Wednesday whimsies

MARQUES's Class 46 weblog has finally published the full programme and list of speakers for its seminar, "Future Plans: next steps for trade marks in Europe", which will be held at the London offices of law firm Simmons & Simmons LLP on Tuesday 5 April (the launch of this seminar featured on this weblog last week). Participants include leading silk Michael Edenborough QC, Appointed Person Anna Carboni, Professor Spyros Maniatis and the IPO's very own Allan James.  You can check the programme and the speakers' credentials here. It's not too late to book -- the venue holds 150 (though, as of this morning, 105 of those places were already taken).

Scams, unsolicited demands for payments and worthless directory entries are all going to be in the IPKat's line of fire later this week.  He can reveal that a revised version of the MARQUES Class 46 list of websites offering advice and guidance to IP owners and practitioners is likely to be made available on Friday, with the addition of warnings from another four countries (Czech Republic, Ireland, Israel, Slovak Republic).  There are still far too many national patent and trade mark offices that offer no advice or guidance at all -- and it is apparent that most countries have little resolve and inadequate laws to deal with this problem.    If your country is one of them, the time to start campaigning has long passed -- but it's not too late to put things right for the future!

From the IPKat's friend Chris Torrero comes news that the Legal Information Institute of India (LII of India) has been officially launched in Delhi this month. .LII of India now offers 108 databases (plus a further eight virtual databases), which readers can check out here.  Of particular interest to the IP/IT fraternity are the following:
Indian data -- on a plate!
* Indian Journal of Intellectual Property Law (INJlIPLaw) from 2008
* Indian Journal of Intellectual Property Rights (INJlIPR) from 2002
* Indian Journal of Law and Technology (INJlLawTech) from 2005
* Central Information Commission of India Decisions from 2006
* Indian Cyber Appellate Tribunal from 2010

"I just love that PCC!"
This week's PCC Page, which the PatLit weblog offers on guidance as to how to handle the newly-refreshed Patents County Court for England and Wales, deals with the tactical side of making an offer to settle (here).  And here's a swift reminder: the first decision under the PCC's new procedures was handed down yesterday in Dame Vivienne Westwood OBE v Anthony Edward Knight. A short note on the Dame's judicial triumph can be found on the IPKat weblog here.

WIPO's mediations can be appealing
for those who want to resolve
disputes without attracting
too much publicity
Given the amount of interest -- and the number of comments -- attracted by the IPKat's recent features (here and here) on how Creative Commons and Creative Barcode differ from one another, it seems appropriate to record the next Creative Barcode adventure: CB has now arranged for the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO)'s Arbitration and Mediation Center to provide mediation services for registered Creative Barcode members operating under CB's Trust Charter Agreement and who allege that their concepts, disclosed to a third party in business development activities, have been used without permission.  The Kats will all be watching with interest ...
Wednesday whimsies Wednesday whimsies Reviewed by Jeremy on Wednesday, March 23, 2011 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.