The IPilogue is IP Osgoode’s online journal of IP Law and Technology. It publishes analysis and commentary on current pressing intellectual property, technology, privacy and related legal issues. The IPilogue features curated contributions from students, scholars, and experts within the Osgoode community, from our network of affiliated researchers and partners, as well as from professionals and scholars in disciplines outside of law.
Editor in Chief: Prof. Carys Craig (ccraig@osgoode.yorku.ca)
Submission inquiries: iposgoode@osgoode.yorku.ca
IP Osgoode and the Intellectual Property Institute of Canada (IPIC) are thrilled to announce the winner of the seventh annual edition of Canada’s IP Writing Challenge:
IP Osgoode would like to thank everyone who attended John Weigelt’s lecture entitled "Adjusting to the Changed Frame of Reference of our Technology Enabled World" on September 30, 2015 at Osgoode Hall Law School. The video of the lecture is available here.
Data Transfers from EU to US “unlawful”; EU Signals Enforcement Actions Possible After January, 2016
The re-posting of this article is part of a cross-posting agreement with CyberLex. On Friday, October 16, 2015, the Article 29 Working Party (“WP29”) released a statement on the decision of the Court of Justice of the European Union (“CJEU”) in the case Schrems v Data Protection Commissioner (C-362-14), the landmark decision which invalidated the […]
Going into law school, I knew that I wanted to practice intellectual property law. I didn't exactly know what that meant, but I knew that it had to do with things I liked - films, television, and music. Unfortunately, my passion for pop culture did not impress the large and boutique IP firms I interviewed […]
This article is cross-posted with permission from Bereskin & Parr. The United States Patent and Trademarks Office (USPTO) has released an updated set of Eligibility Examination Guidelines to provide guidance to examiners on when to reject claimed inventions as ineligible abstract ideas. These guidelines give a sense of what computer-implemented subject matter the USPTO considers […]
March 11, 1876. December 18, 1903. July 21st, 1969. These are the dates that John Weigelt — the National Technology Officer for Microsoft Canada — used to provide scale in his recent IP Osgoode Speaks Series presentation: Adjusting to the Changed Frame of Reference of our Technology Enabled World.
In an interesting twist, arguably the two most common fashion design piracy defendants are pitted against each other. H & M Hennes & Mauritz AB (“H&M”) has issued a complaint against Forever 21, Inc., in the US District Court Southern District of New York. Below is a comparative image of the tote bags at issue:
The re-posting of this analysis is part of a cross-posting collaboration with MediaLaws: Law and Policy of the Media in a Comparative Perspective. Which is the legal framework surrounding Internet Service Providers (ISPs) in the EU, when it comes to copyright protection? The following article analyses the importance of ISPs in the enforcement of […]
To read the press release from the Court of Justice of the European Union regarding Maximillian Schrems v Data Protection Commissioner, click here.
This article is cross-posted with permission from Bereskin & Parr. It is very important to provide adequate disclosure when using “means-plus-function” claims in a U.S. patent, particularly in the field of software. “Means-plus-function” claims include elements that are defined in a functional (as opposed to structural) manner, such as “means for tying a shoe”, and […]