europol IP Crime Conference in Budapest. Themed ‘blueprint for accurate and functional enforcement’, the event gathered 400 IP leaders, as well as businesses and law enforcement authorities from over 46 countries, and addressed the most recent innovations in IP rights enforcement strategies, as well as the importance of developing a sound IP strategy. Additionally, in 2018, the IACC continued to host its regular training sessions for law enforcement both in the US and internationally. Each training session allowed brands to connect directly with law enforcement and coach them on how to authenticate their products and identify counterfeit versions. Strong collaboration between the public and private sectors remains a key component in the fight against fakes, and through these training sessions, law enforcement and rightsholders are better able to learn from each other’s experiences. Since the beginning of 2018, the IACC has conducted more than 15 training sessions around the world, and has targeted holding approximately 25 training sessions in key ports across the US until the end of the year.

The coming months promise to bring just as much effective collaboration and education around anticounterfeiting. In September, the IACC will be a partner in Interpol’s annual International Law Enforcement IP Crime Conference held in Dubai. This will be the second year in which the IACC has partnered with Interpol and Underwriters Laboratories (UL) to bring educational and networking opportunities to organisations in both the public and private sectors. In October, the IACC and UL, in partnership with Interpol, will be co-hosting the Latin America Regional Brand Protection Summit in Orlando, Florida. At the summit, the IACC is set to release a new, multilingual version of its law enforcement training app, which has been refined based on feedback from the Latin American IP audience. The app will now be available in Spanish and Portuguese. Additionally, in its effort to continue engagement in Asia, specifically China, the IACC plans to meet with Chinese government officials in November to exchange the most upto-date information and best IP practices. In 2019, the IACC will be celebrating a significant milestone, its fortieth anniversary. Since 1979, the organisation has stayed true to its mission of advocating for brand protection around the globe. What began as a small organisation comprised of just a handful of member companies has evolved into the leading voice against counterfeiting and piracy. Looking ahead to the next 40 years, the IACC will continue its collaborative approach to explore innovative solutions and uncover new paths to defeat counterfeiting.

Vice president, chief of staff IACC

In June, Barchiesi traveled to Europe to speak at the 2018 Global Sustainability Network in Vatican City. There, he called attention to the use of forced labour in manufacturing counterfeits, as well as the broader connections between IP crimes and transnational organised crime.

Looking forward

Candice Li-Uzoigwe

Curacao’s prime minister, Eugene Rhuggenaath, to solidify the country’s partnership with the IACC, to advance Curacao’s fight against counterfeiting and to reinforce the vital role that IP protection plays in economies around the world.

Feature · ECTA

Local and international Sozos-Christos Theodoulou describes ECTA’s recent efforts, which includes a renewed focus on thought leadership in Europe During the European Communities Trade Mark Association (ECTA) 2018 Annual Conference in Athens, Greece, ECTA had the privilege to nominate ex-EU Intellectual Property Office executive director, and current European Patent Office president, António Campinos, as an honourary member of ECTA. I was elected as president of ECTA for the term of 2018 to 2020, while Ruta Olmane’s term as president ended after having served in the management committee for a term of six years.

US, South America, Asia, and Africa. Some 33 percent of the delegates attended from non-European countries, demonstrating that ECTA’s recognition expands way beyond the European borders. The theme of this year’s conference, ‘Gods in Transit: IP at the Crossroads of Great Civilisations’, was reflected in the professional programme of the conference.

Anette Rasmussen, from Denmark, was elected as the first vice president and Mladen Vukmir, from Croatia, was elected as the second vice president.

Three workshops preceding the conference on 13 June were dedicated to plain packaging in the industry, exchange of best practices between small family law firms, and demonstration of new IP tools and statistics of the EU Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO).

Carolin Kind, from Germany, and László Bérczes, from Hungary, continue in their roles as secretary general and treasurer of the association, respectively.

On 14 and 15 June, various sessions were held, including an update on Brexit, hot topics in anti-counterfeiting, and analysis on EU copyright reform.

Gergely Dzsinich was appointed as ECTA’s strategy and communication officer in March.

The annual conference

The ECTA daily newsletter provided recent professional updates and conference related on-site news for the delegates on every day of the event. The ECTA bulletin comprised of interviews, articles, and case law reviews.

This year, the ECTA Annual Conference was attended by more than 800 attendees from all over Europe, the

In 2019, the ECTA Annual Conference will take place in the Edinburgh International Conference Centre between 26 and

14 IPPro: The Annual

ECTA Âˇ Feature Position papers Between June 2017 and June 2018, ECTA, with the active assistance of its committees, issued several position papers: June 2017: ECTA commented on the EUIPO draft guidelines of work package legal reform. August 2017: ECTA submitted a position paper on the exchange of customs-related data with third countries. September 2017: ECTA commented on the EUIPO observatory draft work programme and the European Commission communication on reform recommendations for regulation in professional services. October 2017: ECTA commented on the draft second edition of the WIPO examination guidelines concerning the classification of goods and services in international applications. February 2018: ECTA position paper on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the council 29 June. In 2020, the ECTA Annual Conference will be held in Copenhagen, Denmark.

The future

on copyright in the Digital Single Market, comments on articles three and 13. March 2018: ECTA published joint statement regarding the negotiations concerning the exit of the UK particularly

All of the events and position papers take place on the European level, however, both the management committee and council members actively voice ECTA positions to international and local authorities, as well. ECTA will, with the help of its professional staff in Brussels as well as its council and committee members, continue to be an active and important stakeholder in EU IP.

with regard to trademarks and designs. April 2018: ECTA produced several position papers on: Free trade zones in non-EU countries: general recommendations, best practices, and guidelines. The dependency of international trademarks on a national basic application or registration.

President ECTA

Sozos-Christos Theodoulou

The introduction of a non-use central attack for international trademark registrations. The introduction of a common electronic filing portal. In May 2018, ECTA produced a position paper on WHOIS. The position papers and comments are available for ECTA members under the member areaâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;activities and position papers sections of the ECTA website: www.ecta.org. ECTA also continues to actively participate in Brexit discussions.

Promoting the UK and best practice Kristina Grinkina of CIPA runs through an eventful year, which saw CIPA challenge Brexit confusion, and secure continued participation in the UPC In the past year, the Chartered Institute of Patent Attorneys (CIPA) has worked tirelessly to show that Brexit will not affect the status or influence of the UK’s chartered patent attorneys. We have continued our lobbying activities both at home and abroad, and have further strengthened relationships with our sister institutes across the world. CIPA has also submitted detailed responses to a number of formal consultations to influence intellectual property policy.

International influence CIPA’s international liaison committee, together with CIPA’s officers and members, have hosted meetings and organised events both in the UK and abroad to share best practice, deepen the bonds of friendship and promote the UK profession in our key markets. CIPA has hosted visits from a number of international organisations and sister institutes from the US, Korea, Japan and China, and has also travelled to meet with colleagues in Australia, New Zealand and Malaysia. In September 2017, CIPA hosted a delegation from the Korean Patent Attorney Association (KPAA), where the effects of Brexit, the Unified Patent Court and the most recent and significant intellectual property cases were discussed. KPAA presented a seminar to CIPA members on Korean IP law and practice, including litigation, designs, and patent and trade mark infringement. In the same month, CIPA hosted a delegation from the China-Britain Business Council, consisting of representatives from leading Chinese firms. They discussed the practical application of IP law and practice in China and shared best practice at a jointly hosted UK-China IP Workshop held at CIPA’s offices in Central London. CIPA delegates also travelled to meet with the New Zealand Institute of Patent Attorneys and the Institute of Patent and Trade Mark Attorneys of Australia. A range of topics were covered including Brexit, recent case law, and the UK’s increasing popularity as a venue for IP dispute resolution. In November, CIPA’s immediate past president Tony Rollins led a delegation to Shanghai and Beijing with the UK Intellectual Property Office to help the UK Government improve co-operation on IP

16 IPPro: The Annual

initiatives in China. CIPA’s international liaison committee chairman, Richard Mair, travelled to Seoul to represent the CIPA president at a meeting of presidents from various leading patent attorney institutes from around the world. The meeting committed the patent attorney profession to assist with further development of the global IP system and to protect IP rights arising out of the fourth Industrial Revolution. In April this year, Mair also lead a delegation to Malaysia, where they participated in a round table discussion with the Malaysian IP Association. More recently, in June, colleagues from the American IP Law Association (AIPLA) visited CIPA for an IP Inclusive breakfast meeting followed by a round table discussion, featuring talks on litigation options by Justice Henry

CIPA · Feature Carr and other current UK patent and design issues. A seminar by AIPLA on US IP law followed in the afternoon.

Events CIPA’s Annual Congress drew record attendance of more than 160 delegates to Glaziers Hall in Central London in September 2017. The attendees listened to keynote speeches by Heli Pihlajamaa, director of patent law at the European Patent Office (EPO), and Tim Moss, CEO at the UK IP Office (UKIPO). A number of popular sessions were delivered on topics including the EPO, advocacy technique and tips, a review of the Lambert Toolkit, Competition Law, patents, the UPC, and litigation. One month later, at CIPA’s 135th Annual General Meeting, Stephen Jones succeeded Tony Rollins as president of CIPA, and Julia Florence was elected as the new vice president. Jones said that his priorities during his term would be to continue CIPA’s work in areas of policy and education, international harmonisation, and to promote diversity in the profession.

In April this year, CIPA was once again partner to The Times’ Raconteur special edition on IP. Various CIPA fellows and associates were quoted across a number of the articles. Chartered patent attorney and member of CIPA’s media and PR committee, Peter Arrowsmith, contributed an opinion piece on how the patent system must change to keep pace with the rise of artificial intelligence. Finally, in June 2018, patent administrators from across Europe and beyond attended our seminar on European Patent Office (EPO) procedures. The joint CIPA/EPO seminar in London was attended by 65 patent administrators from Saudi Arabia, Romania, the Netherlands, Germany and Denmark. Laurence BrüningPetit, EPO head of patent law, Sabine Menrath, EPO procedural expert in formalities and formalities expert Debby de Brouwer of Grip IP Services explained best practices on a variety of administrative issues.

Feature · CIPA

CIPA has supported the technical consultation on minimum standards on the EU Trade Secrets Directive (EU) 2016/943, specifically on the regulations which will transpose the directive into UK law. CIPA fully supported the intention of the directive, which is to provide minimum standards for measures and procedures that trade secret holders should be able to rely on in the event of unlawful acquisition, use or disclosure of their trade secrets.

Ratification of the UPC After many years of lobbying and doing everything possible to assist the government to move towards ratifying the UPC, CIPA’s presidential team was present at the House of Commons on World IP Day, 26 April 2018, for the announcement by IP minister, Sam Gyimah, that the UK had ratified the UPC Agreement. CIPA president Stephen Jones welcomed the move, saying that the UPC would benefit businesses and that the UK would be able to continue to contribute fully despite Brexit, as the UPC would be an international court and not an EU institution.

Brexit In the New Year, CIPA launched an animated video, which explained that European patent work will be unaffected by Brexit because the EPO is not an EU institution. The video was shared with key stakeholders across the world to show them why they should continue to engage with UK-based patent attorneys with confidence. This “business as usual, despite Brexit” message was also promoted by ex EPO president, Benoît Battistelli, after he met Jones and colleagues at the EPO in January in Munich. The EPO released a statement following the meeting with the CIPA team, stating that Brexit would have no effect on the UK’s membership of the EPO, and that European patent attorneys based in the UK will continue to represent applicants before the EPO following the UK’s exit from the EU.

18 IPPro: The Annual

Other promotional initiatives CIPA has helped the UKIPO to create IP Tutor Plus, a suite of teaching materials aimed at giving students the knowledge to engage with the IP system. IP Tutor Plus will be delivered as a lecture to law, business and accounting, science, technology, engineering and mathematics, creative, and humanities students by either lecturers, or visiting chartered patent or trade mark attorneys. The aim of the materials is to educate future leaders about the importance of protecting their IP and to ensure that IP protection is not overlooked at the conception of a business. In April this year, IP Inclusive, in association with CIPA, the Chartered Institute of Trademark Attorneys, and headline sponsor Dehns, launched Careers in Ideas, an initiative to assist those considering a career in IP. At the launch event, a suite of new resources were showcased to encourage greater diversity in the IP sector. Chief executive of the UKIPO, Tim Moss, welcomed the initiative, saying that more diversity in the IP professions would contribute to a stronger IP system and encourage competition, innovation and growth. Finally, CIPA’s hard work was recognised at Memcom 2018, the leading conference and awards event for the UK’s membership sector, when our head of media and public affairs, Neil Lampert, won an award for outstanding achievement. At the same event, IP Inclusive received an award for the best equality or diversity campaign.

Communications officer CIPA

CIPA has submitted a number of consultation responses in an effort to influence decisions on IP policy in the UK and abroad. CIPA’s patents committee submitted comments on the Chinese State Intellectual Property Office consultation on proposals for accelerated examination of patent proceedings. The consultation considered both accelerated prosecution and re-examination/invalidation matters. We also contributed to the the IP (Unjustified Threats) Act, which was passed at the end of last year, through the submission of a number of written consultation responses and written evidence to the House of Lords.

In March this year, CIPA welcomed the announcement by the government that the UK had joined the Hague Agreement for industrial designs. UK businesses previously had access to the Hague Agreement through EU’s membership, but after Brexit, that would no longer have been the case. Members of CIPA’s copyright and design committee worked closely with the UKIPO to help make the UK’s membership a reality.

Kristina Grinkina

Influencing policy

Feature · IPzen

Blockchain and IP: an emerging technology IPzen’s Emmanuel Harrar runs through the potential applications of blockchain in the intellectual property industry Special thanks to Hajar Malekian, PhD in law, BSc in software engineering

What is blockchain?

Advantages

Blockchain is a secure and transparent technology for storage and transmission of information with no centralised control body.

High security is an important benefit of blockchain. The technology offers more security guarantees than a centralised system. Transactions among participating members of blockchain networks are encrypted. In addition, any data stored in blockchain is certified and timestamped. The recorded data can be neither modified nor deleted, however, everyone can read it. In addition, given the fact that blockchain is based on fool-proof mathematical calculations, blockchain certificates would be valid anywhere. Using a blockchain service saves time, as blockchain transactions are ultrafast. Finally, and most importantly, the digital footprint (hash) associated with intellectual property is the only element of communication, and it ensures data confidentiality.

By submitting a document to blockchain a unique identifier called a digital fingerprint or a hash is generated on the basis of complex mathematical calculations performed by miners (validators parts of a blockchain network). A certificate containing the generated number can then be issued to protect a related right. Since blockchain is a peer-to-peer system, it could technically replace trusted third party.

Using blockchain for IP management IP refers to certain creations such as artistic and literary works, names, symbols, designs, and inventions. It includes copyrights, trademarks, patents, industrial designs and geographical indications. Protection of IP can be simplified and strengthened by blockchain service. ••

Figure 1- blockchain There are two main types of blockchain services: public and private blockchain. Public blockchain is an open source and permissionless technology that allows anyone to participate and benefit. However, private blockchain is not open source, accessible only to identified and authorised network members.

20 IPPro: The Annual

Blockchain for ‘proof of creation’ and ‘proof of creation process’: An important issue in protecting IP rights against counterfeiting is providing a ‘proof’. Different types of proofs include proof of authorship, proof of ownership, proof of authenticity, proof of integrity, proof of originality of the work, proof of content, proof of creation date, usage proof, proof of creation process, and finally, proof of counterfeiting. Blockchain can supply all the above-mentioned types of proofs. It is especially useful for managing intangible assets. Establishing a proof via blockchain is a secure, simple, quick, and inexpensive task. It lets IP right owners obtain a proof of creation that can serve them in case of a litigation. This represents a new probative approach that can guarantee an effective protection of IP rights.

IPzen · Feature

�

Blockchain for documenting infringement: blockchain can also be used to document and date an IP right infringement, as well as to trace an infringement especially in the online environment. In order to do so, a simple screenshot related to the infringement can be submitted to the blockchain system.

�

Blockchain for distribution of copyright via smart contracts: Blockchain service can be used as an effective solution for copyright distribution especially when there are multiple copyright owners.

�

It can clearly identify rights owners and allocate their copyrights. Through a smart contract feature available on blockchain, one can make an instant payment to copyright owners by purchasing a licence, according to predefined conditions.

�

Blockchain for creation and enforcement of IP agreements: Another blockchain benefit is the ability to create and enforce IP agreements such as licence agreements and exclusive distribution networks by means of smart contracts. Thus, a real-time payment to IP rights owners could be provided.

Blockchain for ensuring product traceability: blockchain can be used to verify authenticity of products. It could represent an essential tool for identifying fake products on the market. By registering in blockchain each stage of product’s life cycle, from manufacturing to introduction on the market, full and unalterable traceability is ensured. This possibility could be of interest to many IP rights intensive industries, including the pharmaceutical, automotive, luxury goods and consumer goods industries, where product traceability is essential for addressing the product counterfeit concern.

While many company’s assets are intangible, IP rights are critical to the survival of the business. As indicated above, blockchain represents some significant benefits for IP. Blockchain can help to simplify the management of intellectual property assets and protect them more effectively against any potential litigation. Besides the high level of security ensured by blockchain, the financial burden related to the protection of IP would be significantly reduced. Therefore, it makes it possible to protect the entire creative process more effectively.

Founder IPzen

For these types of IP rights, blockchain would not present a particular benefit. However, blockchain service could be used to prove “genuine use” of trademark during its life cycle. It would also help to better manage trademark rights, as trademark usage must be demonstrated upon trademark renewal in intellectual property office.

�

Emmanuel Harrar

Blockchain could also be an interesting option for establishing a proof for unregistered IP rights, such as copyrights. In fact, in some countries, including France, some IP rights such as trademarks, patents, and industrial designs need to be registered by an appropriate office for IP in order to be protected.

A broad focus Sarah Matheson of AIPPI describes how the association’s global nature gives it a broad outlook, as she looks to the future of the association Barney Dixon reports

�

What has AIPPI been focusing on over the past year? Being a global association with over 9,000 members, covering 125 jurisdictions, and dedicated to the development and improvement of all legal regimes for the protection of intellectual property, means the International Association for the Protection of IP’s (AIPPI) focus in any given year is a broad one. AIPPI has enjoyed being an invited observer at recent meetings on the project of the Hague Conference on private international law to develop a convention on the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments. A key question for all who use the IP system is whether IP rights should be included within the scope of the convention at all, and if so, on what basis? In preparation for a diplomatic conference, anticipated for 2019, AIPPI is undertaking a study to develop its position on this important topic. A key focus for AIPPI every year is the work on its study questions, which lead to AIPPI Resolutions, the official position of AIPPI on any given topic. By a rigorous process, four topics for detailed study are selected annually on the basis of their importance to the IP community, whether because relevant laws vary between jurisdictions, existing laws could be improved, or an absence of regulation creates business uncertainty. Each question is analysed by our national and regional groups, then debated by experts as to whether harmonisation is desirable and what the law in question should be, culminating in adoption by AIPPI’s executive committee. By reason of its global membership, an AIPPI Resolution ultimately represents a balanced consensus view. Over the last year, AIPPI has been studying the following key IP issues with the aim of adopting resolutions at the 2018 AIPPI World Congress in Cancun, Mexico:

22 IPPro: The Annual

Conflicting patent applications: Different approaches to the treatment of an application that conflicts with an earlierfiled (but not yet published) application currently leads to claims being considered patentable in one jurisdiction but unpatentable in another.

�

Registrability of 3D trademarks: Despite many jurisdictions permitting the registration of trademarks comprised of the 3D shape of goods or packaging, registrability of such marks continues to present challenges to trademark owners.

�

Partial designs: Copying of a part or a portion of a design of a product may not infringe a registered design right, making it difficult to protect a part of an article without a system of protection for partial designs.

�

Joint liability for IP infringement: The lack of harmonisation as to liability for infringement resulting from the acts of more than one party gives rise to an imbalance between appropriate relief for the right holder and proper allocation of responsibility for the relevant acts.

AIPPI is active throughout any given year in contributing to external consultations, in hosting or speaking at seminars and preparing papers, often through the work of its dedicated Standing Committees. Highlights of the last 12 months on various topics include: �

Hosting a session at the World Trade Organisation Public Forum 2017 entitled ‘IP and other e-commerce related legal frameworks—harmonisation as a means of inclusive trade’.

�

Celebrating World IP Day by running a seminar hosted by the EU IP Office (EUIPO) in Alicante entitled ‘trademark, designs and more—AIPPI at the EUIPO’.

�

Hosting a side event at the 36th Session of the World IP Organisation’s (WIPO) Standing Committee on copyright and related rights.

AIPPI · Interview

�

Speaking at the China IP Forum on the issue of remuneration for employee inventors.

�

Contributions to consultations including the EUIPO consultation on draft design guidelines, various WIPO consultations on the patent cooperation treaty system, the European Commission consultation on measures to improve the effectiveness of the fight against illegal content online, and the consultation of the Supreme People’s Court of China on its guidelines concerning patent cases.

�

Numerous studies and papers covering such issues as border remedies with respect to counterfeit goods, criminal protection of IP, the requirement of indicating the source/country of origin of genetic resources and traditional knowledge in patent applications, access to medicines and access to prior art documents in standard setting organisations by patent and trademark offices.

Another highlight is AIPPI’s ongoing collaboration with Wolters Kluwer to produce the ‘AIPPI Law Series’. The 4th volume—to be launched at the Cancun Congress—is entitled ‘genuine use of trademarks’. AIPPI members from

Sarah Matheson

Secretary general AIPPI

Interview · AIPPI key jurisdictions have authored chapters exploring the central role of the use requirement in trademark law.

What are some of the key challenges facing IP and the IP community around the globe? Building respect for IP and continuing education about the value of IP is a constant challenge. As the IP roadmap published last year by the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) points out, “there is an urgent need to communicate on IP issues with the general public so that political objections to IP initiatives are not based on a lack of understanding”. The balanced approach to the IP system that AIPPI promotes, and the position it formulates, aim to ensure that IP laws are improved for all stakeholders, not just rightsholders. The ICC’s IP roadmap has identified a number of ways in which IP is evolving that align with a number of recent and current AIPPI projects. For example, the identification of innovation as ‘a global game’ is reflected in AIPPI’s recent focus on the implications of multinational inventions, for example, where joint inventors of an invention reside in different countries. This is an increasingly common situation due to the prevalence of international corporations having geographically distributed research and development groups, multinational joint venture projects, and international corporate/academic collaborations. AIPPI’s Resolution on “inventorship of multinational inventions” (Rio de Janeiro, 2015) and its current study on inventor remuneration, are directed to addressing the problems that the present lack of harmonisation creates for employee inventors and employers alike. The ICC IP roadmap also points out that new technologies are transforming IP management and enforcement. As part of its comprehensive professional development programme at the Cancun Congress, there are sessions designed to unlock the mysteries of artificial intelligence (AI) and blockchain. A session on AI will include a technical overview setting out some fundamental concepts of AI, along with some issues that are commonly misunderstood.

exploring what IP issues might arise. AIPPI also has been increasingly focussing on another trend identified in the ICC IP roadmap—‘company data and trade secrets are more valuable than ever’. A session at the Sydney Congress explored a hypothetical case of trade secret theft across the globe and explaining how the challenge of protecting company secrets in a digital environment would play out in their respective jurisdictions. In response to these challenges, AIPPI has also recently set up a standing committee on trade secrets.

What is AIPPI working on for the next year? What are some of the association’s goals? AIPPI’s executive committee has already voted on the study questions it will prepare for debate at the 2019 AIPPI World Congress in London. These are: �

Plausibility: Despite there being no requirement for plausibility in legislation or any IP treaty, this study will seek to identify the boundaries of this evolving requirement which is now evoked in relation to the sufficiency, inventive step, clarity and utility requirements of patent law.

�

Consumer survey evidence: This study will explore whether survey evidence may be used at all and the value to be attached to it, including such issues as admissibility, restrictions on use, precedings where such evidence may be used and where the counterevidence is admissible.

�

Copyright in artificially generated works: Following the Cancun panel session on AI, this study will focus on whether the classic principles of copyright can or should be applied to artificially generated works, or whether something new and different is required.

�

IP damages for acts other than sales: Non-sales infringements with no associated act of sale can involve complex damages analyses and different considerations for different types of infringing acts.

The focus will then move to the implications for IP rights. For example, best practices for protecting AI–related inventions, issues surrounding ownership of AI-created works and issues for enforcement of AI–related IP rights.

AIPPI aims to ensure that its annual work programme and the work of its standing committee is maintained, while continuously aiming for improved quality and impact.

The session on blockchain and cryptocurrencies aims to cut through the propaganda to improve the IP practitioner’s understanding of blockchain and cryptocurrencies,

In the coming year, AIPPI will also be looking for opportunities to submit amicus briefs in national and regional tribunals, where appropriate.

24 IPPro: The Annual

Protect Your Intellectual Property Worldwide RWS is the worldâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s leading expert in intellectual property (IP), legal translations, foreign patent filing, patent search and database services.

Ensure top quality. Cut costs and save resources. Simplify and streamline.

Patent Translations

PCT National Phase Entry

Direct Filing

European Validation

Patent Searches

www.rws.com

Feature · AIPLA

Educate and engage AIPLA president Myra McCormack shares the association’s move to digital, as well as its efforts in clarifying patent subject matter eligibility It is hard to imagine that it has been almost a year since I took on the role of president of the American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA). I have been a member of AIPLA for over 23 years, and I am so proud of all the great work that this association does. We have a new director at the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), Andrei Iancu, and it has been my pleasure to speak with him several times this year. I believe he is steering the USPTO in a good direction for patent and trademark practitioners. The USPTO awarded the 10 millionth patent this summer, a landmark event that was highly celebrated by the office. While we celebrated this patent for its landmark chronology, we should also see each patent as a reflection of the growth and importance of IP in America. A strong patent system is incredibly important to our economy. Through reliance on their patent, a patent owner can harvest investment, manage company expansion and create job growth. The ability to rely on a patent once granted is key. I don’t have to tell you that the history of the USPTO reflects the history of our country, extending at least back to the time that the foundational rights for patents, trademarks and copyrights were included in the US Constitution. For more than 120 years of that history, AIPLA has been a respected voice in the IP law community and has continued this over the last 12 months. My presidential term has focused on two goals. The first goal is to ensure that AIPLA is providing its members with the products and services that they need to support their careers. To that end, we undertook a holistic review and update of our educational offerings to encourage increased AIPLA participation at the local level and create new opportunities outside of stated meetings. The second goal is to continue

26 IPPro: The Annual

raising AIPLA’s visibility on the international IP scene. I’m proud to say that the association has made significant strides in these areas.

Holistic approach to educational offerings AIPLA’s mission is to be an innovator, a powerful advocate, and a visible global leader in IP law through our commitment to education, outreach, member services, and advocacy. With that in mind, we have taken a critical look at the association’s educational offerings and have found new avenues to provide value to our members. We recently launched a podcast series which will expand with time. Our podcast offerings will include: �

Deep Dive: an analysis-focused podcast series that takes a deep dive into AIPLA’s best online programmes and webinars. Each episode goes into even more depth than its accompanying webinar and responds to member questions.

�

Dicta: a debate-focused podcast series that explores every corner of IP. We bring together IP professionals to debate the pros and cons of important cases, legislation, and other noteworthy events.

�

IP Casebriefs: a news-based podcast series that briefly covers current events. This short podcast uses a one-onone interview format.

�

Pathways: a career-based podcast series providing insights and best practice tips from various experts. These podcasts touch on a variety of topics to provide tips to IP practitioners in all phases of their careers.

AIPLA · Feature

Furthermore, website users will soon notice something different at www.aipla.org. We are in the process of making some dramatic improvements to our website and want to thank members for their input to provide an even more userfriendly interface. We will make it easier to access the items you need, while making it more fun and intuitive to keep you updated on news, advocacy, and our events. The website will better share who we are and what we do. We have also added features to improve the content, look and availability of our website on a variety of devices because we know that is how our members work. The website is streamlined and improved to allow easier navigation. Finally, we’ve added some personalisation elements so that each user can see and discover what matters to them most. This summer we also launched AIPLA INNOVATE, a special compendium of articles written by and for AIPLA members. Designed as an online publication, INNOVATE features magazine-like articles on a wide variety of topics in IP law today.

Going local: public outreach and networking initiatives This holistic approach has further led us to incorporate several innovations to our existing offerings, such as new and expanded networking opportunities outside of our stated meetings. AIPLA is a community of practitioners, and despite advances that allow us to receive educational offerings remotely, I believe that there will always be a desire for those practitioners to meet and engage with one another. But budgets can be tight and time short, so an important goal for the organisation is to bolster our outreach and encourage AIPLA participation at the local level.

The association has made local networking opportunities more plentiful by supporting our existing committees in their efforts to expand their offerings of local events. We have bolstered our relationships with local IP associations across the country, and we have travelled regionally to visit law firms and companies to learn how AIPLA can better serve our members. On 11 April 2018, AIPLA joined forces with the US Chamber of Commerce in Washington DC to present the programme ‘Investing in American Innovation: Is the US Patent Environment Promoting or Limiting Investment?’ Iancu featured as keynote speaker and maintained that the dialogue on the IP system should focus on the remarkable and lifechanging innovations attributable to our US system rather than on flaws or abuses in the patent system. On 26 April 2018, in celebration of World IP Day, AIPLA’s Public Education Committee organised more than 14 programmes in 14 different cities around the US, including an event at the USPTO and a celebration on Capitol Hill. This year’s theme, ‘Powering Change: Women in Innovation and Creativity’, recognised the significant contributions of women in the field of innovation and creativity. I have personally taken part in many events at AIPLA that promote networking across our membership and that support a variety of demographics. We want to make sure that travel is not a prerequisite for member satisfaction in this organisation. In addition to the local events discussed above, AIPLA offers world-class education at your desktop, and later this year we are implementing our first-ever virtual career fair. All these initiatives are to improve efforts of bringing AIPLA to our members.

Feature · AIPLA Coordinating AIPLA’s presence here and abroad

�

Over the past year, AIPLA continued its longstanding efforts in advocacy, both in the US and abroad.

WIPO at the 28th Session of the Committee of Experts for the Nice Agreement.

�

Locally we continue our advocacy in the courts. We filed briefs in a number of significant cases, and so far we have been on the winning side in each case.

The 16th Session of the Working Group on the Legal Development of the Madrid System.

�

These include Oil States Energy Services v Greene’s Energy Group, WesternGeco v ION Geophysical, Nantkwest v Matal, In re Silver, Tex. Supreme Court.

The 36th Session of the Intergovernmental Committee on IP and Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge and Folklore.

�

The 7th Session of Working Group on the Legal Development of the Hague System for the International Registration of Industrial Designs.

AIPLA’s initial legislative proposal, released May 2017, called for a statutory amendment to clarify that eligibility is confined to the categories already listed in section 101, and that other issues treated as matters of eligibility are handled within the requirements for patentability found in sections 102, 103, and 112 of the Patent Act. More recently, AIPLA and the Intellectual Property Owners Association reached an agreement on a joint legislative proposal to amend section 101. We are pleased that a number of local associations have agreed with our joint proposal. Internationally, AIPLA continues to contribute to the goal of procedural patent harmonisation as part of the Industry IP5 and to discussions around the longer-term goal of substantive harmonisation as part of the Industry Trilateral. It was my pleasure to participate in the Industry IP5 meeting this year. AIPLA participated in numerous stakeholder meetings across the globe with the heads of the trilateral offices, IP5 heads of offices, TM5 and Group B+, and has attended meetings at the World IP Organization (WIPO) as a recognised Observer. Our presence at these meetings ensures that US IP practitioners’ interests are well represented internationally. To that end, AIPLA members represented us at:

28 IPPro: The Annual

I entered this office with a firm belief that AIPLA is a great organisation. I joined AIPLA as a member in 1995 and have been an active member of AIPLA for most of my career. I was active within committees, at the committee leadership level, the board level and now the executive committee. I have witnessed the passion and professionalism of the association’s leadership, staff, and members, and I’m proud to say that these same qualities continue today. The association believes in the importance of IP as a driver of American commerce and industry. Strength comes from our membership. I hope that AIPLA’s members will continue to be engaged and educate policymakers to provide world-class continuing legal education and opportunities for engrossing dialogue around intellectual property worldwide.

President American Intellectual Property Association

I have been particularly pleased with our efforts to keep the dialogue moving forward on the patentable subject matter puzzle surrounding section 101 of the Patent Act. As you might well know, following a string of recent Supreme Court rulings, patent owners have become increasingly frustrated by the lack of clarity over subject matter eligibility.

AIPLA continues to submit comment letters, addressing, for example, China’s Supreme People’s Court draft regulations relating to patents, and various Japan Patent Office proposals relating to standard essential patents. What I have learned is that you need to be at the table to make a difference—and AIPLA is at the table.

Myra McCormack

We also filed in Booking.com v USPTO, a pending Fourth Circuit case construing trademark statutory language on USPTO attorneys’ fees that is virtually identical to the patent statutory language construed in Nantkwest.

+33 (0) 1 84 17 45 32 contact@ipzen.com www.ipzen.com

Case Management Manage files online

Trademark Management

Track activities

Access your portfolios online

Attach documents

Automatically calculate deadlines

Share Information

Integrate trademark data easily

Integrated Invoicing Generate invoices directly from your files

Domain Name Management Manage your domain names online

Consolidate files into a invoice

Track deadlines

Track payments

Sort domain names by category Check availability online

Deadline Tracking View all deadlines in a snap Select people and delegate task

Watch Services Trademarks Domain names Social media

YOUR IP SOFTWARE SOLUTION IN THE CLOUD

A new beginning Bill Elkington, president and chair of the Licensing Executives Society, describes the latest for the association In 1965, the Licensing Executives Society (LES) began as a diverse group of technology and patent licensing people with a common interest in learning from one another and teaching others about the field of licensing. They began with the big idea that licensing is a profession with associated best practices that should be developed, learned, used to the benefit of the professionals involved, to the advantage of the organisations they represent, and, finally, to the benefit of society at large. The founders of LES believed licensing could serve innovators by putting the fruits of their innovation into the hands of those who would help that innovation flourish. They envisioned the profession of licensing as supporting and enhancing the innovation economy. Over the years, LES has remained true to this mission, but it lately has begun to expand its concept of what the profession is and what it is in the best position to serve. Yes, licensing continues to be an element of how LES defines itself, but more recently, there has been a growing recognition within LES of the importance of business management functions—in addition to licensing—that figure importantly in the creation, preservation and harvesting of value from innovation. And this has come about as the diversity and perspectives of LES members themselves have expanded into intellectual capital management areas outside of licensing. There has been an increasing awareness that licensing is an aspect of a bigger idea. Many believe that there is a profession of intellectual capital management that should be defined, developed, understood and supported. It is commonplace that since the 1980s and 90s, 80 percent or more of many companies’ equity value is in its intellectual capital. Yet today, in many companies, intellectual capital is managed in an ad hoc way, with each part of the organisation more or less on its own to figure out how to contribute to its piece of intellectual capital management. With so much at stake, shouldn’t companies’ intellectual capital be managed systematically, through a coherent set of business policies, processes, tools, training and metrics?

30 IPPro: The Annual

At a strategy meeting in July 2017, the LES board realised that no professional organisation has yet to posit the existence of something called the intellectual capital management profession. Further, it concluded that no professional organisation has set out to define what best practices look like in intellectual capital management. And at that meeting, the LES board decided that LES should set out to take on that role. At this juncture, it is important to point out that the profession under discussion is not the intellectual property management profession but rather the emerging intellectual capital management field. A very great deal of the valuable ‘i-stuff’ that enterprises develop, manage and employ to create shareholder value may not be protectable under the four bodies of IP law. As a result, a more expansive concept of the field is needed. For example, areas of intellectual capital that might not be protectable under IP law include business models, quality management systems, innovation management systems, business partnering processes, merger-acquisition-and-integration processes and the unique combinations of these and other business processes that give a company a differentiated set of operational and financially beneficial attributes. Just as it is difficult to conceive of a 21st century corporation of any size without a human resources department, 50 years from now, it will be difficult to imagine a corporation without an intellectual capital management department. This is where LES is going. LES’ vision is to connect and inspire the intellectual capital management community—to create that community by drawing a broad diversity of people involved in intellectual capital management to LES and providing them with lively and engaging content, thought-provoking collegial discussions, beneficial intellectual capital management standards and a comprehensive executive-quality curriculum. Part of the reason intellectual capital management is ad hoc in the 21st-century corporation is that there has been little

LES Âˇ Feature

academic research specifically tailored to ask and answer questions about the field. Few academics are looking at corporate governance using this particular lens. The result is that Master of Business Administration (MBA) students are barely aware of the possibilities of this field, much less of the best practices. Most MBA graduates see intellectual capital management as something the lawyers do, when in fact, it is something that they mostly do themselves. This lack of awareness and understanding carries over into the academic world where there are few courses available to help MBA students open their eyes to the study of intellectual capital management. Another reason why intellectual capital management is underdeveloped as a field is that there is no significant body of standards developed in the field.

This is changing, however. There are two significant initiatives here. The first is the work of the International Organisation for Standardisation in Technical Committee 279, â&#x20AC;&#x153;Innovation Management Standardâ&#x20AC;?. The second is the work of LES Standards, which was accredited by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) in early 2017. The American National Standards Institute (ANSI) is the unique accrediting organization in the US for voluntary consensus standards development organisations. LES has joined the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, American Society for Testing and Materials, Society of Automotive Engineers, American Medical Association, and about 250 other ANSI-accredited standards development organisations. The ANSI accreditation assures participants and potential standards users that these organisations develop standards in a fair, balanced, due-process-driven way, mindful of the needs of all affected constituencies.

Feature · LES There have been five committees hard at work in LES Standards for the past couple of years:

Intangible assets in the boardroom

IP licensing

IP valuation

IP protection in the supply chain

IP brokerage

The first four are planning to go through formal commenting and balloting on their draft standards by the end of 2018. Also, four more standards committees are just now forming:

ISO/TC 279 innovation management

FRAND licensing

Bill Elkington, president and chair, LES At Rockwell Collins, Bill Elkington provides leadership in all the dimensions of intellectual capital management, and has done so for the past 15 years. On the LES USA and Canada Board, Elkington functions as chair and president. He has led the LES Standards initiative, whose purpose is to develop business process and management framework standards for the field of intellectual capital management. He chaired and cochaired the LES IP100—an invitation-only conference— for a number of years. He also is a member of the Aerospace Industries Association, IP Committee, where he works on education and policy issues with colleagues from other aerospace and defense companies, specifically regarding software and data rights in Department of Defense contracting. He is a member of the government/industry Section 813 Panel, a panel authorised by Congress (in the National Defense Authorisation Act of 2016) to study the software and data rights laws and regulations in Department of Defense contracting and make recommendations for changes to them.

32 IPPro: The Annual

IP management for startups

Big data licensing

In some respects, as a professional field, intellectual capital management is where human capital management was 70 years ago when the American Society for Personnel Administration was first formed in 1948, the precursor to today’s Society for Human Resource Management, a professional organisation of 300,000 members in 165 countries.So in 2018, LES is at a new beginning, announcing its support for a new profession that encompasses licensing but that points considerably beyond licensing to the comprehensive and coherent governance of a corporation’s most valuable asset class—aside from its human capital—its intellectual capital. There is much to do, and we welcome all disciplines and perspectives in helping to define, develop and grow this exciting new field.

Feature · PIPCU

From strength to strength Detective inspector Nick Court runs through PIPCU’s 2018 successes and looks forward to 2019 The City of London Police’s Intellectual Property Crime Unit (PIPCU) has gone from strength to strength since the renewal of our funding in August 2017. In the past year, we’ve reached 50,000 website takedowns, seen a counterfeit airbag seller sentenced and seized over 2,000 suspected counterfeit items from a single house! None of this could have been possible without the support of our stakeholders. Funded by the UK IP Office (UKIPO), PIPCU is a specialist national police unit dedicated to protecting the UK industries that produce legitimate, high-quality physical goods and online, digital content from IP crime. PIPCU tackles counterfeiting and piracy that affects physical goods, with a focus on offences committed using an online platform. In August 2017, it was announced that we would receive a further £3.2 million from the UKIPO to fund the unit to June 2019.

There’s more at stake At the forefront of PIPCU’s work to protect the public is raising awareness of the latest crime trends and the media is an integral part of this. In September 2017, we launched our annual campaign, ‘there’s more at stake when it’s a fake’, warning consumers about the dangers of identity theft and fraud when purchasing counterfeit goods online. When buying items, people will part with personal details such as their address and financial information which allows fraudsters to set-up new websites selling counterfeit goods in their name. Between April 2016 and March 2017, Action Fraud, the national fraud and cyber reporting centre, hosted by the City of London Police, received over 15,000 reports linked to identity crime, which shows the extent of the growing problem. In addition, 400 victims have been contacted by PIPCU in the last two years to inform them that their identity is believed to have been stolen and used to open websites in their name after they had previously purchased counterfeit items online. It is essential that law enforcement limits the impact of fraud on vulnerable people. Those people who find they have handed their personal details to a fraudster are then vulnerable to fraud, it is our job to stop the fraud before it happens. Since 2013, PIPCU’s Operation Ashiko, which aims to combat websites selling counterfeits has taken down a total of 50,000

34 IPPro: The Annual

websites, this includes 22,084 clothing websites and 15,975 footwear websites, with 3,591 sites taken down for selling bags, accessories and jewellery.

PIPCU in action In May 2018, PIPCU officers seized over 2,000 items, including clothing, shoes and handbags in Manchester as part of its crackdown on counterfeit goods sellers on Facebook Marketplace. We visited addresses in the Manchester area on 22 and 23 May 2018 and seized 2,118 items from just one residential address which are believed to have left 55 brands out of pocket. Officers targeted people who were believed to have sold counterfeit goods on Facebook Marketplace. Officers were making sellers aware of the risks that these products pose to the people who buy them and highlighting the fact that this is a criminal offence. By targeting counterfeits at the point of sale, officers are able to limit the potential for these items reaching unwitting members of the public. However, in some cases the counterfeits do find their way on to online sales sites. These cases must be tackled with an investigation.

Caught and in court On 22 February 2018, Robert Czernik, 35, of Blackbird Close, Poole, Dorset was sentenced at Inner London Crown Court to two counts under Section 92 of the Trade Marks Act for selling fake airbags. In a report from Honda it was confirmed that the airbags sold by Czernik had not been produced to any recognised safety standard and might not activate correctly in a collision, therefore potentially causing serious or life threatening injuries. Over 190 airbag covers and a variety of airbag parts were seized in a search of his home on 18 February 2016, including mechanical springs and counterfeit airbag assemblies bearing the names of major brands. Detailed analysis by Honda confirmed that the airbags sold by Czernik were counterfeit.

PIPCU · Feature As a result, Czernik was charged on 16 February 2017 for selling goods likely to be mistaken for a registered trademark under the Trade Marks Act. A total of 28 brands, including Honda, Toyota, Mercedes Benz, Audi, and Skoda have been identified by PIPCU’s detectives as being affected and 680 people have been notified and advised to contact their car manufacturer to ensure their airbag is safe.

At the helm of the good ship PIPCU Any successful team needs a committed leader and this year we had the pleasure of being joined by Detective Chief Inspector Teresa Russell. DCI Russell has 25 years of policing experience and has lead a varied career. Starting out in the public order unit, her unit was engaged in tackling a series of anti-capitalism violent disorders in the 90s including a number of subsequent May Day protests. She spent a brief time formulating the City of London Cold Case Review team, before becoming the deputy coordinator for the Counter Terrorism Intelligence Unit South West, implementing the Government’s PREVENT strand of the counter terrorism strategy. On returning to the City as a Detective Inspector, DCI Russell was transferred to the Fraud Squad. There she created the highly successful Operation Broadway, a joint partnership disruption and awareness initiative tackling ‘boiler room’ frauds. She was promoted to Detective Chief Inspector in January 2016.

Looking forward In the coming year we are looking to work with Europol more closely to broaden PIPCU’s influence across Europe. We are also expanding Operation Creative and are working on new ways to take down websites alongside our work on the Infringing Website List. This is in addition to working with more regulators following the success of our work with the Gambling Commission. In the realm of hard counterfeit goods, we will be working to disrupt the larger sales at the top of the food chain and develop our intelligence using new methods.

Detective inspector Nick Court of the PIPCU has worked for the City of London Police for the past eight years, having started out at Essex Police as a Criminal Intelligence Analyst. He then joined the City Police as a Police Constable and after an attachment with the Home Office, returned to the city in 2014 as a Cyber Crime Supervisor. DCI Court joined PIPCU in 2017.

Bad faith IP litigation Unitalen’s Lei Zhao runs us through a recent case at the Yuhang district people’s court in Hangzhou city

Recently, the Yuhang district people’s court in Hangzhou city, Zhejiang province, made a new first-instance judgment in favor of Bayer Consumers Care AG against Qing Li (a Chinese individual) in an unfair competition infringement case. The court held that Li applied for plaintiff’s trademark in bad faith and maliciously filed complaints against the plaintiff, its wrongful acts constitute unfair competition and award the plaintiff economic loss of RMB 700,000 ($102,938). This case is the first time for Chinese courts to clarify and make a judgment against professional trademark squatters that the misconduct of trademark squatters constitute unfair competition and can be punished under the anti-unfair competition law. In July, the Chinese Trademark Office announced that China’s trademark applications still maintain continuous and rapid growth. In the first half of 2018, the total trademark filing number was 3.58 million, an increase of 55 percent. Up to the end of June 2018, China has 31.428 million trademark filings in total, 19.395 million accumulated registrations, 16.807 million valid registrations. China is the top filer of trademarks for 16 years in a row in the world. China has become an important force in promoting the growth of global trademark intellectual property rights. On the other hand, it costs only official fees RMB 300 ($44) to file a trademark in China and the term is 10 years if it is successfully registered. If some trademark registrations become popular in the future, it could be sold at a price of tens or even hundreds of times. Moreover, as China has been strengthening IP protection for years and the Chinese market is great of importance, some people treat trademark squatting as good “business opportunities” with low illegal cost and huge profit margin. As a result, bad faith applications have been dramatically increased. Some bad faith applicants file trademark applications for some brands, which are not registered yet

36 IPPro: The Annual

in China by the brand owners, or file similar trademarks to famous brands which already registered in China. In order to demand a high price and make more profits, some bad faith applicants very often take all possible legal actions, such as a lawsuit or complaint before online platform. Because they have trademark rights, sometimes they indeed could win in some actions, which will give more pressure to the real brand owners to purchase squatted trademarks at high price. The products involved in Bayer v Qing Li are Coppertone Ultra Guard and Coppertone Kids in the brand series of Coppertone of Bayer group. Established in 1944, Coppertone is a professional sunscreen cream product under Bayer group. After more than 70 years of continuous use and publicity, Coppertone enjoys very high popularity worldwide and is widely favoured and recognised by Chinese consumers. Bayer has also registered its Coppertone trademark in both English character and Chinese character in China. Li knew that the plaintiff had filed many trademarks for its Coppertone trademarks in both English characters and Chinese characters in China. Despite this Li filed trademark applications for the product packaging, which was designed by the third party entrusted by the plaintiff and was originally put into commercial use by the Bayer. Li obtained the trademark registration in 2016. Later, Li used the two registered trademark rights to launch large-scale and continuous complaints against Coppertone products sold on Taobao platform by distributors of Bayer, and provided removal services of its complaints to Coppertone product distributors if Li received payments. Due to Li unfair competition behavior, the plaintiff’s products involved in the case were taken down from the platform during

Unitalen · Feature

Li has never actually used the trademark in any way after the trademark has been approved for registration. Instead, he began to launch a large number of complaints on the Taobao platform after obtaining the registration. While initiating the complaint, Li made a “paid withdrawal” through QQ, Alibaba, and other channels. It can be seen that the purpose of the defendant’s trademark registration and complaint is to gain corresponding benefits rather than to truly safeguard its trademark right. Li repeatedly contacted the Bayer’s agent to ask the it to purchase the two trademarks at a high price. It can be seen that the defendant’s motive for trademark registration is not to use the trademark involved to carry out normal business activities, but to make profits through complaints, sales and other means. Over the years, Li applied for hundreds of trademarks involving multiple different categories of goods, using the same means as in this case, many of which were identical or similar to the patterns used on the packaging of goods of other brands.

Importance of the case First, this is the first successful case for the rights owners to attack professional trademark squatters under anti-unfair competition law. In particular, behavior of professional trademark squatters, such as registrations in bad faith, malicious complaint, sale in bad faith, hoarding trademarks and paid withdrawal of complaint, could be managed by anti-unfair competition law. Even though China is not a case law country, this case will be no doubt helpful to expand vision in dealing with similar cases. As we know that there are many professional trademark squatters in China, who are using same or similar model, such as registration in bad faith, malicious complaint, sale in bad faith, hoarding trademarks and paid withdrawal of complaint. Those people are making money by the way which are not based on honest labor for profit, but on the acquisition of others’ prior achievements and accumulated goodwill, which is a typical unearned behavior. Such acts of maliciously obtaining and exercising the trademark right through infringement of the prior rights of others violate the principle of good faith and disrupt the fair competition order in the market, and shall be deemed as unfair competition acts as stipulated in article two of the anti-unfair competition law. If professional trademark squatters could not make profits and will also undertake serious unfavourable legal consequence, then they will have no motive to apply for trademarks of other brand owners. As a result, it will also help to reduce the volume of new trademark applications, oppositions, invalidations and administrative litigations. Eventually, it will save judicial resources and create a healthy and fair market in China.

Partner Unitalen

Bayer group had repeatedly sent a letter to Li to clarify that it has prior copyright for the two trademarks registered by him, and the use of the two trademarks is reasonable and legal. Li should immediately stop the malicious nuisance and actively negotiate with the plaintiff to deal with the follow-up matters of the two trademarks. Li has been ignoring news, and insisted that Bayer bought the trademarks at a high price, otherwise the complaints will not stop. In this case, Bayer filed invalidation action against its registration, and initiated unfair infringement lawsuit against Li for its bad faith registration and malicious complaints on 31 October 2017 before Yuhang district people’s court. The court held that two trademarks registered by the Li is a major copy of the copyright created by the Bayer, it infringes Bayer’s prior copyright.

Meanwhile, according to the data provided by Taobao, Li made 2,605 complaints on the Taobao IP platform, involving 8 trademarks and 1,810 online stores. It can be seen that the defendant’s extensive trademark registration is not a normal business activity, but an obvious act of hoarding trademarks for profit.

Lei Zhao

the peak sales season, and the distributors were also demoted and punished with point penalty by the platform, which further led to the inability to carry out normal commercial production and operation activities. According to the data of Alibaba IP protection platform, Li filed 249 times complaints against the products involved, involving 121 distributors, and withdrew 19 times after complaining. Alibaba also found that Li had registered the word trademark of several well-known brands for complaint purpose at the same time, including “TFBOYS” and the words “JEJUGREENTEA”. Alibaba further confirmed, Li filed 2605 complaints in its IP protection platform, involving eight trademarks, against 1810 online stores. During the complaint period, Li had contacted Bayer several times, seeking to transfer the two trademarks at a high price, by providing the service of withdrawal complaints. After being rejected by Bayer, he began to bargain and arbitrarily disturbed the normal production and operation activities of the related enterprises when he could not achieve his purpose.

Feature · 101domain

GDPR: the new landscape for domain names Kimberly Darwin of 101domain gives an overview of the far-reaching effects of the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation The EU’s newest addition to the Data Protection Directive, the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), came into effect on 25 May 2018. Since that time, GDPR has altered the business world’s obligations in handling personal data and privacy practices surrounding this data. As a consequence, the structure of a critical piece of the domain name system, the WHOIS database, is being shaken to its core. Enforcing and acquiring domain names under the GDPR proves to be a great challenge. With limited WHOIS information, trademark holders may encounter roadblocks in defending their intellectual property, and domain investors must work harder to conduct their business of selling domains to interested parties. ICANN’s Temporary Specification, meant to address these questions around WHOIS, is only in eﬀect until 25 May 2019. ICANN and its contracted parties are working on a permanent policy that addresses the internet community’s concerns around WHOIS while remaining compliant with GDPR. In the meantime, companies must adapt to a domain system deprived of public WHOIS information and understand how it will impact their ability to enforce, sell, and acquire domains. The WHOIS database was established to collect and display information about domain name registration records from registries and registrars in real-time. With the evolution of the internet, the public domain record information has been used in ways unforeseen by its creators. As the internet grew, contact information listed in WHOIS served the needs of new stakeholders including domain name investors, IP owners, law enforcement agencies, businesses, and individuals. As well as being an aid for legitimate parties, WHOIS has also become a resource for fraud and abuse.

WHOIS under GDPR Domain registrars are required to redact personally identifiable information of domain registrants residing in the EU, publishing only pertinent and non-sensitive information in the WHOIS database in compliance with ICANN’s Temporary Specification for gTLD registration data, a short-term solution

38 IPPro: The Annual

created to satisfy GDPR regulations. Yet ICANN still requires registrars to adopt a system that allows for an open door of

information. Today, with the introduction of the GDPR, the door of free-flowing information is closed and only under predefined circumstances can the door be opened and information released. In response, a few of the larger registrars developed new technology that displays WHOIS information geographically in a way which excludes EU citizens. Other registrars have opted for an easier solution, which shields everyone’s WHOIS information by default regardless of where they reside. In addition, registrars may offer a web form to contact the domain registrant or provide anonymised emails for domain owners in the WHOIS record. The Canadian Internet Registration Authority (CIRA) has been successfully utilising the web form system for years in management of .CA Canadian domains. Since its launch in 2010, CIRA’s Interested Party Contact / Message Delivery Form has facilitated over 250 secure messages a month while keeping the domain owner’s identity private for over 2.7 million domains in operation. Such forms allow interested parties to send a message to registrants without the necessity of revealing domain ownership information.

Private registration In the past, private registration options were offered to shield ownership information from the public eye; an anonymised email address would populate the registrant’s email field, and any inquiries were then forwarded to the registrant, maintaining anonymity. Despite ICANN’s Temporary Specification restricting domain operators from publishing registrant data to the WHOIS database, private registration still remains a valuable tool. Although many registrars have opted to shield all registrant information whether or not the registrant resides in the EU, ownership information still exists at the registry level, where the domains are created. And registry operators for smaller regions, such as Anguilla, a tiny island in the Caribbean, are not subject to GDPR regulations and continue to publish personal registrant information. Anguilla’s domains are a hot commodity right now, as its .AI extension is often used as a ‘domain hack’, a term designated for a domain

101domain · Feature

The UDRP was put in place to help trademark owners recover domain names that were registered in bad faith. In cases of trademark infringement, a brand owner can file a UDRP or URS (a faster, less costly) complaint with an ICANN accredited forum to have the domain transferred to them, or suspended, respectively, if the brand owner prevails. Under GDPR, this is now more complicated. IP professionals traditionally use WHOIS information to aid them in recovering and acquiring domain names for their clients. Without public WHOIS information, complainants filing UDRP and URS cases are essentially submitting disputes blindly. This can be extremely frustrating for trademark owners in their attempt to prove infringement of their brand. Without being able to easily identify the domain registrant, it is difficult to determine the intent of the user, whether they are an established domain investor, an honest business person, or a cybersquatter who registered the domain name in hopes of selling it to the trademark owner. The World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO) described how disputes will work under the GDPR. In a two-step process, the complainant will file a case, at which time WIPO will recover the domain owner’s information from the registrar. At this point, the complainant can decide to continue or amend its complaint based on the personally identifiable information they now have. The previous system, which had access to WHOIS, allowed trademark holders to conduct research on their own and determine if there was a case of trademark infringement prior to taking action under the UDRP. Without the ability to research previous decisions against a repeat respondent, we may see a decrease in effectiveness in recovering cybersquatted domain names.

Domain investors Without WHOIS information, users cannot easily identify the owner of a domain name, even in the case where they want to be found. Unlike most people on the web, domain investors want their information made available to the public. The longterm solution to replace ICANN’s Temporary Specification will most likely include an option for customers to opt-in to

Acquiring domains If you or your client are looking to acquire a domain, you may love the form option adopted by CIRA and some registrars. It affords direct communication with the domain registrant, although they are not required to respond to your inquiry. Should the registrar not offer that option, you may need to resort to archived results such as archive.org for email addresses or phone numbers that may or may not still be valid. Domain brokers are equipped with many tools to do this sort of detective work, so consider one if your initial research is not providing you with results. As you can see, the new GDPR both positively and negatively affects how business is transacted regarding domain names. It affords privacy for those who may be purchasing in bad faith, and yet makes it more difficult for owners with a legitimate interest in their domains to sell them to inquiring buyers. Businesses and individual users could benefit from the mandated anonymity to further protect their information, while trademark owners and intellectual property professionals must work harder when acquiring and enforcing domain names in this new space. The success of the GDPR within the domain industry will depend on the community’s ability to adapt and create solutions that provide value for all parties involved. In a short time, if anything, the GDPR has been successful in sparking a global conversation around the topic of online privacy and inspiring permanent change in the domain industry.

Senior corporate services executive 101domain

Trademark owners

having their information displayed on WHOIS. This is one of the many challenges for those attempting to conduct business in a domain industry without a fully transparent WHOIS. If you are in the business of consulting with domain investors, suggest that they use parked pages to reflect the proper use and intent of their domains, as well as include a contact form for inquiries; and if and when available in future ICANN policy, they can opt-in to their WHOIS information being shared publicly with their domain registrar.

Kimberly Darwin

that suggests a word, phrase or name when combining the elements on both sides of the dot. Since AI is the common acronym for Artificial Intelligence, it’s a trendy extension for tech companies, both startup and already-established, to purchase for a new product, service or concept. Anguilla is not subject to GDPR regulations, and by default, will publish your client’s public information in the WHOIS database. If this is related to a new disruptive idea, your client may not be happy that the word is out via the WHOIS database. Anguilla does offer privacy for its domains,so consider this when discussing new domain ideas with your client.

Cities look to IP for answers as they feel the heat James Cooper from Minesoft explores how PatBase and PatBase Analytics V2 can be used to explore a technology area, with a focus on solutions to the current rising temperatures in cities around the globe In recent years, there has been a much greater awareness of the important role that patents play in legal, technology and business environments, with high profile patent battles between technology giants playing out in the courts (and the media) on a regular basis. As well as monitoring any infringement on a corporationâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s novel ideas, knowing and studying global patent data is also an effective tool to avoid parallel developments and wasted research and development efforts in overcrowded research fields. With this in mind, Minesoft has designed a suite of patent information products and a global, searchable patent database. Users can easily search, review, analyse and share patent information across a corporation, effectively harness

40 IPPro: The Annual

the knowledge found in patents, gain competitive intelligence and build on the ideas of others to drive innovation forward. After a scorcher of a summer in 2018, it is no surprise to hear that our cities are getting hotter, the current trend in global temperature cannot be denied, with the earth set to warm by 2 degrees centigrade by the end of this century. The hottest 10 years on record have all been within the past 15 years, and with denser populations and energy networks, cities suffer worst from the increase due to the heat island effect: The air temperature of a city with 1 million inhabitants can be between one to three degrees centigrade warmer than its surroundings.

Minesoft · Feature Companies and organisations looking for solutions to the rising mercury can and are finding a valuable resource of information in patent literature. So, how are cities fighting back against the rising temperatures? Cities around the world have been trialling different methods to tackle the rapidly rising temperatures. In Guiyang, China, city planners studied wind patterns, water bodies and nearby green belts to incorporate ‘wind corridors’ to blow throughout the city, reducing ambient temperatures with no additional cost or maintenance. As well as working with what is already there, many cities are committing to increasing the amount of green space within their boundaries. In Australia, where ‘extreme temperatures’ is a less relative term than elsewhere in the world, many cities are committing to increasing their tree canopy cover, with Sydney aiming to expand coverage by 50 percent by 2030. New trees would provide shade to residents and help cool the immediate area via evapotranspiration of water from the leaf surface. An increase in trees also helps to improve air quality and reduce carbon emissions in the local area. There are many methods used to reduce city temperatures, and in terms of intellectual property there are two core technologies included in the US

Environmental Protection Agency’s five main strategies for dealing with the heat island effect: Cool roofs and cool pavements, both achieved using heat and radiation reflecting coatings. Traditional black asphalt absorbs much of the sun’s energy that hits it, holding in heat and in some countries becoming too unstable to drive upon in unusually hot weather. Los Angeles, among other cities, is investigating a white coating that can be applied to road surfaces as well as roofs and walkways. Originally designed to hide spy planes from satellite infrared (IF) camera technologies, the coating has been repurposed, the heat and IF reflective properties being utilised for themselves and not for a secondary purpose such as detection avoidance. The coating reflects the majority of the sun’s energy and can keep an area up to 5.5 degrees centigrade cooler. They form part of a scheme to make Los Angeles 1.67 degrees centigrade cooler over the next 20 years.

Analysing the technology area Starting with a keyword search to look for reflective coatings, class codes for the technology area were identified along with additional keywords used to refine the search criteria. Using PatBase or similar tools allow Figure 1: PatBase Analytics V2 Dashboard view for the technology area

Screenshot

Feature Âˇ Minesoft Screenshot

Figure 2: top 10 jurisdictions by number of families

multiple insights to be gained on the topic, showing the key players and jurisdictions involved in leading these technologies forward. Included amongst these results are patents for reflective glass-granule substrates to reflect light, weather resistant coatings designed for use within solar panelling and stealth paint designed to hide spycraft from IF sensors. An excellent example of a patent describing a technology to solve one problem that can be repurposed as a solution for an entirely different scenario, is the Chinese patent application: CN20181172242 applied for in March this year.

Using the integrated Analytics engine, PatBase Analytics V2, assesses the obtained results from our search, enabling the searcher to retrieve information about the key players within the technology field. To date, the key jurisdictions are the US, the World Intellectual Property Organisation, the European Patent Office, Germany, and China. Two of the major players in the technology field are US companies (Certainteed Corp and 3M), so itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s not surprising to see the US in top position with 659 families compared to Chinaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s 607.

Figure 3: Top five assignees by jurisdiction (by number of families) Screenshot

42 IPPro: The Annual

Minesoft · Feature Certainteed possess more than twice the patent families in this area as their nearest rival, 3M. It is worth noting however that while Certainteed possesses more families than its competitor, 3M as a multinational is protecting their IP across more of the major jurisdictions, being the only assignee to appear in four of the top five patenting entities across all five primary issuing authorities for this technology. Nations like China and the US are key players in this market. 2018’s summer notwithstanding, their ambient temperatures have always been on the high side globally, and it is they that will trail-blaze the methods and technologies required to keep city living possible as the heat rises. Germany’s appearance amongst the top five may be in part due to the German government’s continued subsidies for renewable energy technologies. Whilst installation peaked in 2012, the extension of the scheme into 2018 makes Germany a valuable market for solar vendors to operate in for the near future, and reflective

coatings are an important component of many solar energy and heating products. Minesoft’s suite of patent solutions make it easy to keep your cool when searching and identifying patents for a range of technologies and processes. Companies, academic institutions and governments can gain insight into how others are tackling an issue to help inform their own responses. With over 60 full text collections, including non-Latin data, PatBase provides access to patent literature generated from key countries around the world. In just a few minutes, PatBase and integrated PatBase Analytics V2 can be used to identify key players in the space for licensing agreements, locate expired IP that is open for use. Whether you have a practical problem to solve, valuable IP you wish to keep track of or competitors to monitor, Minesoft’s solutions have you covered.

Minesoft’s suite of patent solutions make it easy to keep your cool when searching and identifying patents for a range of technologies and processes

James is currently a support executive at Minesoft. Having completed his degree in Biomedical science in 2012, James started his career in the Healthcare Sector to support an application to study medicine. He worked at a Centre for the Treatment of Traumatic Brain Injury for 2 years, monitoring patient response to treatment and assessing efficacy of treatment based on patient meta-data in addition to assisting the Healthcare Team and Nursing Staff. In mid-2015, James joined Minesoft to provide support for Chemical Explorer, and now assists with the company’s marketing, customer relationship management and support services for all products.

Feature · INTA

Implementing INTA’s strategic plan INTA president Tish Berard sets out the progress made in the past year on each leg of the association’s three-year strategic plan The International Trademark Association’s (INTA) 2018 to 2021 strategic plan outlines three strategic directions for the association: (1) promote the value of trademarks and brands; (2) reinforce consumer trust, and; (3) embrace innovation and change. During the past year, the association has secured a number of achievements in each of these three directions.

acknowledged by the chief judge of the Supreme People’s Court at the end of 2017.

Promote the value of trademarks and brands

INTA is actively monitoring legislative progress in other jurisdictions, including Canada, which has passed a new Trademarks Act. The association is also monitoring legislation in the UK, where INTA has submitted recommendations and attended a delegation with the UK minister for IP, Sam Gyimah, regarding Brexit. Comments on new legislative proposals have also been submitted in Bhutan, Cambodia, Hong Kong, Nepal, Sri Lanka and Vietnam.

INTA has worked throughout the world over the past year, taking part in some 225 meetings and delegations with officials and sending more than 100 letters and submissions to policymakers and government officials. This work includes advocating for more effective laws and supporting executive offices and registries, promoting harmonisation, supporting better enforcement, and developing an understanding of brands and brand value. In China, INTA is the only foreign IP association registered according to the new non-governmental organisation regulation. Our role in advancing the law in China was

44 IPPro: The Annual

In India, INTA has made recommendations for amendments to section 134 of the Indian Trademarks Act and on improving its new Trademarks Rules. We will be meeting with India’s controller general on this issue.

In support of its harmonisation goal, INTA has worked with countries that are considering joining the Madrid and Hague systems. In the past year, INTA has taken part in a workshop on the Madrid System in Jordan and provided comments on initiatives in Ethiopia, Kenya, Qatar, South Africa and the African Regional Intellectual Property Organisation.

INTA Âˇ Feature Reinforce consumer trust

Working to improve enforcement, INTA has led anticounterfeiting initiatives in Africa, Asia, Latin America and North America, and has taken part in events organised by the European Commission and OECD. Specific projects INTA has focused on include the One Belt One Road initiative in China.

Trademarks are a vital source of information for consumers, and INTA monitors and takes action to ensure this function is not undermined. A particular concern in recent years is the introduction of plain or standardised packaging. INTA has made submissions in countries from China to Colombia highlighting the threat this poses.

In Latin America, the third INTA workshop on anticounterfeiting with IP offices was attended by representatives of 15 offices in the region, including six heads of offices, and culminated in the signing of a joint white paper on the role IP offices should play in anticounterfeiting and enforcement.

Another aspect of reinforcing consumer trust is demonstrating and communicating the contribution of brands to the economy and society. In August 2017, INTA published the first Impact Study on Trademarks in Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, and Thailand. This assessed the economic contribution of trademarks in south east Asia and showed how trademark-intensive activities directly contribute between 22 percent and 50 percent to GDP in the countries studied and account for between 13 percent and 29 percent of total employment.

INTA has also held training sessions with trademark examiners in Guatemala, Paraguay, and Argentina, with 90 judges in the Andean Community and Ecuador, and 70 Customs officials in Chile and Panama. A developing area of INTAâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s work is providing members with the tools to demonstrate the value of brands and how their work contributes to brand value. For example, INTA strongly supports the US Trademark Caucus, which now has more than 30 members and has held five briefings as well as district workshops in the past year.

IP anov

AT T O R N E Y S AGENTS & A S S O C I AT E S

One way INTA has demonstrated the value of trademarks to the general public is by co-hosting a trademark exhibit, The Power of Trademarks, at the National Inventors Hall of Fame in Alexandria, Virginia. The exhibit, presented with US Patent and Trademark Office, drew more than 15,000 visitors in the past year.

AnovIP Analytics Intellectual Property .That's it.

Create, Manage & Monetize intellectual wealth. With anovIP, it's amazingly easy!!

Engage our world renowned team of over 120 subject matter experts with varied technology expertise in engineering & life sciences domain to deliver quality intellectual support services at a very competitive price. Patent Prior Art Searches, Freedom To Operate Studies, Technology Scouting, Patent Portfolio Review, Licensing Opportunities Identification Analysis, Invalidity Review, Response to Invalidity Contentions, IP Advisory etc.. Please write to us at info@anovip.com

ANOVIP, 45/1, LEVEL -3, CORNER MARKET, MALVIYA NAGAR, NEW DELHI - 110017, INDIA

P +9111-4183-5550 F +9111-4183-5551

E I N F O @ A N O V I P. C O M W W W W. A N O V I P. C O M

Feature · INTA Embrace innovation and change Recognising both the opportunities and challenges that innovation offers trademark practitioners, INTA is focused on evaluating changes, educating members on their impact and providing innovative services to members. Much of this work takes place in the context of the diverse programme of the INTA Annual Meeting and other INTA events. We are delighted that the past three Annual Meetings have all broken attendance records: in May 2018, nearly 11,000 people from almost 150 countries registered for the 140th Annual Meeting in Seattle. In March 2018, INTA held the Brands and Innovation Conference in New York, which focused on the tremendous worldwide change associated with technology and innovation. The two-day programme drew hundreds to New York to learn about navigating and harnessing new innovations to benefit their brands, products, services, and jobs. INTA also continues to develop new programming to address the changing needs of its members. In October 2017, we held the Changing Landscape of Latin America Conference in Cartagena de Indias—our first stand-alone conference in Latin America. In February 2018, the first INTA moot court in the Asia-Pacific region was held in Singapore. Some 78 students from 27 law schools in eight countries took part. Additionally, one of INTA’s most important assets is the dedicated group of member volunteers who serve on its committees and project teams. Many of those committees are focused extensively on innovation, including the brands and innovation committee, and the emerging issues committee.

Looking ahead

a toolkit to help trademark professionals navigate the Temporary Specification. We are also compiling anonymised data on users’ experiences to inform INTA’s advocacy positions. There is also important work to do on brand restrictions, and INTA will provide further analysis of the recent WTO ruling on Australia’s plain packaging rules for tobacco products. This ruling was disappointing for trademark owners and indepth study and comment is warranted. Later this year, INTA’s Presidential Task Force will issue recommendations regarding one of the association’s top priorities: small- and medium-sized enterprises and entrepreneurs. Other ongoing work includes liaising with partners to tackle the sale of counterfeit goods online and across borders, and promoting education about the danger of counterfeits, notably through the ever-growing Unreal Campaign. Through all of these challenges, INTA will be led by its members. We will continue to expand our programming to provide opportunities for practitioners to meet and discuss trademark developments. In October 2018, the Asia-Pacific Conference in Sydney will look “beyond trademarks” and in December 2018 the Middle East and Africa Conference in Dubai will focus on the opportunities and challenges of attracting investment into the regions, innovation, and the importance of a robust IP strategy. Looking further ahead, in September 2019 the INTA Board of Directors will meet in New Delhi, the first time it has gathered in India, and in 2020 the Annual Meeting will be in Singapore—only the second time it has been held in Asia.

Numerous challenges lie ahead in the coming year for INTA and the rest of the trademark world. Foremost among these is Brexit. INTA will continue to monitor developments in the run-up to Brexit, and advocate to ensure there is as much continuity, predictability, and transparency as possible—both during the transition period and in the long-term.

46 IPPro: The Annual

President INTA

Another topic of great importance to INTA members is the impact of the GDPR on the WHOIS domain name system operated by ICANN, and ICANN’s proposed Temporary Specification. In June 2018, INTA published

Tish Berard

INTA will also ensure its members are informed of any relevant developments via the Brexit Topic Portal.

Vendor Profiles 101domain www.101domain.com 101domain.com is the trusted provider of corporate domain name management, monitoring, acquisition and enforcement services for many of the worldâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s leading organisations. For companies and legal professionals navigating and managing the challenges of brand abuse and infringement online. Trust 101domain.com to provide world-class expertise, consultation, and management services to help you work more efficiently and effectively in enforcing trademark rights on a global basis. 101domain offers a broad range of services, including domain name registration, renewals, and transfers; domain portfolio management, consolidation, and consulting; UDRP, URS, take-downs, and C&Ds; domain name acquisitions, recovery, and research; monitoring including domain names, social networks, marketplaces, and more.

AnovIP www.anovip.com AnovIP are leaders in the protection of intellectual property and assist clients from around the globe in developing and implementing IP strategies. AnovIP has expertise in providing high quality and customised IP support services at a competitive cost to individual inventors, small- and medium-size innovation companies, large corporation, and law firms.

Vendor Profiles Dreyfus & Associés www.dreyfus.fr Founded in 2004 by Nathalie Dreyfus, Dreyfus quickly became one of the top intellectual property law firms in France. The Dreyfus team is well equipped to assist companies with particular expertise in IP/IT matters in France, the EU and worldwide. When confronting problems, Dreyfus assists its clients in decision-making processes concerning the management and valorisation of their IP titles in the business realm and on the internet. With a worldwide network, Dreyfus will represent companies in arbitration centres and courts all over the world in disputes concerning trademarks, designs, patents, copyright, domain names, new gTLDs, social networks, Google AdWords and IT. Advising major traditional industrial actors as well as small and medium-sized firms impacted by the rise of ecommerce and the increasing use of trademarks on the web, Dreyfus has mastered all the issues related to the online presence of companies. In addition, Dreyfus has established the Dreyfus IPweb internet platform, an intuitive and interactive tool. This platform aims to consolidate and summarise all the information available to Dreyfus clients. The firm’s expertise, investment and creativity ensure optimal management of trademarks and domain name portfolios.

IPzen www.IPzen.com IPzen is a user-friendly, cost-effective and efficient case management solution for IP rights. It is comprised of independent modules to help you easily manage any type of IP portfolio. IPzen covers the entire IP lifecycle and by using IPzen, individuals, smaller and bigger firms as well as large corporations have experienced both an enhanced level of productivity and, for the latter, an increasingly collaborative nature in their day-to-day operations. IPzen’s cloud-based system organises the wealth of information surrounding a case and supplies all of the necessary tools for follow-up. You can create deadlines, upload documents, share information between users and clients, generate templates, link files, get financial indicators, share your deadlines with your colleagues when you’re away from the office, customise individual user entitlements as well as your dashboard and much more. IPzen is the perfect solution to collaborate with your team of lawyers. Our solution was created by lawyers, for lawyers. As such, our powerful tool is bound to help you get all the value out of your IP portfolio. IPzen also furnishes an ever-growing list of services that truly make it a one-stop shop: enforcement services, which include UDRPs, take-down notices, phishing and domain name recovery; domain name portfolio management services, including assistance for registrations, transfers, renewals and more; trademark outsourcing services, including filings, renewals and transfers of ownership; and watch services for trademarks, domain names, social media, mobile apps and Google AdWords. Watch services also include our new non-Latin character domain name watches for the Chinese, Japanese, Arabic and Cyrillic scripts.

48 IPPro: The Annual

Vendor Profiles J Vabranov & Partners www.jvpatents.com J. Varbanov & Partners is one of the oldest and leading IP firms in Bulgaria. We provide professional and cost effective services and quality advice on all aspects of industrial property matters for the territory of Bulgaria as well as for the EU. Our team is dealing with establishment, protection and enforcement of industrial property rights derived from patents, trademarks, industrial designs, including validation of European patents in Bulgaria. Our staff is made up of Bulgarian and European patent, trademark and design attorneys with great experience. We do filings and representations before Bulgarian Patent Office, OHIM, WIPO and EPI. We represent clients before custom authorities in connection with the application of boarder measures and all kinds of anti-counterfeiting activities. We are members of INTA, ECTA, EPI, UNION of European Practitioners in Industrial Property, AIPPI, PTMG.

Minesoft www.minesoft.com Founded in 1996, Minesoft develops specialist software solutions in the IP field, providing international patent databases, competitive intelligence, analytics and customised archive solutions. Minesoft serves many Fortune 500/FTSE 100 companies around the world as well as state-run patent offices, IP law firms and patent attorney firms. Minesoft’s solutions, developed and maintained in-house, are designed to help companies protect their innovations and to exploit the value of IP and scientific information throughout the innovation process. In May 2003, Minesoft and RWS Group announced their agreement to develop PatBase, a new searchable database of patent documents designed by experts in the complex art of patent information research. Since the first critically acclaimed public demonstrations in 2003, PatBase has gone on to attract over 50,000 users worldwide from the best-known names in industry as well as leading patent litigation firms. Minesoft has expanded its portfolio of innovative patent information products to include PatBase Express, PatentOrder, PatentTracker, Legal StatusTracker, CiteTracker, Chemical Explorer, Pat-KM and PatBase Analytics. In 2009, Minesoft won the prestigious Queen’s Award for Enterprise for an outstanding achievement in rapidly growing export markets in the field of IP (patent) information. In 2013, a new Chinese language version of PatBase was launched, in addition to the previous English and Japanese interfaces. While PatBase Express is available in English, Japanese, Chinese, French, German, Spanish and Portuguese. In 2015, Minesoft was awarded the Queen’s Award for Enterprise for a second time for an impressive, sustained growth in international trade.

Vendor Profiles Unitalen Attorneys at Law www.unitalen.com Unitalen is dedicated to protecting the ideas and innovations that drive businesses around the world. As one of the largest intellectual property law firms in China with more than 600 employees and more than a decade of experience in IP law, we offer the full spectrum of client-tailored, value-added and cost-effective IP services to our clients. We have more than 183 patent attorneys, 66 trademark attorneys, 61 lawyers and more than 200 patent engineers, including former patent examiners, judges and in-house IP counsel. Many of them were trained in the US, Europe or Japan. With extensive knowledge in fields including electrical engineering, computer technologies, biotechnology, pharmaceuticals, chemistry and chemical engineering, mechanical engineering, and material science, our attorneys are well equipped to tackle all issues surrounding IP protection. Unitalen’s headquarters in Beijing are in close proximity to the State Intellectual Property Office, the trademark office and courts. The firm’s 22 branch offices are strategically located in most of China’s leading technology and business centres, providing us greater accessibility to our clients. Besides, we have representative offices in the US, Europe, Japan, Hong Kong and Taiwan.

United Trademark and Patent Services www.utmps.com United Trademark and Patent Services is a leading firm of lawyers and consultants specialised in intellectual property rights and issues. The firm has been serving its global and regional clients in more than 189 jurisdictions around the world. United’s services include searching, filing, prosecution, registration, licensing, franchising, transfer of technology, arbitration, dispute resolution, enforcement and litigation, anti-counterfeiting, due diligence and counseling. IP theft in today’s digital age is becoming ever more prevalent and complex. It costs governments and companies a lot more than a first glance would suggest. Much worse are the consumers deceived by counterfeit products. Consumers not only lose financially but sometimes also lose their lives as counterfeits can range from high end luxury goods to life saving drugs and car parts.

50 IPPro: The Annual

J. Varbanov & Partners

European and Bulgarian Patent & Trademark Attorneys

One of the oldest and leading IP companies in Bulgaria Professional, cost effective services and quality advices

Areas of practice: *IP Protection *IP Enforcement *Anti-counterfeiting *Litigations *Domain name registrations *IP watches

PO Box 1152, BG-1000 Sofia, Bulgaria South Park Complex, bl.1A, 2nd fl., BG-1421, Sofia, Bulgaria Tel.: (+359 2) 986 51 25, Fax: (+359 2) 980 32 47, e-mail: jvp@jvpatents.com

www.jvpatents.com

Intellectual Property in an Innovative World