October EIPR
October’s IP-packed EIPR is now gracing the nation’s finest bookshelves. Owners of its silky silver sheets can treat themselves to the following:
*Simon Davis (D Young & C) on computer-implemented inventions
*Part 2 of Gill Grassie’s (Maclay Murray & Spens) parallel importation and trade marks article
*Amit Jamsandekar (Dr Tlzapurkar’s Chambers) on the Indian Trade Marks Act
*Gwilym Roberts (Kilburn & Strode) on the patent agent’s view of Patent Office opinions
*Weixiao Wei (University of Strathclyde) on ISP liability in relation to copyright and defamation in China and the UK
*Jeremy Reed (Hogarth Chambers) on the ECJ’s Feta case
*Lucy Harrold (Stephenson Harwood) on the AG’s Opinion in the latest round of the Boehringer Ingelheim saga
*A Kelly Gill (Gowling) on the Canadian Supreme Court’s recent flock of famous mark decisions
*Book reviews aplenty
(Right) There's more fun between the covers of the EIPR
Day Against DRM
Today was Day Against DRM says the Sydney Morning Herald, the aim of which was to raise awareness about DRM technology. The day was organised by Defective by Design – an offshoot of the Free Software Foundation – who argue that DRM renders many applications, such as iTunes, inherently defective in design.
The IPKat [wearing his conspiracy theory claws] wonders what the true effects of DRM really are. How many people can distinguish whether actions that they attempt to perform are rendered impossible by DRM, rather than their technical incompetence?
Lawyer of the week
Congratulations to Gregor Grant of Marks & Clerk who, fresh from his victory in the Hackney v Nike case, is The Times’ lawyer of the week.
EIPR; DRM; LAWYER OF THE WEEK
Reviewed by Anonymous
on
Tuesday, October 03, 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