Search results
250 results ordered by
All change! No extension means major changes for IP rights holders from 1 January 2021
Under Article 132 of the Withdrawal Agreement, 30 June 2020 was the last day that the UK could have requested an extension to the Brexit transition period. The COVID-19 outbreak prompted many to speculate that a request would be made but the deadline passed, without event.
Read moreThe November 2023 AI safety summit and the UK's direction of travel
The government has confirmed that the UK AI safety summit will be held at Bletchley Park on 1 and 2 November 2023.
Read moreWhat To Know About AI Fraudsters Before Facing Disputes
Fraudsters are quick to weaponise new technological developments and artificial intelligence is proving no exception, with AI-assisted scams increasingly being reported in the news, including most recently one using a likeness of a BBC broadcaster.
Read moreThaler v Comptroller [2023] UKSC 49: the UKSC rules that AI cannot be an 'inventor'
To the surprise of no one, the UK Supreme Court (UKSC) has finally ruled that an artificial intelligence (AI) cannot be an inventor for the purposes of UK patent law. This judgment accords with the decisions of the lower courts in the UK and the initial ruling of the UKIPO. It also reflects similar findings from most of courts around the world where the claimant, Dr Thaler, brought similar actions.
Read moreGenerative AI and intellectual property rights—the UK government's position
The IPO is to produce a code of practice by the summer that will provide guidance to support AI firms in accessing copyright protected works as an input to their models.
Read moreAccessory liability: when will directors be held liable for IP infringements committed by their companies – and what is counted as "profits"?
The Supreme Court in Lifestyle Equities CV & Anor v Ahmed & Anor [2024] UKSC 17, has allowed an appeal by two company directors who were found liable as accessories to trade mark infringement by the company in which they were directors. The decision provides helpful clarification on the required elements for accessory liability in the context of IP right infringement claims and confirms the sums to be included in an account of profits if liability is established (spoiler alert: a director's salary is not considered to be "profit").
Read moreOnline platforms should Swatch out: Samsung found liable for infringing third-party content available on the Samsung Galaxy App store
The Court of Appeal in Montres Breguet SA v Samsung Electronics [2023] EWCA Civ 1478 has dismissed Samsung's appeal and upheld a first instance decision which found it liable for trade mark infringement in relation to third-party watch faces available on the Samsung Galaxy App store. This judgment provides guidance on what constitutes "use" of a sign by an online app store and the applicability of the e-Commerce Directive hosting defence.
Read moreFast-growing IP and tech practice at RPC welcomes Caroline Tuck as Partner
International law firm RPC is pleased to announce the appointment of Caroline Tuck as a Partner in its Intellectual Property and Technology (IP & Tech) team. Caroline Tuck joins RPC from Deloitte, where she was a Director in the Disputes team.
Read moreTelecoms supply agreement excludes "loss of profit" claim under "anticipated profits" liability exclusion (EE v Virgin Mobile)
In line with a number of recent cases, in EE Limited v Virgin Mobile Telecoms Limited [2023] EWHC 1989 (TCC) the courts have shown that parties generally cannot avoid clear wording contained in exclusion clauses in order to recover losses that have been expressly excluded (in this case, loss of profits).
Read moreRolls-Royce entitled to hit the brakes in dispute over termination of a software services agreement (Topalsson v Rolls-Royce)
In Topalsson GmbH v Rolls-Royce Motor Cars Limited [2023] EWHC 1765 (TCC), the High Court has provided useful guidance on how to determine whether a software implementation timeline agreed by the parties is binding, when implementation is considered complete and in what circumstances failing to complete implementation by the contractual deadlines entitles the customer to terminate the contract.
Read moreA narrow escape – software services provider entitled to rely on single aggregate liability cap (Drax v Wipro)
When it comes to bespoke software development projects, a lot can go wrong. There's risk for the customer such as project delays, software defects, functionality issues and a lack of meeting of minds in terms of project requirements.
Read moreReproduction of infringing content online: who's liable?
Keyword advertising, search engine optimisation and liability for infringement via online marketplaces: In recent years, there has been a plethora of cases concerning the various ways that trade marks may be infringed, through use on the internet.
Read moreD'Aloia – High Noon for Crypto-Tracing
The High Court judgment in D'Aloia v. Persons Unknown and others [2024] EWHC 2342 (Ch) is arguably the most significant crypto judgment of 2024. Critical deficiencies in the claimant's blockchain tracing analysis, evidence presented at trial and pleadings were ultimately fatal to his claims seeking to recover assets misappropriated by fraudsters.
Read moreHigh Court permits enforcement of foreign judgment in crypto recovery case
Tai Mo Shan Ltd v. Persons Unknown [2024] EWHC 1514 (Comm)
Read moreCrypto damages quantification: valuation at the date of breach or date of judgment?
In Southgate v. Graham [2024] EWHC 1692 (Ch), the High Court addressed an appeal from the County Court concerning inter alia the appropriate date for assessing damages in a cryptocurrency loan dispute. Initially, the County Court determined that the damages should be based on the cryptocurrency's fiat value at the breach date. Due to the volatility of the cryptocurrency, this decision would have resulted in significantly lower fiat damages award than if the valuation were based on a later date. The High Court allowed the valuation date part of the appeal, directing a further hearing to establish the appropriate date.
Read moreSummary judgment against persons unknown – a tale of two crypto judgments
Two recent crypto judgements in the High Court, Mooij v Persons Unknown (February 2024) and Boonyaem v Persons Unknown (December 2023) reached different conclusions regarding whether a summary judgment could be granted against unidentified (and unidentifiable) fraudsters, with Mooji deciding 'yes' and Boonyaem deciding 'no'.
Read moreRPC earns top ranking for Crypto-Asset Disputes in the UK
International law firm RPC has been ranked for the first time in Chambers and Partners 2024 FinTech Guide, achieving Band 1 for Crypto-Asset Disputes in the UK.
Read moreCracking Down on High-Risk Investments: FCA considers industry performance
After introducing stricter rules for the promotion of Restricted Mass Market Investments (RMMIs) in February 2023, the FCA continues to monitor the performance of firms, is conducting a multi-firm review and has outlined good and poor practices in the industry.
Read moreFCA rules could trigger 'marked drop' in finfluencers marketing crypto
Regulator clamping down over concerns consumers are being 'influenced into high risk investments without understanding consequences'
Read moreThe FCA sets expectations ahead of incoming cryptoasset marketing rules
The FCA has issued a "final warning" to firms promoting cryptoassets to UK consumers to prepare for the cryptoassets financial promotion regime. Effective from 8 October 2023, this regime aims to protect consumers from promotions that make exaggerated claims about the benefits in investing in cryptoassets.
Read moreValue of NFT fraud plummets 82% in UK
The value of Non-Fungible Token (NFT) fraud in the UK has dropped 82% over the last year as the collapse in prices and lower trading volumes make these digital assets less attractive to fraudsters, reveals new data from international law firm RPC.
Read moreNew legislation proposed to bring FCA regulation to cryptoasset promotions
What will the Government’s new legislation mean for the promotion of cryptoassets?
Read moreCrypto: issues for solicitors and their PI insurers
We explore the types of work lawyers are doing in this area, the risks this work may give rise to and issues for solicitors and their PI insurers to consider.
Read moreBinance successfully challenges interim proprietary injunction over deposited cryptoassets
In Piroozzadeh v Persons Unknown and Others [2023] EWHC 1024 (Ch), the cryptocurrency exchange Binance successfully applied to discharge an interim proprietary injunction obtained by a claimant whose misappropriated cryptoassets had been deposited at the exchange. This is the first recorded case of an exchange successfully having discharged such an injunction.
Read moreThe FTX fallout so far and what may come next
The collapse of FTX Trading Ltd. has been as dramatic as it has been fast. Until then, FTX had been the second-largest exchange in the world.
Read moreThree Crypto firsts for the English courts
The recent judgment handed down in Jones v Persons Unknown [2022] EWHC 2543 (Comm) contained three firsts in the English Court: the imposition of a constructive trust between a crypto exchange and a victim of crypto fraud, an order for delivery up of Bitcoin, and summary judgment served by NFT airdrop. It shows the English courts' continued willingness to push the boundaries of English law in relation to the recovery of misappropriated cryptoassets. The innovative application of English law procedures and remedies to the growing problem of crypto theft and fraud is of considerable assistance to the victims of this pernicious and widespread fraudulent activity.
Read moreYou've been airdropped: English court approves service by NFT and finds it arguable that cryptocurrency-exchanges hold misappropriated assets as constructive trustees
In D’Aloia v (1) Persons Unknown (2) Binance Holdings Limited & Others [2022] EWHC 1723 (Ch), the English court approved service of proceedings by NFT and found that it was arguable that cryptocurrency exchanges owed constructive trustee duties to cyber-fraud victims.
Read moreFirst judgment obtained in proceedings brought by a cryptocurrency exchange in the English Courts
In HDR v Shulev and Nexo [2022] EWHC 1685 (Comm), HDR (represented by RPC), which operates the cryptocurrency exchange BitMEX, initiated stakeholder proceedings under CPR Part 86 to resolve a dispute between two rival parties claiming control, and ownership of the contents, of a trading account.
Read moreInjunction granted over stolen NFTs held on constructive trust
In a highly anticipated judgment, the Commercial Court in Lavinia Deborah Osbourne v (1) Persons Unknown (2) Ozone Networks Inc held that "there is at least a realistically arguable case" that non-fungible tokens ('NFTs') are to be treated as property in English Law.
Read moreIs the crypto market at the end of its Tether?
The crashing out of Terra has unleashed fears of unsettled investors, rising disputes and fraud exposure.
Read moreHigh Court finds that a cryptocurrency exchange arrangement was not a trust
The High Court decided that no trust could arise where two parties had agreed to an exchange of cryptocurrencies (in essence a sale and repurchase agreement), as the essential economic reciprocity precluded the existence of any trust.
Read moreCrypto-assets again confirmed as property by the English Commercial Court
In the Commercial Court's latest crypto-related judgment, Fetch.AI(1), a proprietary injunction and worldwide freezing order were granted against various categories of persons unknown who had misappropriated various crypto-assets from one of the claimant's Binance trading accounts. In doing so, the Court agreed with the key finding in the seminal case AA v Persons Unknown, Re Bitcoin [2019] EWHC 3556 (Comm) – that bitcoin is 'property' – albeit it did so on a different basis.
Read moreNo interim injunction over bitcoin account where damages would be adequate
The court has declined to continue interim injunctions granted in respect of a 'coin depot account' holding bitcoin over which the claimants asserted a proprietary right.
Read moreBitcoin is 'property' and can therefore be subject of proprietary injunction
Following recent case law on the matter, the High Court has found that bitcoin can be 'property' and can therefore be the subject of a proprietary injunction.(1) In reaching its conclusion, the court adopted the detailed analysis of the issue set out in the UK Jurisdictional Task Force's November 2019 Legal Statement on Crypto-Assets and Smart Contracts, thereby providing a far more detailed judicial basis for the finding than found in previous cases. The bitcoins at the heart of this case were part of a ransom payment paid to a hacker who installed malware on a company's IT systems.
Read moreRegulation of cryptocurrency pre-ICO funding under English Law
Launching a cryptocurrency typically involves an initial fundraising process followed by a public sale process, by way of initial coin offering or token sale ("ICO").
Read moreCrypto & Digital Assets Disputes
Our crypto and digital asset dispute lawyers have deep technical knowledge of the sector and the technology powering it alongside vast experience in navigating the commercial and legal complexities. Where fraud has occurred, we move fast to secure and recover stolen digital assets.
Read moreAesthetic appeal and craftsmanship are not enough: WaterRower fails to secure copyright protection as a UK work of artistic craftsmanship
The term "artistic craftsmanship" has no statutory definition under UK copyright law – a position that has only been made more challenging by a conflict between EU and UK case law in this area. In this hotly anticipated judgment, the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court (IPEC) sought to determine what it means to be a work of artistic craftsmanship in the context of s 4(1)(c) of the Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 (CDPA).
Read moreMcDonald's BIG MAC trade mark – General Court gives decision on evidence of genuine use
In a decision that, practically, provides for only a tiny loss of protection for the behemoth brand and trade mark, on 5 June 2024 the European General Court (General Court) partially revoked McDonald's BIG MAC trade mark (the EUTM) in the EU (Supermac's (Holdings) Ltd v EUIPO (Case T 58/23)).
Read moreSupreme Court dismisses Amazon's appeal in landmark decision on consumer targeting
In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court has dismissed Amazon's appeal against a Court of Appeal (CoA) decision, which found that the sale of branded goods on Amazon's US site, amazon.com, infringed UK and EU trade marks by virtue of the fact that UK consumers had been targeted.
Read moreBenchmarkalikes – Aldi's Taurus cloudy cider lemon leaves Thatchers Cider with a headache
In a recently dismissed claim for trade mark infringement and passing off brought by Thatchers Cider we see so called lookalike or "copycat" products continue to provide a major headache for brands. It's the latest in a line of cases showing that the answer to issues arising from supermarkets' "inspired" alternatives, increasingly is rarely found in trade mark or passing off rights.
Read moreThe status of parallel trade in the European Union and the UK
The following article is a collaboration between Jani Ihalainen of RPC and PDGB (Virginie Coursière-Pluntz and Benjamin Jacob), RPC's partner firm in France through its TerraLex network.
Read moreGinfringement: Success for M&S in the Court of Appeal in registered design spat with Aldi
M&S and Aldi's gin bottle battle over design rights has reached a conclusion (for now) as the Court of Appeal has unanimously upheld the IPEC's decision that Aldi's bottle infringed M&S' design.
Read moreClear as gin: M&S and Aldi take liquor bottle battle to the Court of Appeal
Intellectual property enthusiasts' favourite supermarket adversaries were back at loggerheads this week as M&S and Aldi appear before the Court of Appeal. The pair sought to thrash out a first instance decision handed down in the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court (IPEC) regarding alleged infringement of M&S' registered design rights in a gin bottle.
Read moreM&S v Aldi – lookalike claims lit up by design rights
As lookalike products rise in prominence, the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court's (IPEC) recent ruling that the sale and advertisement of Aldi's 'Infusionist' range of favoured gins infringed M&S's UK registered designs protecting the light-up bottles containing its 'Snow Globe' gin range (Marks and Spencer PLC v Aldi Stores Limited [2023] EWHC 178) highlights the utility of registered design rights in circumstances where other intellectual property rights (IPR) are often less able to provide protection.
Read moreLookalikes and passing off—bottle design get-up claim (Au Vodka)
Currently there's significant activity in the lookalikes space. The Au Vodka claim (Au Vodka v NE10 Vodka [2022] EWHC 2371), which focuses on bottle design 'get-up', arrived in the courts for an interim injunction hearing in September 2022. Au Vodka's application was dismissed. The judgment shows that passing off—get-up claims based on shape can be challenging to bring, particularly at the interim stage, and prompts the question of whether it's possible to bring Cofemel and copyright into the lookalikes arena.
Read moreGin-uine use? The UKIPO concludes yes, despite limited evidence and variances between the trade mark as registered and as used
The UK Intellectual Property Office (UKIPO) has rejected an application by Inver House Distillers for the revocation of a competitor's trade mark. The mark in question is owned by Destileras M.G., S.L and Importaciones y Exportaciones Varma, S.A (the Proprietors) and consists of a 2D image of a distinctively shaped bottle, featuring the 'Master's logo' and a lion device (the Master's Mark). The decision was reached on the basis that the Proprietors had successfully demonstrated genuine use of their mark, in the UK.
Read moreGame over for hyperlinking sites, following Nintendo's recent blocking order success
In a helpful and clear judgment from the IPEC, Nintendo has succeeded in obtaining a broad website blocking order, which includes websites that merely redirect, or link to, third party piracy websites. The decision represents an important win for Nintendo in its continuing efforts to curtail the spread of online piracy in the UK.
Read moreMcDonald's battles to protect its 'Mc'-family
McDonald's has successfully defended its 'Mc' branding, following an application by Children's Cancer Aid Limited (CCA) to register 'MCVEGAN' as a trade mark (the Application).
Read moreStay connected and subscribe to our latest insights and views
Subscribe Here