Many of us use the Apple feature where a double-click of a button allows for payment via Apple Pay without even unlocking the iPhone. Interestingly, this very technology became the focus of a recent landmark decision by the Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office (EPO).

Court rulings in Kazakhstan demonstrate an inconsistent and, at times, unpredictable approach to trademark disputes. It appears that even highly limited use of a brand name can suffice to maintain broad legal protection.

In a decision dated March 25, 2026, the Versailles Court of Appeal brought a high-profile case initiated by the fashion house Hermès to a close. The core of the conflict involved a company selling handbags that were nearly exact replicas of the legendary Birkin and Kelly models. The only distinction was the humorous slogans emblazoned on the front.

The beginning of 2026 has been marked by a true sensation: the court granted not one, but two consecutive injunctions, signaling a radical shift in the country's legal climate.

March 2026 brought the news the global market had been awaiting for eight years: Australia and the European Union have finally reached an agreement on a Free Trade Agreement (FTA). The sharpest stumbling block in the negotiations, which had been ongoing since 2018, was Geographical Indications (GIs)—special product names that denote their origin from a specific region.

In April 2025, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) quietly concluded its Climate Change Mitigation Pilot Program (CCMPP) — an initiative that once provided green inventions with a direct "green light" in the patent queue. Introduced to accelerate innovations capable of mitigating global warming, its termination signals a shift in administrative priorities and political tone.