Victoria calls for "actual cooperation, not just fluffy conversation at the top level" |
Having compressed her one-year allocated for crafting a strategic plan into just six months, Victoria told us how much effort has gone into seeking consensus -- an effort which has borne fruit in uniting business and labour, Democrats and Republicans and all sorts of other warring factions in support of a vigorous pro-IP policy at home and abroad. Dialogue, not consultation, is her aim, and she maintains it with the Department of Justice, the Department of Commerce, Immigration and Customs Enforcement and other concerned bodies (a total of 17,000 Federal employees are apparently involved in IP enforcement issues of one sort or another).
A rare sight at Fordham: Hugh Hansen unable to interrupt a speaker. What might be be thinking ...? |
Victoria's message was a positive and impressive one, quite at odds with some of the downbeat assessments privately expressed by some of the conference participants about having to learn to live with a level of infringement that we can't bring down. It is a message which the IPKat will be taking back to England with him and which he looks forward to drawing to the attention of the All Party Parliamentary Intellectual Property Group (here) next month.
Fordham IP Conference 2011: part 6
Reviewed by Jeremy
on
Friday, April 29, 2011
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