Thoughts for Thursday

The IPKat is delighted to inform his readers that the Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC) for England and Wales is currently inviting applications for the office of High Court Judge. The closing date for applications is 4 March 2008. 21 vacancies are to be filled: 15 in the Queen's Bench Division and 6 in the Chancery Division -- including one intellectual property specialist. Those selected for Chancery vacancies will also be selected as members of the panel of Chairmen of the Competition Appeal Tribunal. Click here for further details.

The IPKat's friend Ibrahim Waziri spent a lot of time and effort researching and writing his LLM dissertation, "Copyright management, disruptive technologies and digital rebellion: can a middle ground be achieved?", and he'd be ever so pleased to send a copy to any interested reader who might wish to peruse it and even comment on it. If you'd like a copy, just email Ibrahim here.

About to launch on another bit of original research, the IPKat wonders whether his readers can recommend him anything good that has been written within the past few years on res judicata and estoppel in intellectual property infringement litigation, other than case notes on L'Oreal v Special Effects. If you can recommend anything, just email the IPKat here. If a decent bibliography is compiled, he will naturally make it available. Any language, any jurisdiction will do for starters!
Thoughts for Thursday Thoughts for Thursday Reviewed by Jeremy on Thursday, February 14, 2008 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:

Powered by Blogger.