°Őłó±đĚý(the “Gowling WLG IPilogue Prize”) was pioneered inĚý’sĚýIntellectual Property class in the Fall 2007 term and has been generously sponsored each year since then by , formerlyĚýGowling Lafleur Henderson LLP. As a sector-focused law firm, Gowling WLG provides clients with in-depth expertise in key global sectors and a suite of legal services, including a and 300-strong .

All blog entries and comments on the IPilogue submitted by Osgoode students are considered automatically for the prize. In each academic semester, one prize is awarded for the best blog post and one prize for the best comment.

This award is a chance to recognize Osgoode students' research and writing in a specialized and technical field and further encourage them to develop their strong interest in Intellectual Property Law. Of course, the subject matter of the IPilogue goes beyond strictly IP. Our stories also delve into related areas including: internet law, privacy rights, broadcasting, social media and free speech.

We are pleased to announce this year’s winners of the Gowling WLG IPilogue Prizes:

Fall 2020 Term:

Best Blog: Summer Lewis on “”

Best Blog Comment: We did not award a winner for this category

Winter 2021 Term:

Best Blog Post: Sebastian Romanutti on “”

Best Blog Comment: We have a tie.

Elif Babaoglu’s comment on “”

Jared Sues’s comment on “”

Congratulations to our winners and thank you to all who make the IPilogue possible. We are most grateful to Gowling WLG for its generous support.

The post Announcing the 2020-2021 Winners of the Gowling WLG Best Blog in IP Law and Technology Prize appeared first on IPOsgoode.

It was apparent from day one of my internship that this drive for results stems from the backgrounds of ventureLAB team. As predominately successful entrepreneurs from the hardware, health and enterprise software industries, the team’s mission is for clients to realize the same successes they did and to keep that success benefiting all Canadians. With an eye on inclusivity, this is accomplished by providing clients access to resources that their experience has taught were necessary for these successes as well as guiding clients away from “opportunities” that may not provide positive results. VentureLAB offers physical space, access to government and private investment where they have positioned themselves as trusted program administrators, guidance from experienced industry leaders, and connections to a wide range of business and legal needs through and contacts. Their success has given them the ear of government and many industry leaders and allows them to select clients that they will be the most successful in helping.

One of the most interesting aspects of ventureLAB is that they are well positioned to further Innovation, Science and Industry Minister Bains’ focus on ensuring that Canadian generated intellectual property continues to benefit Canadians. This is most evident in their role as administrator of the Canadian IP Retention Initiative (CIRI). The purpose of this program is to retain IP in Canada by connecting IP rich Canadian companies at risk of being acquired out of country with Canadian companies as a viable alternative. This program specifically targets the important issue of IP retention in Canada. However, the goal of IP retention in Canada permeates everything ventureLAB does.

I was glad to be a part of this posture by serving as a resource providing initial IP assistance in the form of IP audits and initial IP strategy guidance. Because I was able to plug into this key need for them, the experience was mutually rewarding. Starting in my first week, I was introduced to clients who by the end of my interaction with them had either initiated or shifted their IP strategy based on the information I provided. Many were also connected with resources that both from ventureLAB and my network to further their IP needs. In the two and a half months that I was there I even got to see some clients generate success from these endeavors. This is a testament to ventureLAB’s ability to not only provide resources, but to provide the right resources that generate productivity.

The feeling of being productive is a prime motivator for innovators, employees, and facilitators alike. That is why what and more importantly how ventureLAB is contributing to the productivity of Canada is so important. I have been fortunate to be a part of that productivity and hope that I can capitalize on the motivation it has provided me. Thank you ventureLAB!

Written by Jared Sues, JD Candidate 2021, enrolled in Professors D’Agostino and Vaver 2020/2021 IP & Technology Law Intensive Program at Osgoode Hall Law School. As part of the course requirements, students were asked to write a reflective blog on their internship experience.

The post VentureLAB: How to Produce IP Producers (IP Intensive Reflection) appeared first on IPOsgoode.

Minister Bains highlighted how IP rich small and medium entities (SMEs) are twice as likely to be high growth and four times as likely to export. He pointed directly to cleantech as part of Canada’s needed “green recovery” from the financial impact of the ongoing pandemic. He looked to the patent collective to help Canada in its transition from an “industrial economy to an innovation economy” and explained how the IAC will “foster the collaboration that will bring Canada to a sustainable future.”

Following Minister Bains’ remarks, a roundtable lead by Mr. Hinton featured from IAC partner Business Development Canada, leaders from two potential IAC member companies, Daniela Roper of and Jon Lipinski of , and Mr. Cowan of the IAC. The potential members provided insights as to how the IAC would act as a shield for member companies that draw the attention of international behemoths, particularly nonpracticing entities, which are concerned about their freedom to operate. They relayed how as their companies mature, their IP becomes both a threat and attractive to these behemoths. They are therefore exposed to risk created by the leverage the large companies’ substantial IP portfolios can bring to bear.

Mr. Cowan described how these issues are being exacerbated during this pandemic driven downturn as the cost associated with holding patent assets encourages companies to sell them and how this gives NPEs the opportunity to amass patents at low costs. He relayed how the financial pressure furthers the gap between those companies and countries who can think about IP and those who do not have the capital to do so. For him, it is important how Minister Bains has positioned Canada well in this space and that the IAC is a key piece in supporting Canada’s endeavours to be one of the countries that thinks about IP by helping companies with the burden of doing so.

Both Mr. Hinton and Mr. Cowan explained that the IAC was not going to replace traditional IP service providers nor is its goal to acquire patents either from or explicitly for the practice of their members. Rather, its mission is to “give companies the knowledge base to help them ask the right questions of the IP service providers” and to provide them with the intelligence to back up those questions. The idea is to create a situation where the members can better engage with their service provider.

Mr. Cowan stressed that it is the intention of the IAC to tailor its patent portfolio to its members’ needs as they develop, but as an initial approach, it will make acquisitions to pull low value deterring patents off the market and to rescue patents at risk of being abandoned from being acquired by entities that would pose as an obstruction. While the IAC may license to members or provide a covenant not to sue, the primary purpose is to clear the way for Canadian innovation.

The plan, which Mr. Cowan said was not novel but rather tailored to the Canadian environment, is to use the collective force of Canada as a whole to acquire a strategic defensive patent portfolio, to provide a shield for its members. This will allow Canadian SMEs to operate in the same waters as these larger typically foreign entities with at least some cover.

With its launch, the IAC is now accepting members and is excited to begin the work of supporting Canadian SMEs to better understand, commercialize and protect their IP.

Jared Sues is an IP Osgoode Innovation Clinic Coordinator and regular IPilogue Contributor

The post Canada Officially Launches its Innovation Asset Collective appeared first on IPOsgoode.

The primary issue in this case was whether the labeling on the wine was false, misleading, or deceptive contrary to and . This issue arose from the requirement in that “a clear indication of the country of origin shall be shown on the principal display panel of a wine.” Mactavish MJ’s key consideration was whether the “Made in Israel” label reasonably met these standards set out in the and .

Striking, however, is the absence of any discussion of which provides a regime for establishing protected geographical indications. Unlike the and , the addresses producer discretion in geographical indications and its relation to consumer understanding, the very issue Mactavish MJ is trying to resolve. Furthermore, as Binnie J pointed out in the is “consumer protection legislation”. It therefore does not suffer from the scope issues Mactavish MJ attributes to the and , the sources brought by the plaintiff. While the was properly not adjudicated, as it was not raised by the parties, it could have provided helpful guidance.

The regime prescribed in the focuses on the question of consumer understanding of geographical rather than political boundaries. While it leaves ample room for discretion in this regard, the repeatedly references “the territory, or the region or locality of a territory, in which the wine … is identified as originating.” Therefore, a product falling outside of a specified political boundary, but still within the region or locality of such a “territory” could, by law, be indicated as originating from the territory. In other words, a wine produced in the Israeli region could properly be labeled as “Made in Israel” without being misleading.

The question is therefore reframed from whether the West Bank is part of the State of Israel, to whether it is within the region of Israel. This approach allows the producer to separate the politically charged foreign policy issues that Mactavish MJ refers to as “profound”, “difficult”, “intractable”, “deeply-felt” and “sensitive” from their requirement to inform the consumer. The reasonable person’s understanding of a region is still a matter in question, but the approach of focusing on this understanding, rather than a legal or political definition of the area restores the concerned laws to their purpose of consumer protection.

. If the case proceeds, perhaps the will yet still shed some light on whether wines made in the West Bank will be allowed to be sold in Canada labeled as “Made in Israel”.

Written by Jared Sues, a second year JD Candidate at Osgoode Hall Law School. Jared is an IP Osgoode IPilogue Editor and Innovation Clinic Coordinator

Ěý

The post Wine From … Israel? appeared first on IPOsgoode.