Latest JIPLPs

The IPKat has been a bit remiss in announcing the publication of Oxford University Press's flagship IP journal, the Journal of Intellectual Property Law and Practice (JIPLP), which IPKat team member Jeremy edits. Indeed, two issues have gone out since last he performed this task and a third, with "April" on its cover, is on the way. Topics featured in the February issue included the following:
* a review of the legality of 'data-scraping' in the UK by DMH Stallard solicitors Frank Jennings and John Yates;
Right: compared with real-world scraping, data scraping is a doddle
* a punchy account of fashion design protection in Australia by Tim Golder and Marina Lloyd Jones (Allens Arthur Robinson);

* Maxwell J. Petesen (Pauley Petersen & Erickson, Chicago) writing on defence strategies for US litigants facing patent infringement claims from so-called trolls.
TThe March issue contains a special focus on IP transactions. It includes
* an analysis of warranties and covenants in IP licences by Davenport Lyons' David Marchese;

* an in-depth visit to problems raised by nanotechnology licences by Paul J. Sutton, Chinh H. Pham and Joanna Toke (Greenberg Traurig);
Right: one problem with nanotechnology patents is that the prior art can be too small to find ...

* Matthew Murphy (MMLC Group, Beijing) considers how best joint-venture partners can protect their share of the IP in China.
You can read the February editorial in full, and at no cost, here, and the March editorial (a guest piece by Neil J. Wilkof) here
Read all the editorials of the past twelve months here
For free sample, click here; to subscribe, click here; to write, click here
Latest JIPLPs Latest JIPLPs Reviewed by Jeremy on Saturday, March 28, 2009 Rating: 5

1 comment:

  1. Before I read your note I hadn't heard of 'data scraping'; a tiny bit of googling, yielded - this page.



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.