News

On November 1st, Apple was forced to pay 12 million yuan (US$1.9 million) to Chinese distributor COL Digital Publishing, which supplies reading products through diversified channels, including works literature, comic books, and editorial products on paper.

The Chinese company has had several legal battles against Apple since 2012 over copyright issues, totaling four lawsuits against the iPhone’s owner. One of them took place in April this year when Apple had to pay a fine of 368,000 yuan.

This time, the decision made by the People’s Court of Tianjin Binhai (responsible for the case located in the north of mainland China) to punish Apple came after COL Digital found that third-party applications in the App Store, belonging to the US company in mainland China, were publishing unlicensed content, including novels popular in the country, which could only be distributed by the publisher online.

According to the Chinese distributor, the illegal availability of their works in third-party applications caused a loss of more than 70 million yuan for the company, in addition, there are still 83 cases open regarding infringement of rights copyrights in the App Store, including at least 460 titles owned by the Asian company. Thus, there is still the possibility of further lawsuits by the publisher against the iPhone manufacturer in the future.

The South China Morning Post reported that Apple declined to comment on the matter, while a lawyer for COL Digital upheld the Tianjin court’s decision but chose not to provide further details as the case is still ongoing.

In October of this year, Apple had already lost a lawsuit brought by Huawei regarding the use of the “Huawei MatePod” trademark registered by the Chinese manufacturer for its series of headphones. The American giant unsuccessfully tried to block the use of the nomenclature due to supposed similarity to the names given to its category of registered headphones such as “Pod”, “iPod”, “AirPods” and “EarPod”.

Source: Canaltech

A Brazilian who has been fighting for years to be recognized as the inventor of the barrier spray won a victory over FIFA. In April of this year, the Superior Court of Justice slammed the hammer on the jurisdiction of the Brazilian justice in the case and determined that FIFA would have to answer for any violations that occurred only in Brazil.

The decision of the judges on Wednesday followed this orientation. That’s why, in practice, the Brazilian’s request was partially granted – the lawyers were asking for compensation for the use of the spray around the world. However, the defense of Heine recognizes the result as a great victory while studying to file suits in other countries.

Heine Allemagne is now awaiting a million-dollar indemnity. Judge-Rapporteur Francisco de Assis Pessanha Filho decided, and was followed by his peers, that the Brazilian must be repaired for all damages that have occurred since 2012 – the amount will still be calculated in an eventual settlement of the sentence. In the initial part of the lawsuit filed in 2017, the inventor asked for U$ 40 million dollars.

In addition, it was decided that FIFA will have to pay R$ 50 thousand for having used the spray in the 2014 World Cup in Brazil, with the Spuni brand covered.

Source: GE

A special program of the BPTO can speed up the decision-making process for granting patents for projects that support a sustainable economy. Green Patents speeds up the process for projects aimed at technologies that promote a lower environmental impact.

Between January 2020 and March 2021 there were 118 applications for priority exam based on the program. Of these, 32 requests have already been decided, with a 65% concession and an average time between the request for an accelerated examination and the end of the process of just eight months.

“In order to be eligible for the accelerated procedure, the patent application must include inventions related to technologies for alternative energy generation, biofuels; for transportation, such as hybrid or electric vehicles; for energy conservation; and for waste management or sustainable agriculture, such as fertilizers, irrigation techniques, among others”, says Ana Cristina Müller, an expert on the subject.

In addition to the “Green Patents”, the specialist says that there are other ways to speed up the exam. An example are cases of infringement of the object of a patent application, that is, when there is a third-party product or process on the market that is reproducing, without authorization from the applicant, an invention that already has a patent application in progress.

“For these, the applicant can request the expediting of the examination, simply sending an extrajudicial notification to the potential offender as evidence that the offense is taking place.”

Source: Exame

A record published by the US Patent and Trademark Office recently called attention even though it did not reveal equipment or technology. It is a new trajectory for the Moon, developed by NASA engineers. The unprecedented route for travel to the natural satellite saves money, time and fuel, as well as providing unprecedented discoveries about the Universe for the first mission to explore it.

Through this technique, smaller spacecraft can hitch a ride on missions launched to Geosynchronous Earth Orbit, a region that is the destination of many satellites. There, they would be able to perform a series of maneuvers at any time of the year and without restrictions on time and inclination to enter lunar orbit, making a faster trip and with little or no fuel.

Due to its characteristics, it is aimed at spaceships of reduced size and low budget, so larger missions, with spacecraft carrying astronauts and rovers, cannot benefit from this route.

Source: Tecmundo

After receiving patent approval for a vaccine against the enteropathogenic Escherichia coli bacteria, the Butantan Institute is working on the development of an immunizing agent against the disease, capable of causing diarrhea that leads to death. Also known by the acronym EPEC, an enteropathogenic Escherichia coli is one of the six pathogenic categories of E. coli that cause intestinal disease. Transmitted via the fecal-oral route, that is, through the ingestion of contaminated water or food, it is common in developing countries due to the lack of basic sanitation, and annually kills up to 2 million children worldwide from diarrhea.

The issue sensitized Wilmar Dias da Silva’s professor and researcher at Butantan in 2005, during the Thematic Cooperation Program in the Matter of Science and Technology (Proáfrica), a technology transfer project for the creation of a serpentarium in Mozambique. Back in Brazil, he devised a recombinant vaccine to fight the disease. In this type of immunizing agent, which is obtained through genetic engineering, there is a combination of DNA or RNA from different organisms, the result of which is inserted into a vector – in this case, the chosen one was the BCG bacterium, which is widely used in research for its safety and immunogenic properties.

Who accepted the challenge of taking the project forward, under the supervision of Wilmar and researcher Roxane Piazza, from the Bacteriology Laboratory, among other scientists from the Butantan, was the then master’s student at the University of São Paulo (USP) Halyka Vasconcellos. “We inserted the genes of two proteins, BFPA, and intimin, which are responsible for the adhesion of EPEC in the intestine, inside the BCG. We then applied this modified BCG in mice, generating a positive immune response”, summarizes the researcher. The work was published in the renowned journal Vaccine, in 2012, but continued to be improved by Halyka throughout her doctorate and postdoctoral studies, until the patent registration was submitted and approved, in May this year, by the Brazilian Patent Office (BPTO).

“It was the realization of a dream, which I would not have realized without the contribution of numerous researchers from Butantan who helped me along this path”, says Halyka, who is now a university professor and directs two laboratories in Nova Friburgo (RJ). Besides her, Wilmar and Roxane, scientists Karina Scaramuzzi, Ivan Pereira Nascimento, Jorge da Costa Ferreira Junior, Cecilia Abe, and Andre Kipnis are also listed as inventors of the patent, due to their technical contribution. “We do not work interested in personal profit, but in the good that a vaccine will bring to society”, emphasizes Professor Wilmar.

The next stage of the research will be the realization of pre-clinical and clinical trials (phases 1, 2, and 3). “We still have a long way to go, but the approval of the patent will certainly facilitate the negotiation of this new technology”, celebrates the innovation manager at Butantan, Cristiano Gonçalves Pereira.

Source: Pfarma

After nine years awaiting a decision at the second instance and 14 years after the lawsuit was filed, the 11th Panel of the Federal Regional Court of the 3rd Region decided that the term “Botox” is a trademark and is not to be confused with the substance botulinum toxin. The discussion took place in Civil Appeal 0000616-76.2006.4.03.6100 / SP and the decision was unanimous.

The lawsuit was filed by the appellant Cristália Produtos Químicos Farmacêuticos LTDA against Allergan Inc and the Brazilian Patent Office (BPTO).

Cristália claimed that the word “Botox” is indicative of the chemical substance botulinum toxin and therefore it would not be subject to registration. Therefore, the appellant requested the annulment of the trademark registration, owned by Allergan.

The lawsuit was filed in 2006. In a judgment rendered in the first instance, the 19th Federal Civil Court of São Paulo dismissed the lawsuit, but Cristália appealed to the second instance and continued arguing that the registration was in disagreement with the trademark legislation, since the name in question derives from a substance widely used in neurological and aesthetic treatments, and it does not serve to distinguish only the product manufactured by the defendant according to Article 124, VI and XVIII, of Law 9.279 / 96, the Brazilian Industrial Property Law.

However, according to judge Nino Toldo, rapporteur of the case at TRF3, the BPTO’s act of granting the registration of the trademark was “perfectly valid”. The magistrate concluded that the term “Botox” presents the three elements provided for in art. 122 of Law No. 9,279 / 96, necessary to obtain protection and registration as a trademark: Distinctiveness – because it differentiates the product from the company Allergan from those manufactured by other laboratories, such as Botulift (Laboratório Bergamo) and Prosigne (Laboratório Cristália), among others; visually perceptible signs – captured by sight and not by other senses; and no legal prohibition – considering the fences listed in art. 124 of the Industrial Property Law.

Still, the judge understood that the generic character pointed out by Cristália was not characterized in the specific case, because the term “Botox” represents an evocative and suggestive mark of its main component, the botulinum toxin.

“More specifically with regard to its generic character, it should be noted that the word ‘Botox’ is not used to describe the chemical substance itself, which is its main component, and there is no need to speak, therefore, of prohibiting its registration as a trademark. Such a word, by the way, is perfectly capable of individualizing a specific product, within its segment of operation ”, said the judge in his decision.

The vote of the rapporteur judge was followed by all magistrates who are members of the 11th Panel and, by unanimous decision, Cristália’s appeal was denied, the decision of the lower court being upheld.