Around the periodicals

The May 2008 issue of Patent World (click here for contents and details) leads with a double question from engineer-turned-solicitor David Knight (Field Fisher Waterhouse): "why is it more expensive to enforce patent rights in Europe and what is being done to reduce the costs?". Optimistically, David feels that things are looking up and, in his own words, that "the costs of enforcing patent rights in the UK and Europe will continue to reduce" (this issue went to press too early to take account of the startling costs decision in RIM v Visto (noted here by the IPKat), which is fortunately not typical of the genre).

Right: the Royal Courts of Justice, London -- an effective device for the distribution of wealth ...

Another notable piece in this issue comes from Mike Thumm (Chipworks), which looks at reverse engineering -- not from the traditional point of view of working out how you can make a competitor's products but from a strategic, IP-management perspective.

The 8-times a year Sweet & Maxwell Journal of Business Law (see webpage here) is not known for its IP content, but every so often it publishes a substantial item in that area. Issues 3 and 4 have recently been published. Issue 3 has nothing on IP as such, but "Termination of a Contract by a Party in Breach", by Australian academic Wayne Courtney, covers in general terms a topic that is of keen interest to IP licensors and their licensees, for obvious reasons. Issue 4 has a major feature by two Singaporean academics, Cheng Lim Saw and Susanna H. S. Leong, "Defining Criminal Liability for Primary Acts of Copyright Infringement: the Singapore Experience". These are the same authors, the IPKat favourably recalls, who wrote a very good piece, "Copyright Infringement in a Borderless World - Does Territoriality Matter?", in the Spring 2007 issue of Oxford University Press's International Journal of Law and Information Technology.

Out of the same stable as the JBL but with a very much more frequent IP-specific content is the bimonthly collection of European Commercial Cases (see here for title details). This issue features two IP cases:

* Experience Hendrix LLC v Purple Haze Records Ltd and others (Court of Appeal, England and Wales, noted here by the IPKat), a ruling on whether the provisions of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 applied to performances made by a performer before that Act came into force and where the performance took place in a country that was not, at the time it took place, a "qualifying performance";

* Jean-Philippe X v Universal Music and others (Cour de Cassation de Paris), a case explaining the position under French law where a producer continued to exploit the exclusive rights vested in him by a contract that was later rescinded, the contract itself being silent as to the effect of rescission.

Around the periodicals Around the periodicals Reviewed by Jeremy on Wednesday, April 30, 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.