As the weekend approaches, here are a few short notices from the IPKat

1. PIIPA: the IPKat has still received very, very little information about this shadowy and mysterious body, but will report its findings early next week.

2. Neil J. Wilkof: don't forget to email Jeremy to let him know if you want to join Neil for a friendly and informal chat on Tuesday.

3. IP and the Big Chill. Here, courtesy of John Blake (Brookes Batchellor), is a provocative article from The Scientist on whether intellectual property protection slows down progress, especially now that academics are so selfish as to seek to protect their own IP. John adds, not without justification, "the report I noted may have been at least partially inspired by this from the AAAS, which was interpreted here as "A survey has found out just how much of a chilling effect patents have on science research...".

Thanks, John! The IPKat's own take on this is that IP rights are bound to have a chilling effect on anything that tends towards anarchy, just as road traffic laws have a chilling effect on the freedom of motorists to drive around residential neighbourhoods at top speed ...

4. Black mark for artists' resale right. Here, fresh from the UK House of Lords' Merits of Statutory Instruments Committee is an unfavourable report on resale royalty right (one blushing IPKat didn't even know this committee existed ...).
SOMETHING FOR THE WEEKEND ...? SOMETHING FOR THE WEEKEND ...? Reviewed by Jeremy on Friday, January 20, 2006 Rating: 5

No comments:

All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.

It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.

Learn more here:

Powered by Blogger.