News

An article by legal counsel Zuzanna Ochońska-Borowska on the subject of litigation in non-monetary claims in intellectual property cases, including prevention and combating of unfair competition, appeared on the Law.pl portal under “5 minutes about IP”. The text addresses doubts about the interpretation of the amended regulations, in the context of the need to determine the value of the subject matter of the dispute (in the case of a claim for omission and publication). Precise determination of CSP still difficult, haphazard or even impossible? Still adequate criteria include: the interest of a certain person in the possibility of undisturbed enjoyment of his rights, the premises of the value of the object of protection, the duration and intensity of the violation, the likelihood of continuation of the violation, the size of the companies of the parties to the proceedings, the period for which the abandonment was requested. At Markiewicz Sroczynski Mioduszewski, we help entrepreneurs in cases of protection of copyright, industrial property rights and protection of other rights on intangible property, including European intellectual property rights and claims for the prevention and suppression of unfair competition, so we look with interest at the further development of the jurisprudential line in this area. Link to article: https://www.prawo.pl/biznes/przedmiot-sporu-przy-roszczeniach-niepienieznych-w-sprawach-wlasnosci-intelektualnej,526309.html

In today’s Rzeczpospolita, Dr. Michal Markiewicz writes about regulations related to the creation of intellectual property rights. In particular, highlighting those that do not require any formalities for this purpose, including copyright, related rights, and the right to an unregistered Community design, among others. In the case of rights that arise as a result of decisions by the relevant offices, it is worth bearing in mind the provisions on infringements occurring between the filing and the granting of the right. Link to article: https://www.rp.pl/biznes/art40121071-kiedy-powstaja-prawa-wlasnosci-intelektualnej

We are pleased to announce that legal advisor Ewelina Bosek and legal advisor Marcin Mioduszewski of Markiewicz Sroczynski Mioduszewski GP have been included by the Patent Office of the Republic of Poland on the list of contractors for the IP Scan service in Poland. IP Scan is a service already known at the EU level and now introduced in Poland to support entrepreneurs (SMEs) in planning and implementing intellectual property protection in their business. The cost of the service is 90% (up to €630) covered by an EU SME Fund grant. Thus, it is a tool that allows, with a negligible financial outlay, to identify important intellectual property objects in the company and to develop a strategy for their protection, so as to realistically use it in the daily operation and further development of the company. More about the IP Scan service: https://tiny.pl/d7rjq

Today in Rzeczpospolita, Dr. Michal Markiewicz writes about software, and more specifically about the problem of shaping the relationships involved in the creation and development of key software for an entrepreneur, such as ERP. Should an entrepreneur develop such a program on his own, use the services of small or medium-sized IT companies, or choose software from one of the large and reputable providers. Each of the above solutions has its pluses, but also gives rise to certain dangers. It is important to make the decision consciously and adjust it to your needs and expectations. Publicly available excerpt from the article: https://archiwum.rp.pl/artykul/1512833-Licencja-na-program-komputerowy—mozliwosci-i-ryzyka.html?fbclid=IwAR28IHUZ2JA8hQGH8jG3PD9C745yE2_mJptFgv3wSX7WZcjBhAFiN1rZydg

The Prawo.pl portal’s “5 minutes on IPR” featured an article by counsel Ewelina Bosek on the obligation to use trademarks and attempts to circumvent it in order to maintain broader trademark protection. The trademark monopoly is not absolute, and in order to maintain it, the mark must be realistically and regularly used in the market after the five-year grace period. On the business side, on the other hand, there are times when protection is needed that is broader than just the actual use of the mark. Is it possible to avoid the obligation to use? Is obtaining further protection rights for an analogous mark in order to avoid this obligation a permissible and effective action? Business strategies vary, but legally they are often unsustainable and easily challenged. Link to article: https://www.prawo.pl/biznes/czy-da-sie-skutecznie-obejsc-obowiazek-uzywania-znaku-towarowego,525924.html?fbclid=IwAR2eU7D-GRhBCBDHIIKhAW14lEoO-z7UkXHtA_BsZk2EDmsQEXJIKPfGDqs

Rzeczpospolita published an article by editor Jan Skoumal, which included a commentary by Dr. Michal Markiewicz on legislative changes to the permitted use for machine learning of generative artificial intelligence (TDM) models. It is a good thing that the ministry has backed off from the proposed TDM modifications, which are contrary to EU law, as otherwise we would limit Poland’s competitiveness, including research opportunities, and the change itself would not affect the activities of major players in the AI market, who could develop their models outside Poland anyway and then offer them to end users in our country. Link to article: https://www.rp.pl/internet-i-prawo-autorskie/art40003381-nowelizacja-prawa-autorskiego-sztuczna-inteligencja-wraca-do-lask

Recently, visits to the CJEU have become our tradition. This time Marcin Mioduszewski and Zuzanna Ochońska-Borowska had the honor of appearing before the Court in a preliminary question proceeding. In an unfair competition appeal case pending before a national court, in which we are representing our client, doubts have arisen about the correctness of the composition of the court of first instance. The Court of Justice of the EU will now answer questions regarding violations of the rules on random allocation of judges to cases, in the context of EU law. We look forward to the judgment, which will have a not inconsiderable impact on the practice and understanding of another aspect of the independence and impartiality of judges in the EU. Advocate General L. Medina’s opinion is scheduled for June 2024.