Archives for March 2016
By Carola Monintja
Recently a controversial decision made by the Indonesian Supreme Court has been making waves in local and foreign media. The Supreme Court refused the cassation appeal filed by internationally well-known furniture company, Inter IKEA Systems B.V. (“IKSBV”), and affirmed the decision by the Commercial Court to allow the deletion of the “” trademark in Class 20 and Class 21.
So how could this happen and what does this mean for IKEA’s business in Indonesia? Let’s look at the facts of the story.
By P. Kandiah
In patent practice, it is common to have at least one independent claim followed by at least one or more claims depending on the independent claim. The dependent claim would be interpreted to mean to claim the features claimed in the independent claim and the features in the dependent claims, thus narrowing the scope of protection of the independent claim.
Now, how are the dependent claims to be interpreted if the independent claim on which the dependent claim depends on is declared invalid for lack of novelty or invention step or for any other reason? Recently the Federal Court of Malaysia, which is the apex court in Malaysia, had an opportunity to pronounce judgment on this question.
Listen in to this podcast to find out what what Geetha K. has to say about the protection of apps in terms of IP. Should they be protected under Patents? Copyright? Or both?