Articles

In the recent decision of North Brewing Company Ltd. v DLA Piper (Canada) LLP, 2023 FC 1188, the Federal Court clarifies the extent to which variations of a registered trademark will constitute use of the mark by the owner in cancellation proceedings pursuant to section 45 of the Trademarks Act.

In this ongoing series, we will profile each of the members of the OBA IT/ IP Law Section Executives to learn about them in five minutes or less. It’s five minutes or less because we know that a lot of you docket in six minute increments! Meet this year's Vice-Chair: M. Imtiaz Karamat!

In this ongoing series, we will profile each of the members of the OBA IT/ IP Law Section Executives to learn about them in five minutes or less. It’s five minutes or less because we know that a lot of you docket in six minute increments! Meet this year's Chair: Paul Lomic!

In the recent decision Energizer Brands, LLC v Gilette Company, 2023 FC 804, the Federal Court ruled that Duracell’s use of Energizer’s registered trademarks ENERGIZER and ENERGIZER MAX in comparative advertising on its sticker labels depreciated the goodwill in Energizer’s registered trademarks.

Authors of science fiction are sometimes unduly credited with predicting giant leaps in sci-tech, but the joy of reading them remains. Technology fiction came to be regarded as a serious literary sub-genre in the mid-20th century. The advent of the earliest computer, Alan Turing’s “Turing Machine,” and advancements in space exploration largely coincided with the works of Isaac Asimov, Arthur C. Clarke and Robert Heinlein.

In this ongoing series, we will profile each of the members of the OBA IP/ IT Law Section Executive to learn about them in five minutes or less. It’s five minutes or less because we know that a lot of you docket in six-minute increments!

In The Coca-Cola Company v. The Attorney General of Canada, 2023 FC 424, the Coca-Cola Company appealed a decision of the Commissioner of Patents refusing to grant a patent on Canadian Patent No. 2,718,279 on the basis that the claims in the Application were obvious. The Federal Court allowed the appeal in part. It held that the Commissioner erred in its obviousness assessment of one of TCCC’s claims and referred the matter back for redetermination.