A company’s digital presence is now crucial to its brand success. Whether it’s a website, social media or e-commerce, businesses need to ensure their brands are nationally and Internationally protected and defended. Leupold Legal´s services in trademark law include:
In a data driven economy, digital content, software and databases are essential assets. However, companies face new challenges: Who owns the rights to AI-generated content? How can software be licensed in a legally secure manner? Are AI algorithms, models and systems protected by copyright? Which rights of use can be monetized for digital media? The services of Leupold Legal in copyright law include in particular:
With the increasing digitalization, the risk of trade secrets being compromised through cyber attacks, internal breaches or insufficient protection is on the rise. The EU Trade Secrets Directive and the German Trade Secrets Act (GeschGehG) require companies to take concrete measures to be able to claim legal protection for their know-how. Leupold Legal’s services for safeguarding your trade secrets include:
In both regions, copyright arises when a work eligible for copyright protection is created. Registration is not required.
In Germany and the EU, copyright law protects personal intellectual creations, including literary works (such as written works, speeches and computer programs), musical works, pantomimic works, including works of dance, artistic works including works of architecture and of applied art, photographic works and cinematographic works, and illustrations of a scientific or technical nature, such as drawings, plans, maps, sketches, tables and three-dimensional representations. However, mere ideas and works lacking the required level of originality are not afforded copyright protection.
Since a corporation cannot be the author of a copyrighted work, the authorship of a computer program rests with the natural person who created it. However, EU Directive 2009/24/EC and the national copyright laws of EU member states stipulate that if a computer program is created by an employee in the course of their duties or based on instructions from their employer, the employer shall exclusively be entitled to all economic rights to the program unless otherwise agreed upon in a contract. However, this does not apply to freelancers who are assigned programming tasks.
A rights holder may seek a cease-and-desist order under § 97, para. 1, of the German Copyright Act if there is actual or imminent infringement of copyright. The claimant must demonstrate ownership of the copyrighted work and prove that the infringement occurred. If the claimant did not create the work, proof of ownership of rights requires a complete chain of title from the author to the claimant. The required urgency for an injunction is typically presumed in interim proceedings. Damage claims can only be decided in main proceedings after an action has been brought.
Any sign capable of distinguishing goods or services can be registered, including words, logos, sounds, three-dimensional designs, the shape of goods or their packaging, and other wrapping, including colors and color combinations. The sign must have distinctive character and not be descriptive. For word marks, fictitious terms that are not descriptive and are not already in use in any language often work best.
Trademark owners can assert injunctive relief and, in the event of intentional or negligent infringement, claim damages, for the calculation of which they can also assert claims to information. Under the Anti-Counterfeiting Regulation (EU Regulation 608/2013), customs authorities may suspend the release of goods suspected of infringing a trademark or detain them at the external borders of the EU customs territory if the right holder so requests and the customs authority grants the request.
The usual defences include the lack of distinctive character of trademarks not registered, the absence of a likelihood of confusion and the invocation of the exhaustion of rights if the goods designated by the trademark in question have been lawfully placed on the market in the EU.
Information that is secret and therefore has economic value, is subject to reasonable confidentiality measures by its lawful owner under the circumstances, and for which there is a legitimate interest in maintaining secrecy as a trade secret.
Companies should implement confidentiality agreements, access controls, and internal policies to maintain secrecy. Without these measures in place, information may not be legally protected as a trade secret.
Additionally, the GDPR mandates transparency about automated decision-making processes, including providing meaningful information about the logic involved.
These include injunctions, claims for damages and actions for the destruction or surrender of documents, objects, materials, substances or electronic files that contain or embody trade secrets.
The defendants may argue that the information is not protected as a trade secret due to a lack of adequate confidentiality measures, or that it was obtained lawfully, e.g. through independent discovery or creation or reverse engineering.
Yes, principally. However, NDAs are often too broad and/or do not limit the term of protection for confidential information. German courts have regarded common “catch-all” clauses in NDAs that seek to cover any kind of information exchanged or obtained, regardless of any justified interest in keeping it secret, as well as NDAs that never expire, as invalid. Such NDAs are not effective in deterring the receiving party from disclosing confidential information.
