Passionate about IP! Since June 2003 the IPKat has covered copyright, patent, trade mark, designs, info-tech and confidentiality issues from a mainly UK and European perspective. Read, post comments and participate!

The team is Eleonora Rosati, Annsley Merelle Ward and Merpel. E-mail the Kats here!

The team is joined by GuestKats Söğüt Atilla, Oliver Fairhurst, Georgia Jenkins and Marcel Pemsel.

SpecialKats: Verónica Rodríguez Arguijo (TechieKat), Rose Hughes (PatKat) and Jocelyn Bosse (Book Review Editor).

InternKats: Wissam Bentazar, Simone Lorenzi and Kliment Markov.
Home / Jeremy Phillips / UK-IPO website / UK-IPO website under threat from bureaucratic aliens

UK-IPO website under threat from bureaucratic aliens

- ,
Ever anxious that the UK Intellectual Property Office's website should be of maximum benefit to its many users, the IPKat has learned that the Cabinet Office is proposing to reorganise government websites and to change the way they are accessed. If this proposal is adopted, many individual sites will be affected. The UK-IPO site, for one, is likely to be accessed via a wider government portal instead of being directly available.

Above, left: the UK-IPO website is bright, cheerful and imaginative

If you want to get through to the UK ex-Pat Office (here) with a minimum of clicking and clucking, email Mark Pacey here and assure him of your concern. Mark is the UK-IPO's Chief Information Officer and he'd love to hear from you.

Department of Trade and Industry's Innovation home page here: Merpel says, can you spot the carefully concealed link to the UK-IPO, craftily hidden under the obsolete label Patent Office?
UK-IPO website under threat from bureaucratic aliens UK-IPO website under threat from bureaucratic aliens Reviewed by Jeremy on Tuesday, June 12, 2007 Rating: 5

5 comments:

  1. AnonymousTuesday, 12 June 2007 at 11:57:00 GMT+1

    Excuse me, is this the self same person who, when it was first launched, roundly condemned the new UK-IPO site as pretty much unfit for purpose.

    Now, (OK, thanks to Wallace and Gromit), it is bright, cheerful and imaginative !

    ReplyDelete
  2. David PearceTuesday, 12 June 2007 at 14:08:00 GMT+1

    This particular kat still thinks that the organisation of the UK-IPO website leaves a lot to be desired, and does not necessarily view the proposed changes with as much trepidation as others might. I refer the reader to the sidebar on the left regarding conflicting kat views.

    ReplyDelete
  3. JeremyTuesday, 12 June 2007 at 15:13:00 GMT+1

    Dear anonymous - "bright, cheerful and imaginative" is not a statement of fitness for purpose, is it? Or have I missed something?

    ReplyDelete
  4. AnonymousTuesday, 12 June 2007 at 19:58:00 GMT+1

    There are two issues here. Yes, the organisation of the UK-IPO does leave something to be desired. However, the concept of having a comprehensive and directly accessible website is something to be cherished. For its faults, the UK-IPO contains a wealth of valuable information of great public interest (albeit poorly indexed at times) and it would be very sad to see it threatened.

    ReplyDelete
  5. David PearceWednesday, 13 June 2007 at 09:07:00 GMT+1

    I just hope they don't change all the URLs again, like they did last year. Making all useful links to specific places on the website no longer work does no good for public relations.

    ReplyDelete

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

Subscribe to: Post Comments ( Atom )
Powered by Blogger.