intellectual property

No supplementary protection for a new form of an active substance

In a judgment of 21 March 2019 (C-443/17) the CJEU reiterated the need for a precise and concise interpretation of the term “protected product” under Regulation (EC) 469/2009 concerning the supplementary protection certificate for medicinal products. The CJEU stressed that this term only applies to an active ingredient of a medicinal product, and not combination with other substances that do not have an independent therapeutic effect.

Changes to trademark law from 16 March 2019

An amendment to the Industrial Property Law took effect on 16 March 2019, transposing into Polish law the Trademark Directive (2015/2436). The amendment is not revolutionary but will certainly have huge practical implications.

Abolition of the graphical presentation requirement for national trademarks

One of the changes in the amendment of the Industrial Property Law is that there will no longer be a graphical presentation requirement for trademarks. From 16 March 2019, it is possible for trademarks to be presented in any form using generally available technology, provided that they are presented in a clear, precise, independent, understandable, durable, objective, and easily accessible manner.

Licensee as claimant: A significant new entitlement

A licensee’s right to bring a legal action in proceedings for infringement of a trademark was introduced by the amendment to the Industrial Property Law. So far, in the case of national trademarks, only an exclusive licensee entered in the register could pursue claims for trademark infringement on an equal footing with the proprietor. This has changed from 16 March 2019.

Trademarks in dictionaries and encyclopaedias

Can a trademark owner require the publisher of a dictionary to indicate alongside the colloquial definition of a word that the word is a registered trademark?

Liability of intermediaries for trademark infringement

The amendment to the Industrial Property Law in force since 16 March 2019 provides that a person whose services were used in an infringement is also liable for infringement of the protected right to a trademark. A trademark owner may demand that such a person refrain from infringing the trademark, turn over unjustly obtained benefits and repair the damage (where the infringement is culpable). Thus the new regulations introduce the intermediary’s own liability for trademark infringement.