Intellectual Property Law and Copyright Laws

Merger and acquisition (M&A) activities present many challenges to buyers and sellers, particularly when it comes to intellectual property (IP) issues.

In the digital age, companies are increasingly leveraging Generative AI to boost competitiveness and drive innovation. While this technology enhances content creation efficiency, reduces operational costs...

Digital twins are virtual representations of actual items, systems, or processes that redefine a variety of sectors by allowing for real-time monitoring, predictive analytics, and simulation-driven innovation.

After years of preparation and a decidedly rocky start to ICANN’s New gTLD Program due to a glitch in the gTLD application system, the applications are in, and ICANN will soon begin evaluating the TLD candidates.

Over the last couple of years, it has become clear that Trademark and Copyright owners have a tense relationship with the Internet Service Providers.

Under the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP), there can be a relatively fine line between the permissible use of an acronym as a domain name and the impermissible use of a trademark.

For trade mark owners and IP practitioners familiar with the Thai system, one thing is clear: securing trade mark protection ...

On June 13, the Federal Circuit reversed the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB or Board) nonprecedential decision finding no likelihood of confusion between opposer...

With 24 official languages and three official alphabets, considering linguistic diversity within the EU can be a real...

On June 8, 2012, Genentech’s lawsuit seeking a declaration that US Patent No. 6,733,752 was invalid and not-infringed by Genentech’s trastuzumab product (HERCEPTIN).

Health Canada specifically contemplates certain proteins as SEBs in its Guidance, although Health Canada has not limited SEBs to only particular classes of drugs.

On May 23, 2012, the Federal Court held that Merck Frosst Canada Ltd. ("Merck") is liable to Apotex Inc. ("Apotex") for damages under section 8 of the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations (the "Regulations"), but exercised its discretion to reduce the amount of compensation payable based on a defence of ex turpi causa.