What the IPKat says:
Subtitled 'Protect your ideas and make money', this book reflects the author's belief that creativity well tempered with good advice and common sense is a better path to success than the simple course of stealing and using other people's innovative ideas. This book is not aimed at the IP professional or at the academic: it's not written for the sort of person who is a professional inventor, designer or innovator either. It's directed to the sort of person who may have only one or two clearly profitable ideas in his or her life, who is unused to the normal paths of commerce and product development and who must be warned about the problems ahead without being frightened off the path to profitability. Apart from the occasional longish word or legal construction that sneaks in, this book will frighten no-one and will provide plenty of encouragement too. There are lots of pretty pictures (you can even have fun guessing their relevance and/or symbolism and plenty of key text in little pink boxes.What the publisher's blurb says:
"Setting up a website or launching a new product? Looking to invest, or safeguard your creation? If you’ve got big ideas, this is your wake up call to protect, profit and prosper from them.Bibliographic details: Official price £14.99. Special launch offer from publisher's website dk.com - £11.99 if you buy before 1 March 2007. Hardback, 288 pages, ISBN 9781405319263 01. The book has its own website, for corrections, amendments etc. It also exists in both US and UK editions. Rupture factor: medium - the glossy paper makes this little tome heavier than you'd imagine.
Frederick Mostert, a leader in the intellectual property field, has counselled celebrities and public figures including President Mandela, Boris Becker, Stella McCartney and the Shaolin Monks. Follow his practical tips and expert advice and learn how intellectual property works, how to develop strategies to protect your ideas and find out how to get an idea out of your head and into action".
More UK subordinate copyright legislation has wormed its way under the IPKat's door, across his office floor and on to his desk, in the form of the Copyright (Certification of Licensing Scheme for Educational Recording of Broadcasts) (Educational Recording Agency Limited) Order 2007 (SI 2007 No.266). Made on 1 February and coming into force on 1 April 2007, this statutory instrument provides that
"Under section 35 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 recordings of broadcasts may be made by or on behalf of educational establishments without ... infringing copyright. Similar provision is made by paragraph 6 of Schedule 2 to that Act in relation to performances. These provisions do not, however, apply if and to the extent that there is a licensing scheme certified for the purposes of the relevant provision providing for the grant of licences.
This Order certifies a licensing scheme to be operated by the Educational Recording Agency Limited (effective from 1 April 2007) for the granting of licences to educational establishments for the recording by them of broadcasts, other than television programmes broadcast on behalf of the Open University which are the subject of a separate licensing scheme (SI 2003/187)".
Above: the IPKat greets another new SI with unfeigned excitement
In other words, says the IPKat, get wise and get a licence, or - depending on your luck - get sued or get away with your infringement scot-free. If you don't like the licence terms that are on offer, Merpel adds, you can challenge it before the Copyright Tribunal, thus providing hours of harmless entertainment for many interested copyright-watchers. The IPKat and Merpel both wonder if any reader knows the total number of statutory instruments made under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 since its inception. Must be heading up towards the 500 mark, surely ...?
Read more about the Educational Recording Agency Ltd here
List of ERA member organisations here
The IPKat received this link from George Godar (DLA Piper UK) to the excellent IPEG blog, mentioning a Dutch Supreme Court ruling of 22 December 2006 in Dijkstra v Saier on a European-flavoured file wrapper estoppel dispute. The court held that patent prosecution file history may be invoked in order to prevent the patentee, having disclaimed an aspect of his patent monopoly in order to get a patent granted, later reclaiming it during infringement proceedings. The IPEG post places this decision within the context of Dutch case law. Many thanks, George, for writing in.