It may look or smell like a 'free ride' but it is not 'unfair competition'

‘Free-riding’ on another product's reputation andbenefiting from the efforts put into promoting it can amountto trade mark infringement, even without much apparent damageto that product, but the law of passing off does not supportclaims of unfair competition where no deception or misrepresentationis involved.     

Sony continues campaign against PlayStation grey market

A parallel importer infringes UK intellectual property rightsin electronic products by offering to sell those products inthe UK and Europe via a Hong Kong-based website, where the rights-holderintends such products for sale and distribution in Japan only;no defence of exhaustion of rights, or that the website hadnot targeted the UK or European customers, is available in thecircumstances.     

Parallel imports: more CD than WOW?

Legal context: Intellectual property rights, particularly trade marks, haveas their primary aim the protection of the rights holder (andperhaps consumer) by allowing him and only him to sell eg, hispatented product, or his product under his trade mark. Counterfeitersand infringers are stopped in their tracks. However, intellectualproperty law has a secondary use – allowing rights holdersto stop products being marketed in Europe without their consent,even when said products are genuine. Key points: This article summarises the law on parallel importation andexhaustion of rights, focussing on two recent UK cases; thesuccessful action by the music industry for copyright infringementby CD-WOW, a leading CD retailer based in Hong Kong and thesuccessful appeal against a finding of trade mark infringementby parallel importer Mastercigars Direct, which imports Cubancigars. Practical significance: Parallel imports provide a means for entrepreneurs to exploitprice differentials between countries in Europe and countriesin the rest of the world. As such, they occur on a significantscale, generating substantial revenues. IP rights holders haveconsistently taken action against such individuals, with Sonyin particular heading to the courts on regular occasions, meetingmostly with success.     

House of Lords simplifies the law on patent entitlement

The House of Lords has held that, to claim entitlement to another'spatent or patent application, a person need only prove thathe was the inventor of the subject-matter of the patent, anddoes not also need to invoke ‘some other rule of law’as required previously by the Court of Appeal in Markem v Zipher[2005] RPC 31.