|Judge Jeffreys ("The |
hanging judge"): would
he have approved?
"Currently small firms are often put off enforcing their Intellectual Property (IP) rights by high costs. The new process will limit fixed costs and allow damages of up to £5,000 per case. New figures produced today by the Intellectual Property Office (IPO) estimate that around 150 firms will benefit from the service every year, providing an annual boost to UK business of £350,000 [the IPKat is surprised at the low figure of 150. Is this because there aren't enough facilities to handle any more? He thinks that, once word gets round that this service exists, at least ten times as many people will be wanting to take advantage of it. ACID's design-based membership could probably keep the small claims court at full strength by themselves, he reckons. Merpel says, you've misread it. "Small claims service" means a small service for claims ...].The IPKat wholeheartedly welcomes this initiative and wishes it every success. Merpel wants to know why, despite a previous prod from this weblog, the email circulars from the News Distribution Service continue, pointlessly and mindlessly, to bear the inscription
The recommendation for a small claims service was made in the Hargreaves Review of Intellectual Property and Growth [though there have been periodical calls for it almost since the Kat can remember]. Since the Review was published in May 2011 the Government has been looking at building a business case for the service, which has now been completed meaning it will become a reality.
Minister for Intellectual Property Baroness Wilcox said: " ... We hope to have the new system in place by this time next year”.
Justice Minister Jonathan Djanogly said: "... Evidence presented to the recent Hargreaves Review ... indicated that around 1 in 6 (17 per cent) of small and medium sized businesses had given up attempting to enforce their rights due to high court costs" [which makes the figure of 150, cited above, look even more of an underestimate].
"© Crown Copyright 2010 [This is not a mistake: to save administrative costs and make things easier for the numerically-challenged, the Government is rounding all years up, or down, to the nearest ten]. This communication from the NDS is confidential and copyright. Anyone coming into unauthorised possession of it should disregard its content and erase it from their records".