
Right: "Teachers' Pet", one of a selection of delightful posters from Allposters

UK (or is that DigiBrit?) legal practitioners who still think that the Trade Descriptions Act 1968 is still part of the armoury of legal weapons for dealing with, among other things, counterfeit goods sold as though they were legitimate, had better take a reality check. You can start here with Filemot's post on SOLO IP if you've nowhere more convenient ...

Here's an advance notice for contributors to, and peer-reviewers for, Oxford University Press's monthly Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice. This autumn JIPLP is going to be processing all stages of the submission, review and correction process via ScholarOne's Manuscript Central system. The exact date on which the change-over takes place will be announced at the end of April. Once the new system is in operation, articles, current intelligence notes and book reviews may only be submitted via this system. You can be sure that it will be a real pain in the teething stages, for all of us, but the long-term advantages are immense. They include things like (i) articles not getting lost in the pipeline, (ii) peer reviewers getting automatic reminders that someone, somewhere wants to hear from them and (iii) a means by which authors of articles can find out online, at 2.30am on a Sunday morning, the exact stage reached in the processing of their article. You have been warned!

Via R. S. Praveen Raj comes a link to this item in The Hindu concerning the registration of the image of a deity as a trade mark in India. The proprietor, the Attukal Bhagawathy Temple, maintains that its registration of a mark entitled ‘Sabarimala of Women’ would help to prevent unauthorised use of the image and the title. Praveen Raj, himself a former patent and designs examiner, has raised a number of issues relating to the sensitive interface between religious faith and commercial practice, which leads the IPKat to wonder what his readers think.

Monday medley
Reviewed by Jeremy
on
Monday, March 16, 2009
Rating:

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