IPKAT ADVISORY: THE CONTENTS OF THIS BLOGPOST MAY BE OFFENSIVE TO SOME READERS, PARTICULARLY THOSE WITH NO SENSE OF HUMOUR, OR WITH A DIFFERENT SENSE OF HUMOUR TO MERPEL'S
Inspired by Neil's post, "2013-Ten IP Stories That We Wish We Had Written", here, Merpel has decided to do a bit of wishful thinking of her own, listing some stories she'd love to write:
* "European Commission apologises over unitary/unified patent disaster, promises: 'next time we'll listen to the experts'".
"We weren't trying to cause chaos, really. We just thought that most of the patent owners, practitioners and judges in Europe were making a silly old fuss about nothing and that legislating a new patent system into existence, with courts to match, was no more difficult than legislating for passports for pet ferrets".
* "New WIPO Treaty to Protect Bloggers' Rights Comes into Force".
theftborrowing of copyright-protected material, people enjoy reading blogs more than they enjoy paying to enjoy other people's talent -- and there were, are, and always will be more votes for free copying than for the other sort.
* "Developing countries say 'Forget about Nagoya: we want technology we can use ourselves, not payment for use of our twigs and leaves'".
This article gets written when the 170 or so countries that make up the vast and generally disempowered majority in the great IP debates of our time wake up to the fact that making businesses pay for the use of biological material found in their territories is a pathetic fobbing off exercise and they ask themselves the following questions: (i) are we truly any better off after the last bit of bio-material has been paid for and there's nothing left to bio-prospect? (ii) are developing countries likely to receive in total any more than the amount of money that has been spent so far in transporting diplomats and lobbyists around the world, feeding and installing them in hotels, paying their taxi and per diem living expenses? and most importantly (iii) when will the world adopt any policy that addresses the imbalance of technological capabilities between countries that can do things and countries that can't, possibly by making it financially worth the effort for bio-pirates and indeed anyone else to invest hard cash, on-site education and training, manufacturing plant and so on, in countries that lack any reason for their educated young to remain there rather than migrate to better jobs and prospects in the USA, Europe and beyond?
No substitute for IP ...
* "Senate passes bill to protect good patent trolls".
* "Chinese finally shamed into providing decent IP enforcement for foreign brand owners after reading so many articles on how the Chinese are at last providing decent IP enforcement for foreign brand owners".
face" and, particularly, of "losing face". In the olden days, when every IP journal and magazine carried articles excoriating the Chinese for their blatant and callous disregard for Western intellectual property rights and their government-sponsored encouragement of outright theft of brands and designs, the Chinese were indignant, resenting the harsh criticism that was hurled at them. But now that, authors and editors are tripping over each other in the race to be first to publish a paean of praise for the efforts made by the Chinese to emulate, if not actually surpass, the levels of protection available elsewhere, no self-respecting Chinese person can take the total embarrassment of feeling the pain and the shame at the possibility of there being even the smallest gap between the printed word and the reality.
No further explanation required.
* "Three Strikes and You're Out for clients who give patent and trade mark attorneys last-minute instructions"
It is well known that the IP system would work much better if IP practitioners were given more time to do their jobs properly, instead of having to respond to last-minute communications from their clients -- especially where there's not enough time to get back to the client and seek clarification of what it meant and do what the client has asked for.