Is this you? As a journalist, you can create a free Muck Rack account to customize your profile, list your contact preferences, and upload a portfolio of your best work.
Claim your profile
Articles by Nedim Malovic
Volume 21, Issue 4, April 2026
This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only Sign In or Create an Account This PDF is available to Subscribers Only For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription. As a benefit of your subscription, you can share temporary access to restricted articles. Each link will stop working after 30 days or 10 uses. You may create up to 10 links in a 30 day period. Please sign in to your personal account to gift article access.
Owning the celebration: signature moves in the age of synthetic media
A mid-air dunk. A lightning-bolt pose. Folded arms after a goal. Sports stars are turning signature movements into registered trademarks — but can the law still hold the line when AI can generate the gesture without the athlete? For decades, athletes such as Kylian Mbappé, Michael Jordan and Usain Bolt have transcended their respective sports to become global icons. Mbappé crossing his arms and tucking his hands beneath his armpits.
Brand wars: the never-ending battle against the clones
When are goods supposed to be for personal use and when should they be assumed to be used in the course of trade under trade mark law? This question was brought before the District Court of The Hague, and later the Court of Appeal of The Hague, in a case (here and here) involving the importation of counterfeit Off-White products from Turkey to Germany by a private individual. Background In October 2022, Mr. Aslan travelled from Turkey to Germany.
Non-conventional trade marks and distinctiveness: some remarks from the EUIPO Case Law Conference 2024
Last month, I had the opportunity and privilege to speak at the EUIPO Case Law Conference 2024 and present the challenges of trademark modernization, under the heading “Reconciling the Old with the New: Challenges of Trade Mark Modernization” [see IPKat here]. In this post, I would like to discuss the main conclusion that I reached after reviewing case law of the EUIPO issued over the period 2022 – 2023.
Thursday Whimsies
With Thursday coming to an end, readers are informed about relevant developments in the IP world. New events and conferences are added to our Events page continuously, so do not forget to check it out regularly! Peter Meier-Beck on 10xGenomics v Nanostring: How are novelty and inventive step to be assessed and should the patent claim be construed first?
[Guest post] Horological IP and the customization of watches
The IPKat has received and is pleased to publish a guest contribution by Katfriend Hans Eriksson (Westerberg & Partners) that discusses the rights conferred by trade mark law in the context of horology. Here’s what Hans writes: Horological IP and the customization of watches by Hans Eriksson The world of high-end watchmaking is a good case study for the importance of intellectual property (IP) rights.
Sunday Surprises
With a new week just about to start, readers are informed about relevant developments in the IP world. New events and conferences are added to our Events page continuously, so do not forget to check it out regularly! The IPKat is thrilled to announce that, in the evening of 14 March 2024, a stellar panel has been gathered to discuss the Court of Appeal of England and Wales judgment in THJ v Sheridan [2023] EWCA Civ 1354 regarding copyright originality in certain graphic user interfaces (GUIs).
Banksy’s trade marks once again at the centre of attention, this time with repeat filings as bad faith
A while ago, the IPKat reported [here, here, and here] on a number of cancellation actions directed at Banks’s EU trade mark (EUTM) registrations representing his artworks.
Sculptor sues glass maker over Swedish transposition of Article 20 DSM Directive and to test its temporal application
As readers may be aware, Articles 18-22 of the Directive (EU) 2019/790 (DSM Directive) [IPKat coverage here] establish protective measures for authors and performers that license or transfer the exclusive economic rights over their works and performances to third parties for the purpose of exploitation.
[Guest post] Bad Bunny shoo shooes anyone liking AI-generated song replicating his style and voice - is he right?
The issues with AI-generated content and AI clones are certainly not going away any time soon. The latest concerns Porto Rican sensation Bad Bunny, as Katfriend Despoina Dimitrakopoulou (Plug and Play Tech Center) explains. Over to Despoina: Bad Bunny shoo shooes anyone liking AI-generated song replicating his style and voice – is he right?
[Guest post] Transparency requirements in the EU Provisional Agreement on the Artificial Intelligence Act influence the copyright and wider tech debate
The IPKat has received and is pleased to host the following guest opinion by Katfriend Roya Ghafele (OxFirst), addressing the copyright implications of the upcoming EU Artificial Intelligence Act.
Swedish court requests CJEU to clarify notion of ‘author’s own intellectual creation’ when assessing EU originality standard
When assessing whether a work of applied art affords exclusive rights granted through copyright, what factors should be considered? Should the originality requirement focus on factors related to the creative process and the author’s account of the actual choices that they made, or rather factors concerning the work itself and the final result of the creative process?
[Guest post] Online copyright protection in Greece: recent developments in dynamic website blocking
The IPKat has received and is pleased to host the following guest contribution by Eleni Lappa (Ipwork.gr) on recent developments concerning online copyright protection in Greece. Here’s what Eleni writes: Online consumption of audiovisual content has become increasingly popular globally over the past few years, even more so since the Covid-19 pandemic. But how can rights in such content be effectively protected?
Distinctiveness and human faces: can you register a face? Perhaps, but not so easily
In a recent decision (only available in Dutch), the EUIPO Examination Division rejected an application for EU trade mark (EUTM) registration concerning a figurative mark that depicted Dutch model Puck Schrover (see below). In particular, the EUIPO Examination Division considered that the applicant failed to demonstrate that the mark had distinctive character and/or acquired distinctiveness through use, pursuant to Articles 7(1)(b) and 7(3) of Regulation 2017/1001 (EUTMR).
[Guest post] Deepfake it till you make it: How does AI relate to postmortem personality rights?
The IPKat has received and is pleased to host the following contribution by Danish Katfriends Jakob Plesner Mathiasen and Thit Nymand Nisbeth (both Gorrissen Federspiel) on the interplay between AI, deepfakes, and personality rights in the form of image/publicity rights. Here’s what they write: Deepfake it till you make it: How does AI relate to postmortem personality rights?
EUIPO Fifth Board of Appeal rules out that sale of spare parts for Ferrari’s Testarossa is genuine use of the trade mark
Pursuant to Article 58(1)(a) of Regulation 2017/1001 (EUTMR), a trade mark which has not been put to genuine use by its holder within five years after its registration may be liable to revocation unless there are valid reasons for its non-use.
[Guest Post] Third time’s a charm: The Little Mermaid and a big win for satire and freedom of speech
The IPKat is pleased to host the guest contribution below by Katfriends Hanne Kirk and Paul Sina (Gorrissen Federspiel) on the recent Danish Supreme Court decision concerning The Little Mermaid.
Cryptocurrency exchange platform Coinbase wins trade mark bad faith battle before EU General Court
In a recent judgment, the General Court upheld the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU’s) reasoning in Chocoladefabriken Lindt & Sprüngli (C‑529/07) EU:C:2009:361 and held that, when an applicant is acting in bad faith, all the relevant factors specific to the particular case at the time of filing the EU trade mark must be taken into consideration (and not merely the scope of appeal as limited years later).
EUIPO Board of Appeal holds numeric pattern insufficiently distinctive to be a trade mark
In a decision issued earlier this month, the EUIPO First Board of Appeal (the Board) held that a mark comprising of the sequence of numbers from 0 to 23 could not be registered as an EU trade mark (EUTM), since it would be perceived as a listing of the product or an article number.
IPR infringement in yellow-and-blue logo: Lidl wins High Court dispute against Tesco
In a judgment issued a few days ago, the High Court of England and Wales (the Court) held that Tesco had infringed Lidl’s copyright, trade mark, and rights in passing off vesting in Lidl’s blue-and-yellow logo. However, the case was not completely successful for Lidl, since the Court also found that Lidl had registered its figurative wordless mark in bad faith.
General Court considers ‘gymnastic and sporting articles’ and ‘games and toys’ dissimilar for the purpose of likelihood of confusion assessment
Are toys that fall within the category of ‘gymnastic and sporting articles’ different from toys that fall within the broader category of ‘games and toys’? In a recent decision, the General Court considered the goods covered by the marks in question, namely ‘Games, toys’ and ‘Gymnastic and sporting articles’, dissimilar since they have a different nature, intended purpose, method of use, manufacturers, and distribution channels.
[Guest post] The Anne Black Danish copyright trilogy: The final say and a tripling of damages and compensation
Over the past few years, The IPKat has hosted a number of posts on the lengthy Danish saga relating to protection and infringement of copyright in pottery created by designer Anne Black. Now, the final word seems to have been spoken, as Katfriends Hanne Kirk and Charlotte Mittet Høfler (both Gorrissen Federspiel) report.
[Guest post] SIAE vs Meta: no more Italian music available on Facebook and Instagram?
The IPKat has received and is happy to host this guest contribution by Deborah De Angelis (Studio Legale DDA) on the highly publicized halted licensing negotiations between Italian collecting society SIAE and Meta regarding the availability of the music repertoire administered by the former on the latter’s services. Here’s what Deborah writes: SIAE vs Meta: no more Italian music available on Facebook and Instagram?
[Guest post] Virtual wars: Exploring legal boundaries in the gaming world
The IPKat has received and is please to host the following contribution by Katfriends Jakob Plesner Mathiasen and Paul Sina (both Gorrissen Federspiel Denmark) concerning IP and gaming. Here’s what they write: Virtual wars: Exploring legal boundaries in the gaming world by Jakob Plesner Mathiasen and Paul Sina The HBO series "The Last of Us" has taken the world by storm, as it explores a post-apocalyptic world ravaged by the Cordyceps fungus.
[Guest post] Critical review of recent design case law by the General Court
The IPKat has received and is pleased to host the following guest contribution by Katfriend Henning Hartwig (Bardehle Pagenberg) on some recent EU design case law.
[Guest post] The NFT Hermés Case: Mainly Relevant for Large Collection of NFTs
The IPKat is pleased to host the following guest post by Katfriend Paolo Maria Gangi (Studio Gangi). Here’s what Paolo writes: The NFT Hermés Case: Mainly Relevant for Large Collection of NFTs by Paolo Maria Gangi Over the past few weeks a lot has been said about the decision – on 14 February last – of the Southern District Court of New York in favour of Hermès against NFT creator Rothschild.
[Guest post] Decathlon successful in protecting its store layout in China
The IPKat has received and is pleased to host the following guest contribution by former InternKat James Kwong (Norton Rose Fulbright) on a recent Chinese decision concerning protectability of a store layout under the law of unfair competition.
[Guest post] Engines are really warming up: one (last?!) life sciences conference before the UPC
The IPKat has received and is pleased to host the following conference report by former GuestKat Gabriele Girardello (Pavia e Ansaldo) on a life sciences conference that he attended in Amsterdam a few days ago.
[Guest post] Under the influence: Influencer marketing - when private individuals become professionals and (potentially) responsible for IP infringements - The IPKat
The IPKat has received and is pleased to publish another guest contribution by Danish Katfriends Jakob Plesner Mathiasen, Hanne Kirk and Thit Nymand Nisbeth (all Gorrissen Federspiel) tackling influencer marketing from an IP perspective.
[Guest post] Litigation commenced against the developers of AI image generation software
Katfriends Adrian Aronsson-Storrier and Oliver Fairhurst from Lewis Silkin report on recent litigation in the UK against the developers of AI generation software. This litigation has arisen amongst a flurry of recent interest in AI generated works.
Can Charlie Chaplin’s character “Charlot” be registered as an EU trade mark?
In the era of silent films, Charlie Chaplin did rise to become a worldwide icon through his screen persona, the Tramp (Charlot in several languages). It may therefore come as no surprise that companies, to this day, attempt to monetize in his iconic image.
[Guest post] BAYC sues Ryder Ripps over unauthorized minting of NFTs - Part 2
The IPKat is pleased to host the following guest post by Katfriend Paolo Maria Gangi (Studio Gangi) as a “sequel” to his earlier IPKat post discussing the lawsuit brought by BAYC against Ryder Ripps.
[Guest post] No small feat: Converse wins Dutch Supreme Court case on trade mark exhaustion
The IPKat has received and is pleased to host a new contribution by former GuestKat Jan Jacobi. Here’s what Jan writes: No small feat: Converse wins Dutch Supreme Court case on trade mark exhaustion by Jan Jacobi As explained in an earlier blog, proving trade mark exhaustion (within the meaning of Article 15 of the Trade Mark Directive) can be a very challenging task.
Use of a 3D mark for a potato chip in an altered form: what is needed to avoid revocation for non use?
During the past few years, non-conventional trade marks have found their way into trade mark registries worldwide and discussions over their protection has more or less turned mainstream. This blog has on several occasions reported on decisions related to non-conventional trade marks [see for instance and recently IPKat posts here, here and here].
The post-Brexit trade mark order: (ir)relevance of use and acquired distinctiveness in the UK for EU trade marks
Post-Brexit, evidence of use and acquired distinctiveness of a trade mark may be one of the areas within trade mark law that cause headaches for practitioners.
General Court reminds that in invalidity proceedings EUIPO Boards of Appeal can only review arguments submitted by parties (failing to do so also breaches EU Charter of Fundamental Rights)
In contrast to proceedings related to relative grounds for refusal, invalidity proceedings are different in that the examination by the Cancellation Division and the EUIPO Boards of Appeal are limited to the grounds and arguments submitted by the parties (Article 95 (1) of Regulation 2017/1001 (EUTMR)).
[Guest post] Archival Authenticity or Iconic Copies? Some IP Thoughts on Dolce & Gabbana’s SS23 Collection Curated by Kim
The IPKat is delighted to host the contribution below by Katfriend Felicia Caponigri (IMT Alti Studi Lucca and Fashion by Felicia) on the IP implications of the recent and seemingly already iconic Dolce&Gabbana fashion show at the recent Milan Fashion Week. Here’s what Felicia writes: Archival Authenticity or Iconic Copies?
Swedish court applies C-762/19 CV-Online Latvia in parking app battle
The IPKat is delighted to host the guest post below, penned by Katfriend Hans Eriksson (Westerberg and Partners), on a recent Swedish decision which has applied the recent ruling of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in C-762/19 CV-Online Latvia. Here’s what Hans writes: Thankfully Kitty found a place where to park her car Content and service aggregation is big business in 2022.
[Guest post] Milan loses derby against Inter… in Court
Katfriend Federica Combariati (TM IP Counsel at Assa Abloy) discusses a recent decision relating to AC Milan’s attempt to extend its international trade mark registration for its club logo to the territory of the European Union.
Transposing the DSM Directive: the draft Swedish implementation of Article 17
While some countries have already adopted the DSM Directive into their own laws (last week it was the turn of Spain and Italy: see here and here), many are still working full force on implementing it, despite that the deadline has already passed. As to Sweden, a government inquiry was initiated last year and completed earlier this autumn.
Is Veuve Clicquot’s orange a colour or a figurative mark?
As background to a (lengthy) case leading to an interesting decision of the General Court, Veuve Clicquot Ponsardin (the applicant) applied to register a colour mark, by ticking the box “figurative mark” in the application form to the then OHIM (now EUIPO). The Examiner, in rejecting the application due to lack of distinctiveness, also informed the applicant that it should have ticked the box “other” if it sought to claim protection for a colour per se.
Appointed Person considers status of international trade marks in the UK post BREXIT
In an interesting decision (O/557/21) rendered following an appeal against a decision of an Hearing Officer of the UK Intellectual Property Office (UK IPO), the Appointed Person upheld the Hearing Officer’s decision ((O/474/20) and declared the appellant’s trade mark invalid on the basis of a likelihood of confusion between the marks at issue.
General Court considers ‘PANTA RHEI’ confusingly similar to ‘PANTA RHEI’ despite low similarity of goods
In a recent decision, the General Court considered that ‘PANTA RHEI’ was confusingly similar to the earlier EU trade mark ‘PANTA RHEI’. In particular, the General Court found that, on account of the identity of the two signs and despite the low degree of similarity between the goods, the Applicant’s mark was still capable of giving rise to a likelihood of confusion on part of the relevant public.
EU General Court considers bad faith claim in scenario of parties’ earlier cooperation
Bad faith pursuant to Article 59(1)(b) of the EU Trade Mark Regulation (EUTMR), presupposes the presence of a dishonest state of mind or intention (Koton Mağazacilik Tekstil Sanayi ve Ticaret v EUIPO (C‑104/18 P)).
EU General Court says that ‘heartfulness’ for meditation cannot be registered as an EU trade mark
In an mindful (given the topic!) decision from earlier this year, the General Court considered that the word ‘heartfulness’ conveys the meaning of a particular relaxation and meditation technique and therefore does not perform its essential function as an indicator of commercial origin for meditation-related goods and services. The mark was therefore considered descriptive pursuant to Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation 2017/1001 (the EU trade mark regulation (EUTMR)).
No likelihood of confusion between EU collective trade mark ‘HALLOUMI’ and ‘BBQLOUMI’, says EU General Court
In a recent decision concerning the likelihood of confusion between the EU collective trade mark ‘HALLOUMI’ and the sign ‘BBQLOUMI’, the EU General Court held that – in light of the similarity between the signs, the goods and services, and the distinctive character of the former mark – there was no likelihood of confusion pursuant to Articles 8(1)(b) and 75 – 82 of Regulation 2017/1001 (the EU trade mark regulation (EUTMR)).
General Court says that ‘ALMEA’ and ’MEA’ are confusingly similar
How far does likelihood of confusion go, within the meaning of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation 2017/1001 (the EU Trade Mark Regulation (EUTMR)), when it comes to the comparison between two signs? In an interesting decision from last month, the General Court considered that - despite the generally high level of attention of the target public for the Class 5 goods – the figurative sign (depicted below) was confusingly similar to the German word mark ‘MEA’.
General Court says that ‘MARK’ and ‘MARQ’ are confusingly similar despite low degree of similarity between respective goods
In a recent decision, the General Court upheld the EUIPO Fifth Board of Appeal’s (the Board) findings regarding the likelihood of confusion between the two signs ‘MARK’ and ‘MARQ’. The General Court considered that there was a low degree of similarity between the goods in Class 11 covered by the Applicant’s mark and the ‘lighting mixers’ in Class 9 covered by the earlier mark.
CJEU assesses the scope of ‘genuine use’ and considers that the resale of vehicles and replacement parts thereof amounts to ‘genuine use’
Does the resale of vehicles and replacement parts thereof amount to genuine use of a trade mark under Article 12(1) of Directive 2008/95/EC (the former Trade Mark Directive) [now Article 19 of Directive 2015/2436]? Is there genuine use – pursuant to that same provision – when the trade mark proprietor offers services which do not use the trade mark but are intended for the goods already sold?
Show More
loading
Actions
Is this you?
As a journalist, you can create a free Muck Rack account to customize your profile, list your contact preferences, and upload a portfolio of your best work.Get in touch with Nedim
Contact Nedim, search articles and posts on X, monitor coverage, and track replies from one place.
Learn more about Muck Rack