Today it's World Intellectual Property Day. WIPO Director General Dr Kamal Idris, according to the WIPO press release, has emphasised the limitless value of ideas in inspiring the work of inventors and creators from which we all ultimately benefit. He adds:
"Ideas shape our world. They are the raw materials on which our future prosperity and heritage depend. This is why it is important to provide environments in which innovative ideas are encouraged and rewarded. This is why intellectual property exists".
But here's an IDEA which is firmly protected by copyright ... and here's another one.
The IPKat learns from Reuters, via his erudite friend Caroline Wilson, that the European Commission is set to recommend common European sanctions today against counterfeiting and piracy of goods, including at least four years in prison and a 300,000 euro ($372,700) fine. This is reputedly because different penalties in the 25 EU countries make it difficult to combat counterfeiting and piracy effectively. The EU executive recommends higher fines when there is a health or safety risk. Other possible measures are the confiscation or destruction of the objects, and a permanent or temporary ban on offenders from engaging in commercial activities.
Non-harmonised punishments: proposals from the British (above, right) and French (below, left)
Crime and Punishment here
Let the punishment fit the crime here
HAVEN'T AN IDEA; CRIMINAL SANCTIONS IN THE EU
Reviewed by Jeremy
on
Wednesday, April 26, 2006
Rating:
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: http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/p/want-to-complain.html