Full contents here; 50 most-read JIPLP articles here* an illustrated and carefully referenced round-up by Arnaud Folliard-Monguiral (OHIM) and David Rogers (EPO) of Community trade mark case law developments during 2006 (abstract here);
* a special focus by OHIM's Gordon Humphreys on proof of use, continuity of functions in inter partes proceedings and three-dimensional marks (abstract here);
* "Patently designed and trade marked: MMORPGs", academician Yee Fen Lim's sequel to her earlier article on the copyright issues raised by online multi-player games (abstract here);
* "Search orders and computers" by Arty Northey and Tony Willoughby (Rouse International), a hugely practical piece that deals with a lawyer's nightmare - you've got your search order, you enter a suspected infringer's premises and what do you find but one or more computers, with possibly thousands of files to search and no clear notion what you're likely to find there (abstract here).Left: spare a thought for the poor trainee lawyer who, left alone with a computer and a search order, has to plough through half a million files in search of an incriminating invoice ...
Instructions for authors here; sample print or online issue here
Read the Editorial for this issue ("In with the INN-crowd", on the concept of the non-proprietary name and its relevance to other areas of IP) and all other issues, absolutely free of charge, here
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