Friday reminders ...IP Litigation conference. If you haven't yet booked to attend IP Enforcement and Remedies: An international perspective on enforcement of rights and injunctive relief, a one-day conference run by LexisNexis Butterworths and held in Central London, it's time to get a move-on. Although the conference doesn't take place till 31 October, you can save £50 by booking on or before 22 August. Full programme and registration details available here.
Right: IP enforcers, ever watchful for infringers
Tomasz Rychlicki. If you were on holiday and missed last week's post, the IPKat reminds you that his friend Tomasz Rychlicki is looking for some good IP experience in London over the coming year. Click here for details.
IPKat email circular. To receive your IPKat postings by email, just email the IPKat here and he'll add you to the list. For the record, most weeks the IPKat and Merpel post between around 15 and 30 items. These include comments on recent cases and legal developments, commercial and cultural news, information on books, journals and conferences, plus some stuff that defies categorisation.
Latest IPQ
Issue 3 for 2006 of the learned Intellectual Property Quarterly, published by Sweet & Maxwell, has just reached the IPKat. This issue features some series stuff. Among other things, there's a scintillating piece on the curious UK litigation over the legal status of MELTON MOWBRAY PORK PIE as a protected geographical indication for pork pies coming from various places other than Melton Mowbray. There's also some mind-stretching speculation by the University of Edinburgh's Charlotte Waelde on geospatial data and database protection.
FRIDAY REMINDERS
![FRIDAY REMINDERS]()
Reviewed by Jeremy
on
Friday, August 18, 2006
Rating:
Follow the IPKat on LinkedIn 
![[Guest post] EUIPO Second Board of Appeal refers case to Grand Board of Appeal following earlier refusal to register a photograph of a man’s head/face as an EU trade mark](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiUj9v-k3DYaSVMR4lsmKDLHVB5nIoINuvZNbH2TQCelrfaAE9qmGSAQs-plzQ7HnZ7Svk_gRdrIODp0Nat5vpWajduit3xkArNhK76AHhX770RIJ62thfCVI5fnvcXU-5zH4NkUSfPY9FjRMFiK7OKJ7m7YSo2FzhyPSoA8ZWCsxaOXb0bBCoPQA/s72-c/Picture%201.png)
![[Guest post] Benelux Office rules on opposition proceedings prepared by ChatGPT](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi29VY0rNNP1Hqyz8RgB47r4q7fhqQfYHxsEbX_RKmT4KU5Y_vg7vB6dsAW91CidjMfJ38klTvD4mMtZb3QmwFPAHaGF88BPttWSbfYvo7UUg7MpFRTNtEjThmG0QaX2qZFFHSnN71i3YQZSBFC0SL7PgkAlme-XH8cSNWRFbOAOuLr_LMOGcImLQ/s72-c/Screenshot%202024-12-04%20at%2020.45.58.png)
Posts
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