On October 8th, the European Data Protection Board (EDPB) published the Guidelines 1/2024 on the processing of personal data based on Article 6(1)(f) of the GDPR. These guidelines analyse the criteria outlined in Article 6(1)(f) of the GDPR that data controllers must meet in order to lawfully process personal data necessary for the “legitimate interests pursued by the controller or a third party.” According to the Board, legitimate interest criterion should not be treated as a "last resort" for unusual or unexpected situations where other legal bases are deemed inapplicable, nor should it be automatically chosen or its use unduly extended on the assumption that it is less restrictive than other legal bases.

The Court Appeal clarified that withdrawal of the opt-out is not allowed when national proceedings were commenced during the transitional period. Instead, proceedings commenced before the transitional period cannot affect the withdrawal.

The Court of Milan stated that so-called ‘simple’ (non-creative) photographs available and accessible on the internet, except in cases of bad faith, can be used freely and without authorisation by the people who found them, if they lack the indications prescribed by Article 90 of the Italian Copyright Law (no. 633/1941, ICL).

The Italian Advertising Standards Authority (IAP) has recently released an updated version of the Digital Chart Regulation, which incorporates the latest developments in the field and insights from the technical roundtable initiated by AGCOM, as basis for the drafting of a code of conduct, which is expected to be published in early 2025.

The Court clarified that, pursuant to Directive 2001/29/EC, Member States cannot apply the criterion of material reciprocity (Art. 2(7) of the Berne Convention) to works of applied art from third countries.

In a recent decision (see Data Protection Authority Newsletter, October 22, 2024), the Data Protection Authority fined a company €80,000 for creating backups of an employee’s email account during the employment relationship, affirming that an employer cannot access an employee’s email or use software to retain copies of messages.

The Court declared the infringement, enjoined the defendant from any further marketing of infringing machinery, setting a penalty of €12,000 for any further infringement, and ordered an interim award of damages in the amount of €15,000.

The decision elaborates on the need to dismiss or stay the case due to the pending of parallel proceedings between affiliated companies and provides a summary of the criteria to be followed in interpreting claims and assessing novelty and inventive steps.

The Court highlighted that intervention in interim proceedings is exceptional and can only be granted in presence of a legal interest of the intervener. Menarini instead had a mere de facto interest in boostering parallel proceedings in which it was a party. Its application was therefore dismissed.

On 26 July 2024, the Second Board of Appeal of the EUIPO rejected the appeal filed by Consorzio Vino Chianti against the refusal to register EU collective trademark no. 018441418 for lack of distinctiveness pursuant to Article 7(1)(b) EUTMR and Article 76(1) EUTMR.

The Court held that the declared intention to launch a biosimilar drug and the obtaining of the related Marketing Authorization did not constitute an "imminent infringement" of the patent on the originator drug. Therefore, the requested interim injunction was not granted.

With the decision of 1 July 2024, the AGCM (Italian Competition and Market Authority) imposed a fine of more than EUR 4 million on the Italian Football Federation (FIGC) for violating Article 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, which prohibits the abusive exploitation of a dominant position.

The decision was issued in 12 months and revoked the DexCom patent, dismissing its infringement claim. The decision is now effective in the 17 EU Member States that have ratified the UPC Agreement; it may however be appealed.

The Court confirmed the judgment of the Milan Court of Appeal, which denied copyright protection to the lamp pictured on the left, in respect of the one on the right. It also mentions Cofemel and the need to disapply the artistic value requirement.

The Court of Brescia found that the EU and international design lines for "Purestrength," "Selection," and "Selection Pro" gym machines had been infringed

EUIPO rejected a European so called "position" trade mark application by Loro Piana on the basis of Article 7(1)(b) RMUE, according to which the registration of trade marks without distinctive character is prohibited.

In Judgment No. 24006/2023, the Court of Cassation dismissed the appeal of Swift Company S.r.l. against Rolex S.A. and Rolex Italia S.p.A., which had accused it of producing and marketing bracelets purportedly inspired by Rolex watch bezels and bearing the MGT sign, allegedly confusable with Rolex's GMT Master trademark.

The court found for design infringement and calculated damages based on the profits lost due to the infringers’ commercialisation, thus applying one of the criteria established by art. 125 Italian IP Code for damage calculation.

The court found that the ZzzQuil packaging is distinctive and that competitor’s product illicitly imitate it, as incorporates all its identifying elements.

On 23 April 2024, the government approved a draft law to introduce provisions on artificial intelligence (AI). The draft law emphasises that the lifecycle of AI systems and models must respect the fundamental rights and freedoms of individuals enshrined in Italian and European law.