Search for: "Nagoya Inc"
Results 1 - 16
of 16
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
13 Apr 2015, 12:50 pm
The Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising [here and here are earlier katposts] might look not so attractive for the IP professions, but they are wrong, as the Nagoya-to-go-person Darren explains in this step-by-step Q&A that Jeremy enthusiastically re-launches.* The IPKat and his friends: a round-up of some IP weblog news Every three months or thereabouts, the IPKat and… [read post]
13 Jul 2015, 3:51 am
.* The General Court declines to visit Nagoya: challenges inadmissibleAs the IPKat reported a while ago, German and Dutch associations of plant breeders had challenged EU Regulation 511/2014 (the Regulation implementing the Nagoya Protocol and setting out compliance measures for EU users) before the General Court in order to seek its annulment. [read post]
31 Mar 2015, 4:01 pm
In a media statement issued from Google Inc's Googleplex headquarters in Mountain View, California, spokesperson Olaf Pirsol is quoted as saying:“We are the world’s search engine and we organize the world’s data. [read post]
20 Jul 2015, 2:43 am
| Pro-Football Inc v Amanda Blackhorse et al. [read post]
27 Jul 2015, 9:35 am
| Pro-Football Inc v Amanda Blackhorse et al. [read post]
27 Apr 2015, 3:56 am
Never too late 41 [week ending on Sunday 12 April] – Nagoya Protocol for dummies | The IPKat and his friends | Actial Farmaceutica Lda v Claudio de Simone | Article 5(5) of the EU's Trade Mark Directive 2008/95 | Article 16(3) of our beloved TRIPS | Italy v Spain in copyright enforcement online. [read post]
3 May 2015, 10:33 pm
Never too late 41 [week ending on Sunday 12 April] – Nagoya Protocol for dummies | The IPKat and his friends | Actial Farmaceutica Lda v Claudio de Simone | Article 5(5) of the EU's Trade Mark Directive 2008/95 | Article 16(3) of our beloved TRIPS | Italy v Spain in copyright enforcement online. [read post]
20 Apr 2015, 4:18 am
Never too late 40 [week ending on Sunday 5 April] – OHIM and national res judicata in Case T 378/13 Apple and Pear Australia Ltd and Star Fruits Diffusion v OHIM |Scrabble v Scramble is not a game in JW Spear & Sons Ltd & Others v Zynga Inc | Nagoya UK and EU implementing regulations | Again on making available and communication in CJEU's decision C More | Brown epilators in Albania | More food for thought regarding… [read post]
10 Aug 2015, 1:45 am
| Pro-Football Inc v Amanda Blackhorse et al. [read post]
2 Aug 2015, 4:01 pm
| Pro-Football Inc v Amanda Blackhorse et al. [read post]
6 Apr 2015, 7:31 am
Zynga, the online social games company, operated SCRAMBLE and SCRAMBLE WITH FRIENDS.* Onward march to Nagoya - UK and EU draft implementing regulationsThe Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources is back, and Darren explains what the EU and US draft implementing regulations are about.* Making available does not mean communication: still on the C More decisionEleonora goes back to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) decision in C More Entertainment… [read post]
8 Dec 2010, 2:20 am
– Nova Biomedical fight for survival following patent threats from Abbott, Roche, Medtronic (IP Directions) Pathogens and the Nagoya Protocol of the Convention on Biological Diversity (PatentlyBIOtech) Australia: Federal Court punishes CSL for amendment delay: CSL Limited v Novo Nordisk Pharmaceuticals Pty Ltd (Patentology) Australia: AusBiotech, legal academics and ARDR weigh in on gene patent debate (Patentology) Australia: Gene patent amendment bill introduced (IP Whiteboard)… [read post]
6 Jul 2011, 2:21 am
Biopet Vet Lab, Inc., et. al. [read post]
1 Nov 2010, 1:22 pm
Access the complete 70-page GAO report (click here).Waste Information & Management Services, Inc. [read post]
7 Apr 2014, 11:00 am
One registry operator giant, Donuts Inc., allows Sunrise registrants the ability to obtain a Sunrise registration through an approved registrar, such as GoDaddy.com. [read post]
28 Dec 2015, 2:51 am
District Judge Colleen McMahon rejected Sirius’ arguments that Flo & Eddie Inc, controlled by founding band members Howard Kaylan and Mark Volman, did not own copyrights in The Turtles’ recordings or that Sirius had an “implied” license to play Turtles' songs. [read post]
