Friday fantasies

Friday may not be the end of the week for most people, but it marks the end of the working week for most IP practitioners and their clients, as well as the many administrators, policy-makers and 24/7 devotees of the subject. To all of you the IPKat extends his greetings and politely reminds you to check out the list of forthcoming events in his side bar.

The IPKat has received a copy of Charles R. Macedo's book, The Corporate Insider's Guide to US Patent Practice, which he will soon be reviewing for the PatLit weblog. One thing that amuses the Kat is the discovery that authors with highly-specialised interests (in this case US patent law) sometimes venture out of their specialities into other, quite different fields. This is the same Charles Macedo who has recently written this Current Intelligence note on Janky v Lake County Convention and Visitors Bureau, a 7th Circuit appeal decision on the joint authorship of a doo-wop song. Such versatility ... Merpel asks, in the light of Mr Macedo's face-furniture, can we assume that he also has an interest in barbershop?

The subject of assisted suicide and Dignitas cropped up yesterday and the IPKat, noticing that the organisation has neither Community trade mark nor UK registrations for its name, wondered what Classes under the Nice Classification it might be advised to cover. Merpel was wondering, too, whether the name might be descriptive of the manner in which Dignitas seeks to carry out its functions, and therefore unregistrable. Any thoughts?

The Intellectual Property Institute (IPI), London, has recently released "The Economics of Intellectual Property Rights and Climate Change: Three New Studies Provide a More Scientific Basis to the Debate", a ten-page pdf file which you can download here. According to the executive summary, "The papers [by Daniel K. N Johnson and Kristina Lybecker of Colorado College] provide a comprehensive review of the current body of economics research and a wealth of information on various aspects of the debate and show that a broad consensus among economists on the role that IPRs play in the low-carbon technology space is forming".

If you want to know how the House of Lords debate over the UK's Digital Economy Bill kicked off, Hugo Cox has given it an appropriately reverential treatment on the 1709 Blog here.

If you want to know how the Administrative Council of the European Patent Office is still foundering over the election of a new President, Axel Horns' IP::JUR blog is a good place to look for news and comment.
Friday fantasies Friday fantasies Reviewed by Jeremy on Friday, December 11, 2009 Rating: 5


  1. Re Dignitas:
    Class 35: Economic Forecasting; Efficiency Experts; Management Assistance; Tax preparation
    Class 36: Antique Appraisal; Organisation of Collections; Issue of Tokens of value;
    Class 37: Extermination; Knife Sharpening
    Class 39: Carting; Distribution of Energy; Travel; Removal Services; Unloading cargo
    lass 40: Alteration; Destruction of Waste and Trash.

    Class 1: Accelerators; Anti-incrustants
    Class 2: Removers; Crushing Machines
    Class 4: Vapourised Fuel Mixtures; Lighting (for gas)

  2. Surely it must be "medical services" in class 44.

    I don't think it would be descriptive since it isn't directly descriptive - it alludes at most.

    I do think a UK application would be refused if they did not fram it correctly as the provision of the services in question are illegal - possible s. 3(3) objection?

  3. Good heavens!

    Extermination by sharp knives followed by waste disposal using crushing machines? Looking at that list of classes it looks more like cold blood than dignity.

  4. Is there a classification for pythonesque satire?

    "The tenants arrive in the entrance hall here, and are carried along the corridor on a conveyor belt in extreme comfort and past murals depicting Mediterranean scenes, towards the rotating knives. The last twenty feet of the corridor are heavily soundproofed. The blood pours down these chutes and the mangled flesh slurps into these..."


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.