tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post3085718607870493284..comments2024-03-28T16:45:51.051+00:00Comments on The IPKat: Monday miscellanyVerónica RodrÃguez Arguijohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05763207846940036921noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-60649345536859932302013-07-16T13:00:15.875+01:002013-07-16T13:00:15.875+01:00Plain Packaging:
"It needs concerted investm...Plain Packaging:<br /><br />"It needs concerted investment (a) in education to discourage young people from take-up and (b) in providing proper support for existing smokers to quit." <br /><br />Yes, but it would also help if tobacco companies didn't give piles of money to ultra-glamourous Formula 1 teams to paint their racing cars the same colour as the sponsors' fag packets.<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-28237014574607212722013-07-16T07:39:17.692+01:002013-07-16T07:39:17.692+01:00"It seems an unlikely sort of brand to attrac..."It seems an unlikely sort of brand to attract and retain the goodwill of clients"<br /><br />Well, this is a firm that apparently believes that "avidity" is the sort of brand to attract and retain the goodwill of clients.<br /><br />Mind you, there's a fair few people that would consider it a most appropriate name for a law firm...especially after receiving a bill for legal services...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-1992267884784909922013-07-15T21:39:55.173+01:002013-07-15T21:39:55.173+01:00"Avidity IP ("Satisfaction is not enough..."Avidity IP ("Satisfaction is not enough")"<br /><br />Either this is intended as advertising on behalf of this firm or it is a sarcastic dig.<br /><br />My guess is the latter.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-55492662078386039642013-07-15T15:46:26.001+01:002013-07-15T15:46:26.001+01:00Oh dear, Anonymous
What's your problem?
Fact...Oh dear, Anonymous<br /><br />What's your problem?<br /><br />Fact 1: POISONOUS DIVISIONALS is a bizarre trade mark for an IP practice to register, by any objective standard;<br /><br />Fact 2: POISONOUS DIVISIONALS is a bizarre trade mark for an IP practice to use, judged by the same standard.<br /><br />Why the snide dig at CIPA, which loves avidity IP so much that it has published an article from avidity IP in its journal (on poisonous divisionals, of course) even though it does not normally republish pieces first published elsewhere - as avidity IP's website proudly boasts?<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-66431687066871796612013-07-15T14:01:44.681+01:002013-07-15T14:01:44.681+01:00Re avidity: Such patronising supercilious commenta...Re avidity: Such patronising supercilious commentary should be left for for those cosy CIPA get-togethers, paid for by members.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com