Commission Regulation 355/2008 of 21 April 2008 amending Regulation 1239/95 as regards the use of electronic means of communication in proceedings before the Community Plant Variety Office (CPVO) has now been published on the European Commission's Official Journal website.Right: the big issue now for the CPVO is what to do with their old communications equipment
According to the first three Recitals,
Says the IPKat, from this it looks as though the CPVO has been issuing hand-written certificates up till now, using Post-Its to stick information concerning rights on the noticeboard somewhere to the south of the office kettle and tea cupboard ... Merpel wonders, would anyone have challenged the vires of the CPVO if it did this without a Regulation?"(1) The rules provided for in Commission Regulation (EC) No 1239/95 of 31 May 1995 establishing implementing rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 2100/94 as regards proceedings before the Community Plant Variety Office should be simplified, in particular by allowing the use of electronic means of communication.
(2) It is appropriate to simplify, on the one hand, the filing of applications, objections or appeals and, on the other, the service of documents by the Community Plant Variety Office (the Office) by permitting the use of electronic means. Moreover, the Office should be given the possibility to issue certificates for Community plant variety rights in electronic form. Publication of information regarding Community plant variety rights should also be possible by electronic means. Finally, electronic storage of files relating to proceedings should be allowed to improve efficiency.
Above, left: ... and the answer is here!
(3) The President of the Office should be empowered to determine all necessary details with respect to the use of electronic means of communication or storage".
Electronic plant information here
Do plants conduct electricity? Your chance to answer here
Reviewed by Jeremy
on
Thursday, April 24, 2008
Rating:
Follow the IPKat on LinkedIn 
![[Guest post] EUIPO Second Board of Appeal refers case to Grand Board of Appeal following earlier refusal to register a photograph of a man’s head/face as an EU trade mark](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiUj9v-k3DYaSVMR4lsmKDLHVB5nIoINuvZNbH2TQCelrfaAE9qmGSAQs-plzQ7HnZ7Svk_gRdrIODp0Nat5vpWajduit3xkArNhK76AHhX770RIJ62thfCVI5fnvcXU-5zH4NkUSfPY9FjRMFiK7OKJ7m7YSo2FzhyPSoA8ZWCsxaOXb0bBCoPQA/s72-c/Picture%201.png)
![[Guest post] Benelux Office rules on opposition proceedings prepared by ChatGPT](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi29VY0rNNP1Hqyz8RgB47r4q7fhqQfYHxsEbX_RKmT4KU5Y_vg7vB6dsAW91CidjMfJ38klTvD4mMtZb3QmwFPAHaGF88BPttWSbfYvo7UUg7MpFRTNtEjThmG0QaX2qZFFHSnN71i3YQZSBFC0SL7PgkAlme-XH8cSNWRFbOAOuLr_LMOGcImLQ/s72-c/Screenshot%202024-12-04%20at%2020.45.58.png)
Posts
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