When I think of Frank Sinatra's "My Way," I see a connection to the main ideas behind intellectual property law. "My Way" embodies personal expression and an individual's journey through life, which parallels the concept of the ideas-expressions dichotomy in copyright law. It echoes the principle that music, literature, or art can be copyrighted while allowing others to explore the same ideas without infringing upon that particular expression. Sinatra's anthem also celebrates uniqueness, which is reflected in the definitions of all of the varying types of intellectual property.

The Purpose of This Blog

The articles on this blog are all written, reviewed, and edited by me, Mr Peter Adediran, the Digital Media and Intellectual Property Solicitor at PAIL Solicitors. They are intended to empower the new generation of business executives, professionals, business owners and creatives who want to keep up with intellectual property, digital media and entertainment law in the digital age. Most importantly, empower the community of creatives who want to create works "their way". In today's rapidly evolving digital landscape, staying informed and increasing knowledge in specialised legal services is crucial for e-commerce and digital technology businesses. At PAIL® Solicitors, we understand the unique challenges start-ups, business owners, professionals, business executives, creatives, writers and talent face in protecting their intellectual property and navigating legal complexities. By reading this blog and engaging us as your legal representatives you can safeguard yours and your company's reputations, make informed financial decisions, and confidently expand into new markets by focusing on continuous learning and expertise in these areas.

This blog contains articles on the following themes:

Articles on Addressing YouTube Copyright Claims

Advice on Protecting Digital Content

Information on Navigating Online Defamation
Litigation Tips And the Role of Contentious Disputes Lawyers
The Importance of TV and Film
Compliance with Modelling Agreements
Information On Publishing for Authors and Publishers
Essential Website-Related Agreements

Encouragement to Stay Informed and Protected

For creatives and businesses alike, staying informed about legal issues surrounding intellectual property is critical. Knowledge is a powerful tool for safeguarding one’s work from infringement or misuse. We encourage individuals to engage with our resources, participate in discussions, and keep abreast of developments in IP law.

Narrow Your Focus

Discover Insights :

Samsung Apple intellectual property lawsuit

Apple intellectual property lawsuit

This article is on the apple intellectual property lawsuit.

In the Court of Appeal (CoA) on appeal from the High Court Chancery Division the Hon Mr Justice Floyd

Before: Lord Justice Moore-Bick, Lord Justice Rimmer and Lord Justice Kitchin

Between: Samsung Electronics Co Ltd and Apple Retail UK Ltd Apple sales International [2014] EWCA Civ 250

Facts

These proceedings include an ongoing raft of proceedings between Samsung and Apple in the UK, USA, Japan, Korea, Germany, France, Italy, Netherlands and Australia.

Samsung appealed a judgment by the Hon Mr Justice Floyd regarding the validity and infringement of some of its patents which it alleges had been infringed by Apple. The products affected included the iPhone 4, iPhone 4s, iPad 2 3G. FloydJ found on the 08 May 2013 each of the patents invalid, both as granted and as proposed to be amended, and he ordered their revocation, which he suspended pending appeal. Floyd J found that the patents were not entitled to their claimed priority and they were both invalid by reason of intervening prior art. Further, even if they had been valid then they would have been invalid for obviousness.

Samsung made an application to the CoA in February 2014 to adjourn the appeal pending the outcome of applications which it made to the European Patent Office for amendments of the patents. Samsung asserted that the outcome was likely to be known by June 2014 or earlier.

Apple made a cross application that unless Samsung undertook to take no further steps with its central amendment applications, then the permission to appeal granted by the judge should be set aside, the notice of appeal struck out and the patents revoked. In other words Samsung was to either seek its central amendment application or give up its appeal. Samsung could not do both

The CoA allowed Samsung’s application and dismissed Apple’s application but without prejudice to Apple’s right at the appeal hearing to make further submissions (and any necessary application) about the conduct and further progress of the action as it may consider appropriate. The CoA did not consider that, at this stage in the proceedings, Samsung’s pursuit of its central amendment application necessarily means that the appeal proceedings were an abuse of process.

To obtain a quotation, please contact us at (020) 7305-7491 or at [email protected]. We would be delighted to assist you. Mr Peter Adediran is the owner and principal solicitor at PAIL® Solicitors. Subscribe to our newsletter to get blog post updates and other information about the firm straight to your inbox.