For the half-year to 31 December 2014, the IPKat's regular team is supplemented by contributions from guest bloggers Rebecca Gulbul, Lucas Michels and Marie-Andrée Weiss.

Regular round-ups of the previous week's blogposts are kindly compiled by Alberto Bellan.

Friday, 11 May 2007

Damages: what do you think?

Well hidden within the website of the Department for Constitutional Affairs (now rebranded as the Ministry of Justice), a new consultation on the law of damages has recently been issued. As with most government consultations these days, the time limit is quite short. You have, if you are interested, until 27 July to let the Ministry know what you think about the law, and whether anything should be done about it.

Further hidden amongst the 44 questions posed in the consultation is one which asks the following:

What are your views on how the system of damages works in relation to:
(a) patents;
(b) designs
(c) trade marks and passing off
(d) copyright and related rights?
Any IP practitioners with an interest in the subject should perhaps have a think about this. This particular Kat takes a completely neutral position on the subject, as he doesn't get involved in litigation. He would, however, be interested to see what views there are out there on how the system currently works, and whether we need to change it. One question that immediately comes to mind is whether the system should include the possibility of a punitive element, rather than being only restorative. Do feel free to let the IPKat know what you think.

1 comment:

Gerontius said...

To start the ball rolling, I'm very happy to be practicing in an environment where patent infringement is not a criminal offence and for which damages are not punitive.

The concept of triple-damages for infringing a patent is just frightening. How on earth did the US get themselves into such a predicament?

Subscribe to the IPKat's posts by email here

Just pop your email address into the box and click 'Subscribe':