tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post6147209866706268215..comments2024-03-18T17:10:35.838+00:00Comments on The IPKat: Wintersteiger 2: the mechanism for commenting on Court of Justice referencesVerónica RodrÃguez Arguijohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05763207846940036921noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-29936964154637259532011-01-06T15:48:29.648+00:002011-01-06T15:48:29.648+00:00As far as I know there is no facility for public c...As far as I know there is no facility for public comment via the INPI or even being made aware thereof in France. It is always possible that the INPI work with the French professional representative's institute CNCPI on such issues, but if so, this is not broadly publicised.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-28914293523347388222011-01-04T10:30:55.088+00:002011-01-04T10:30:55.088+00:00Thank you for publicising this comment from the IP...Thank you for publicising this comment from the IPO.<br />I believe that the key is in those fateful words " <b>it is a service that the IPO provides</b> but other government departments do not".<br /><br />The government/IPO itself is not interested in the view of stakeholders, it does not need input to make the decision. <br /><br />If it's a service then let's take it as a service and make no response unless we have clients who need the UK government to respond the need to and want to lobby. In such circumstances a tight timescale ain't a bad thing.<br />If and when the IPO wants input of a more general nature, then I am sure it can ask for it.Filemothttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15735898485265104580noreply@blogger.com