IP and technology

IP and technology

Intellectual property (IP) refers to creations of the mind, such as inventions, literary and artistic works, designs, symbols, names and images used in commerce. IP is protected in law by IP rights such as trade marks, design rights, copyright and patents.

IP rights allow those who invest time and resources into creating and developing IP to reap benefit from their investment. IP rights are valuable business assets and, like any other asset, should be protected. By registering (where necessary), maintaining and enforcing IP rights, a rights holder can prevent others from stealing or copying their IP and thus maintain the value of their IP rights.

Technology refers to the use of scientific knowledge for practical purposes. IP is a key element of technology, but the IP and IP protection required depends upon the characteristic of the technology concerned.

New and emerging technologies

The technology industry is fiercely competitive and the race to develop the next technological advancement is persistently looming. It is therefore key that technology businesses protect their IP. Although it is important to consider each of the IP rights which may be available, technology

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

TAKE A FREE TRIAL

Latest IP News

IPO reports rise in Trading Standards enforcement actions under Trade Marks Act

The Intellectual Property Office (IPO) annual Trading Standards survey for 2024-25 reveals multiple successful prosecutions under the Trade Marks Act 1994. Notable cases include a £270,000 confiscation order in Berkshire, a 20-month suspended prison sentence in Ceredigion with ongoing Proceeds of Crime Act proceedings, and multiple premises closure orders across the UK. The report, covering April 2024 to March 2025, shows increased enforcement activity with 70% of local authorities responding. Trading Standards officers secured convictions for counterfeiting offences across various jurisdictions, with courts issuing closure orders, confiscation orders and criminal sentences.

UK Data (Use and Access) Bill facing collapse risk over Parliament’s AI copyright challenge

MLex: The UK’s Data (Use and Access) Bill faces increasing risk of collapse after the House of Lords again pushed forward an amendment to include in it protections for rights holders over their works being scraped for AI training. The House of Lords lawmaker who brought the amendment, which calls on the government to bring dedicated draft legislation on the issue, said their intent was not to kill the Bill but to push the government to respond by proposing its own amendment.

Peers push government again over AI copyright concerns

Law360, London: Peers voted once more on 2 June 2025 to introduce an amendment to the Data (Use and Access) Bill (DUA Bill) requiring AI companies to be transparent about the copyright-protected works they are training data on, in the third round of pingpong over the issue.

Res Judicata and the protection of registered designs in the EU and UK post-Brexit (Praesidiad v Zaun)

IP analysis: The Court of Appeal upheld a High Court decision striking out Zaun Ltd’s (Zaun) counterclaim challenging the validity of a registered EU Design (REUD) and its UK re-registered design (UKRRD) equivalent. Praesidiad Holding BVBA (Praesidiad), previously known as Betafence, the design rights holder, had already successfully defended the design’s validity through the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and EU courts. The Court of Appeal ruled that Zaun’s renewed UK challenge was barred by res judicata (the legal doctrine preventing re-litigation of claims or issues that have already been resolved by a competent court) and constituted an abuse of process, despite the UK’s departure from the EU. The decision reinforces that EUIPO judgments, particularly where upheld by the EU General Court, may remain binding in UK proceedings involving post-Brexit re-registered rights. For rights holders, this affirms the continued value and enforceability of EU-originated IP rights in the UK. For defendants, it highlights the importance of raising and resolving validity issues in the appropriate forum, as opportunities to re-litigate in the UK may be limited once EU decisions have reached finality. Written by Amanda McDowall, partner, and Saher Amin, trainee solicitor, at Lee & Thompson LLP.