Friday futilitarianism

Earlier this week the IPKat asked readers if they could contact Duncan Bucknell with a view to the compilation of a Budweiser scorecard. The template is now up and running, the scorecard consisting (so far) of a brief introduction to the long-running dispute for control of the right to use the word Budweiser for beers and some details of the dispute in seven jurisdictions. Thanks for your support so far - and can you please email Duncan any further information you may have, including case references.

Right: Bloodweiser, from

The IPKat's friend Tomasz Rychlicki sent him this link to BusinessWeek, speculating that it might have been an April Fools joke - but it looks the real thing. The Plagiarius concept has been around since 1977. According to the Plagiarus site:
"... "Plagiarius" serves to inform the public about the problem of fakes and plagiarisms and the negative impacts they have on not only the economy as a whole, but also on small companies and designers. Action Plagiarius awards the negative award at the annual “Ambiente” trade fair during a press conference. The award is given to those com-panies that the jury has found guilty of making "the most flagrant" design imitations. As his key figure, Busse chose a gnome, which he painted black with a gold nose to signify the “illicit earnings from product imitation”".

Although he likes to think of himself as a discerning patron of free speech, IPKat team blogger Jeremy has made some monumental decisions relating to proscribed words in JIPLP, the Journal of Intellectual Property Law and Practice, which he edits. From now on:

* No article is allowed to start with the word "Introduction", nor end with the word "Conclusion", unless the presence of either word informs the reader of something of which he might otherwise be unaware;

* In the part of the article that was formerly called "Conclusion" and which will now be renamed to suit the context, the verbal excrescence "it remains to be seen" is to be surgically excised wherever it appears;

* No book reviewer is permitted to describe the book under review as being "interesting" - particularly when no reason is given for it being so;

* The word "perhaps" is prohibited wherever it indicates only that the author wants to say something but is afraid of being wrong;

* The word internet is to be given an initial lower case "i" since it's not the name of a place or a person and doesn't deserve a capital.

If any reader would like to add words or phrases to the proscribed list, email Jeremy here and let him know.
Friday futilitarianism Friday futilitarianism Reviewed by Jeremy on Friday, April 13, 2007 Rating: 5


  1. I have just one suggestion for a proscribed word: pedantic!

  2. Do you mean that your suggestion is itself pedantic, or that it is the word "pedantic" that you are suggesting banning? Oh, and - if the latter - is that "pedantic" with or without an exclamation mark?

  3. The word Internet arguably is the name of a place - and indeed the Webster dictionary the definitive tome for American English has it properly capitalized. After all, the Internet was invented in the USA. Even the British Oxford dictionary recognizes this fact and also capitalizes Internet. Might I suggest that the esteemed IPKat has his tail in a twist over this point.


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.