On 24 December 2015, Regulation (EU) no. 2015/2424 was published. This Regulation enters into force on 23 March 2016 and − together with Directive (EU) no. 2015/2436  − significantly changes the current European legislation on trademarks, reforming part of Regulation (CE) no. 207/2009 on Community trademarks. The latter will change its name to “European Union trademark” and the current Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market (OHIM) will change its name to “European Union Intellectual Property Office” (EUIPO).

Since 9 January – the date on which most of Regulation (EU) no. 524/2013 became applicable – disputes concerning online sales and service contracts concluded between consumers resident and traders established in the Union have a new Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) tool: the European online dispute resolution (ODR) platform, operational as of 15 February 2016 and available at the following website http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/odr/.

With sentence no. 472 of 14 January 2016, the IP Court of Milan (Judges Mr Marangoni, Mrs Dal Moro and Mrs Giani) granted patent protection to a particular pair of jeans that can “enhance and shape the forms of the wearers, with particular reference to the gluteus area”, and ordered the defendants to return the profits derived from the sale of infringing goods.

On 30 December, the IP Court of Turin ruled as a precautionary measure for the protection of the registered designs of some showerheads. The subject matter is the same as we discussed here a few days ago in reviewing a decision by the Milan IP Court.

On 14 December 2015, the IP division of the Court of Milan ruled in preliminary injunction proceedings (docket number 40511/2015) on a case of alleged trademark infringement by means of the well-known Google AdWords service (a topic already discussed here on this blog).

With an order dated 28 December 2015, the IP division of the Milan Court granted provisional protection to the “wink” trademark characterising the Flirting collection of well-known fashion blogger and designer Chiara Ferragni.

On 24 December 2015 the Court of Milan, Business Chamber “A”, issued an interim order granting the preliminary appeal by Full Spot S.p.A., the company commercialising the well-known “O bags”.

On 1 December, the IP Court of Milan issued a judgment (no. 13487/2015) which granted copyright protection to a particular bottle designed by Ross Lovegrove, which was considered infringed by the glasses named “Sorgente” which are manufactured and commercialised by an Italian well-known company.

On 3 November the Italian Court of Cassation ruled in the matter of alleged infringement of a figurative trademark reproduced by a third party within a complex graphic pattern used for ornamental purposes. In particular, the Court of Cassation rejected the appeal against a second instance ruling in which the Court of Appeal of Turin – confirming an earlier decision of the first instance court – ruled out the likelihood of confusion between an Italian figurative trademark owned by Lotto Sport Italia S.p.A (consisting of the iconic double lozenge) and an allegedly identical sign serially reproduced within a graphic pattern on the surface of some clothes and bags designed by Max&Co, a brand belonging to the Max Mara Fashion Group.

We recently talked here on this blog of the motion filed by Barilla against an Italian company (“the respondent”) that sells pillows with shapes and names that are similar to those of some of the applicant’s goods.

The Milan IP Court recently dealt with the competitive effects of the violation of tax rules on “permanent establishment” in Italy (order of 16.11.2015, Judge Mrs Gandolfi).

With ruling no. 3575/2015 of 21 October 2015, the Company Matters division of the Florence District Court (whose jurisdiction encompasses IP matters) awarded a major victory to Consorzio del Vino Nobile di Montepulciano, a trading association representing the interests of grape growers and winemakers engaged in the production of Vino Nobile di Montepulciano, a wine originated in the area of Montepulciano, near Siena.

On 28 October, the IP Court of Milan (Business Chamber “A”) issued an interesting ruling (no. 2048/2015) on a topic of no frequent discussion: the employee’s right to compensation for the inventions realised by him/her in the execution of his/her work, where no specific salary was agreed for such inventive activity.

In a decision published in August 2015, the second Division of the Italian Patent and Trademark Office (UIBM) upheld the opposition filed by Riva S.p.A., a historic Italian company active in the field of luxury yachting, against the application for the Italian figurative trademark “Diva Yachts”, filed in 2012 by a Chinese competitor.

With sentence no. 11416/15 of 13 October, the IP Court of Milan (Business Chamber “A”) granted copyright protection to the interior design of the shops of the known cosmetics chain Kiko. The Court held that the relevant project was protected under art. 2(5) of the Italian Copyright Law (“ICL”), according to which “architectural designs and works” enjoy copyright protection.

The Italian Antitrust Authority (AGCM) punished Techmania S.r.l., a tech e-commerce company – already penalised by the Authority in the past – having found it in breach of Articles 20, 24, 25(d) and 61 of the Italian Consumer Code, which deal with the prohibition of unfair and aggressive commercial practices against consumers (including the imposition of barriers by the trader to the exercise of consumers’ contractual rights) and grant consumers the right to terminate the contract and receive reimbursement if goods that they purchase via distance selling are not delivered within 30 days.

The Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market (“OHIM”) recently declared the invalidity of the registered Community trademark “instaweather”, granting the application for a declaration of invalidity filed by Instagram LLC, the owner of the well-known trademark.

On 5 October, the IP Court of Milan (Judge Mrs Tavassi) issued an interim decision in a dispute between two companies managing paid car parks, respectively the licensor and licensee of the ParkToFly trademark and of the booking software hosted on the domain name www.parktofly.it.

Following a preliminary proceeding commenced by Barilla against an Italian textile company to stop the production and commercialisation of pillows reproducing the name and the shape of some of Barilla’s most famous cookies, the Milan IP Court upheld both the word trademark infringement and the parasitic competition claim, granting an injunction in the terms described below.