IPKAT @ Fordham

The IPKat is currently attending the Fordham Intellectual Property Conference. As ever, there are more IP ideas knocking about than one can shake a very large stick at, but here are some of the highlights:
  • Graeme Dinwoodie pointing out that trade mark owners are now increasingly seeking to leverage their trade marks into downstream markets, e.g. for servicing, but the law is reluctant to let them do so;

  • Paul Maier pointing out that there have been over 8,000 OHIM Board of Appeal decisions - he claims that they are used as precedent, together with CFI decisions, but how this is possible with so many decisions being potentially relevant the IPKat has no idea;

  • Hugh Laddie pointing out the risks of trade mark 'trolls' as it gets easier to register trade marks;

  • Judge Rader pointing out that, while it's possible to teach the rules on patentability in 5 minutes, it takes 15 years of coalface experience to get a feeling for obviousness (the IPKat has felt this for a while, and is glad to be vindicated, but he doesn't understand why obvious proves more difficult than distinctiveness in trade mark law or originality in copyright);

  • Martin Adelman arguing that the exceptions to patentability should be abolished (the IPKat strongly disagrees with this one, but it was a good rabble-rouser).

The fun continues tomorrow...

IPKAT @ Fordham IPKAT @ Fordham Reviewed by Unknown on Friday, April 13, 2007 Rating: 5

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

Powered by Blogger.