From October 2016 to March 2017 the team is joined by Guest Kats Rosie Burbidge and Eibhlin Vardy, and by InternKats Verónica Rodríguez Arguijo, Tian Lu and Hayleigh Bosher.

Monday, 27 October 2014

"A talented kitten called Kate ...": results of the limerick competition

So much talent, so little cat ...
The competition.  On Sunday 19 October the IPKat launched a snap competition to compose a limerick that (i) begins with the line "A talented kitten called Kate" and (ii) is on the theme of intellectual property protection other than via the patent system. The prize -- to remind readers -- is complimentary registration, complete with a free lunch, at CLT's conference this Wednesday, 29 October, "Intellectual Property: the 'no patents' round-up for non-techie people", organised by CLT and held in Central London [it's still not too late to sign up for this joyous event, even if you're not the winner of this competition ...].

The pain. On the whole, the level of entries was quite painful, since many of the readers either didn't take the trouble to establish what a limerick was, or knew perfectly well what it was but decided to do their own thing, either throwing themselves at the Kats' mercy or growling contemptuously at their petty insistence on there being any rules at all.  However, there were plenty of entries that either complied with the rules or, even if they didn't, were nonetheless quite fun.

The entries. Here are some of the better ones:

From Mark Anderson (Anderson Law, and superb fellow blogger for IP Draughts) came this:
A talented kitten called Kate
Bought brands very cheap in Kuwait
When she got back to Blighty
Customs men got excitey
And impounded her counterfeit freight.
From the Netherlands, patent attorney Bart van Wezenbeek (V.O.) took advantage of the "no-patent" instruction as follows:
A talented kitten called Kate
disclosed her invention on a date
Her tomboy said “Cool,
But you’re such a fool.
Since for patenting it is now too late”.
Charles Quekett's offering is zany enough to qualify for publication:
A talented kitten called Kate,
Her oppositions were always just too-late.
She gave ‘drid a ring;
Changed ‘file’ into ‘fling’.
We haven’t heard much of her of-late.
The winner. The best effort comes from John Boumphrey (Zenith Chambers, Leeds), who created this Herculean effort:
Kate v Moose 
A talented kitten called Kate
Had painted an Elk for the Tate
But a clever old Moose
In an act of abuse
Reproduced it in silver and plate.

The talented kitten called Kate
Required the Moose to abate.
Then issued proceedings,
Which failed in the pleadings,
To mention the artist’s home state.

The talented kitten called Kate
Had put in her statements quite late
When the Moose’s reply,
Set out to deny
That his acts to infringement, equate.

He told the kitten called Kate
Some might say a little too late
“The Moose” was his Mark,
As old as the ark,
Which covered both paper and plate.

So the talented Kitten called Kate
Amended her case at fast rate
She claimed a small kitty
In his work, although pretty,
Was an image requiring a rate.

Moose explained to the kitten called Kate
That her action would be decimate.
The silver’s container
Had “sufficient disclaimer”
“It’s all found in One Seven Eight”

“How so” said the kitten called Kate
And the Moose counterclaimed to relate
How his shiny designs
Had been stamped with small lions
And were therefore approved by the state.

The Kate v Moose judge decided
The parties should both be derided,
For mixing IP
To such a degree
That the truth was completely elided.

For the talented kitten called Kate
The moral is clear to relate
Take proper advice,
Check pleadings twice
And don’t sue a large ungulate.
Well done, John! We hope to see you at Wednesday's conference.

Honourable mentions: credit also goes to some whose efforts are not reproduced here. They include Katharine Alexander (Olswang LLP), fellow blogger Michael Factor (who sent us an effort which opened with the horrid lines "A talented kitten called Kate/Was hysterectomized (such was her fate!"), Phil Roberts (One Essex Court), Emily Greene (Warner Bros), Jasper Groot Koerkamp (AOMB IP Consultants, The Netherlands) and Sean Gilday (Page Hargrave). A chivalrous mention goes to Howard Knopf (Excess Copyright), for telling us upon whom he would like to bestow his prize, if he were to win, as a token of his gentlemanly esteem.

Bottom line. Finally, feline condolences are extended to one of our competitors who would have done a little better if the word "trademark" really did rhyme with "arse" ...

1 comment:

Ashley Roughton said...

I insist on seeing the trademark/arse submission.


Subscribe to the IPKat's posts by email here

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