Mr. Sroczynski and M&S were again recommended in the Expert Guides Competition and Antitrust 2021 legal ranking. “Expert Guides has been researching the world’s legal market for over 20 years and has become one of the most trusted resources for international buyers of legal services.” (expertguides.com)
On 13-15 September 2021 in Krakow, there was held the XXI Krakow Conference organised by the FORUM Educational Centre within the series MODERN Copyright and Intellectual Property Law. Dr Michał Markiewicz gave a lecture covering two issues: 1) the conflict between registered trademarks taking into account the provisions of the Act on Combating Unfair Competition, and 2) doubts around public communication of a work in CJEU rulings and Directive 2019/790. Prof. Ryszard Markiewicz delivered a lecture on: the principles of legal assessment of short fragments of text on the example of copyright protection of the phrase “To take the train by any means”, NFT technology or “Non-Fungible Token”, as well as “New cases, new images – old and new problems of copyright law (jurisprudence of the Court of Justice, Polish judicial decisions, new challenges for copyright law.
Global Competition Review published on 8 September 2021 an article on the Air Liquide/Betamed merger, with a statement by J. Sroczynski on the advisability of introducing the institution of a “monitoring trustee” participating in complex conditional concentrations.
We recommend an article authored by Monika Sewastianowicz and published in the “Prawo.pl” service owned by Wolters Kluwer Polska entitled “Pay attention to protect what’s yours – regaining trademark rights might be difficult and very costly”. The commentary on the case concerning the so-called “trademark trolling” and the trademark in the context of its registration, authored by Dr Michał Markiewicz, deserves particular attention – not only from numerous fans of young YouTube stars Ekipa and their colourful ice cream Koral. In our opinion, it is an interesting example of unfair usage of other’s popularity for own particular interest. Dr Michał Markiewicz points out more broadly that: ” The protection of a trademark is granted from the moment of its application, however, it arises only at the moment of registration of the right of protection for the trademark. Therefore, after registration it is possible to assert claims for infringements occurring from the moment of filing the application for registration. As far as the registration of other people’s signs is concerned, the situation is complicated, as it is possible to register an unregistered sign – however within the procedure before the Polish Patent Office each time it is examined whether the application was filed in bad faith (this circumstance can be brought to the attention of the Office). The registration of a trade mark may also be hindered by the infringement of personal or property rights of third parties, such as e.g. copyrights – which in the procedure before the PPO requires an opposition by the right holder. It happens, however, that such cases end with the repurchase of rights from the person who registered the trade mark or in court. It should also be borne in mind that using someone else’s unregistered sign may be considered unlawful under the Act on Combating Unfair Competition. On the other hand, in the case of conflicts between registered trade marks, it is relevant who filed the trade mark application first.” https://www.prawo.pl/biznes/ekipa-rejestracja-znaku-towarowego-a-trademark-trolling,510291.html
The question to the CJEU in the course of M&S practice. We have before us a solution to an interesting issue concerning a request for information in proceedings in intellectual property cases (Article 479 (112) et seq. of the Code of Civil Procedure). The doubt of the Court in Warsaw concerns the application of Article 8(1) in conjunction with Article 4(1) of Directive 2004/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004. As a consequence, the CJEU will consider the issue of the scope of application of a given measure of protection in the context of the necessity to previously confirm the entitlement to a given intellectual property right for our Client and the whole practice. What is more, as a result of the CJEU decision the issue of interpretation of the above mentioned regulations in the context of standard of proof in case of the so-called information claim is to be resolved. The question of the Court concerns whether it is necessary to prove or only to confirm certain circumstances within the framework of the application.
M&S has been recommended in “WHO IS WHO LEGAL” ranking and Jaroslaw Sroczynski named “GLOBAL LEADER” in the “COMPETITION” area. We are grateful for this distinction.Read more on the WWL Ranking website: https://whoswholegal.com/jaroslaw-sroczynski #whoiswholegal #competition #globalleader
In the 19th edition of the national ranking of law firms 2021 organised by “Rzeczpospolita”, the law firm Markiewicz & Sroczynski received recommendations in 2 areas: 1) Competition and antimonopoly law; 2) Copyright and related rights. Moreover, Prof. Ryszard Markiewicz has been recommended in the field of “Copyright and Related Rights” and Mr. Jarosław Sroczynski in the field of “Competition and Antitrust Law”. These recommendations are made on the basis of indications from other lawyers. We would like to thank everyone who has recommended us! More about the ranking on the Rzeczpospolita website: https://rankingi.rp.pl/rankingkancelarii/2