Forthcoming events? You can check them here on the IPKat's own dedicated page for them. If you want to list an event of your own, please let the Kat know, but PLEASE keep the information short, sweet and in the body of your email -- nothing that is PDF'd to the hilt, needs translating or can't be accessed without having to register or use a password.
|Agents Muehlendahl and Kur |
investigate EU trade marks,
but who will believe their story?
|The clock is ticking -- but nothing|
is happening. Why?
[Rant begins here] The IPKat cannot believe that this is happening. For four months the single most important agency in the field of intellectual property, which is charged with promoting the importance of IP protection, the value of trade marks and the need to protect the public against fraud, confusion and deception, has failed to stop this outrage. It is of course wholly possible that none of the companies listed here (for patents) or here (for trade marks) has been deceived or has paid anyone anything, either before WIPO knew about this site or thereafter. These companies include Genentech, Caterpillar Inc, Morphy Richards Ltd, Styron Europe and Baker Tilly.
Why has nothing been done so far? Is it because WIPO lacks the legal standing to enforce its rights under Article 6ter of the Paris Convention in Member States, or because Article 6ter has no legal effect in the Czech Republic? It surely can't be because WIPO lacks intellectual property expertise and it certainly can't be because the organization doesn't think trade marks and copyrights are important. Why has WIPO not acted? Why does WIPO not explain why it has not acted? Will WIPO acquiesce for as long as it takes for WIPD to obtain its own right to use the lookalike logo? Does WIPO propose to reimburse deceived parties who have paid WIPD in the mistaken belief that they were dealing with WIPO? Would WIPO advise any IP owner to do as they have done? [End of rant, for now].
here. Says the Kat, this is further evidence of the integration of serious weblog content into the mainstream of intellectual property literature and data storage.
The results of the Starbucks New Logo poll are now in. 437 people voted, the result being as follows:
Before you rush to tell the Kats that the percentages add up to more than 100%, respondents were allowed the luxury of more than one answer -- though not many needed to. Thanks for participating, everyone!
* The exercise is an aberration and a complete waste of time 24%
* This was just an exercise to encourage loyal customers to ask for the old logo to be reinstated 18%
* It's a blatant attempt to buy free publicity 13%
* A brilliant piece of marketing 10%
Around the blogs. Canadian IP/IT blogger and expert photographer Lorraine Fleck (IP Address Blog) has drawn the Kat's attention to an IP site manned by her firm, Hoffer Adler: Intelligent IP Law -- definitely worth checking out if you have Canadian inclinations or just like IP. And while we're on the subject, another Canadian -- this time Barry Sookman -- has navigated the world of copyright in 2010: you can discover his findings here. The SPC Blog carries the text of the settlement of a patent dispute between Novartis and Teva in Denmark over Valsartan here.