Friday fantasies

Friday has come round again and, with it, the usual reminder to check the IPKat's Forthcoming Events page to see what's looming up in the future. There are conferences, seminars, all sorts of attractions. Might we see you at any of them?

Youth opportunity of the week.  The IPKat is getting quite a few requests these days from young enthusiasts in search of that elusive first rung on the ladder of life in the IP field.  This week's eager youngster is Simon Graham, who writes:
"I am a highly motivated postgraduate looking for an internship with a patent firm or in-house patent team ideally in the UK, Europe or America. Having gained the Master in the Management of Intellectual Property and the certificate in Intellectual Property Law from Queen Mary [for the benefit of first-time readers, the Kat explains that Queen Mary is the college, not the ship or even the pub], I am part qualified and currently studying for the UK Patent Practice (P2) exam.

My technical background is in life sciences and computing gained in the pharmaceutical industry with some experience of working in an IP environment.
Please contact if you can help." 
Well, readers -- if you are interested, you know what you can do!

Around the weblogs. The Cyberleagle blog, authoritatively authored by the IPKat's friend Graham Smith, carries this eloquent piece on "10 essential points from Newzbin2".  Graham's very discreet about which law firm he works for, but it has four wings and plenty of feathers.  The jiplp weblog features a Current Intelligence piece by Kingsley Egbuonu and Chukwuyere Izuogu on the only case known to this Kat in which an injunction to restrain a patent infringement had repercussions for the conduct of a general election. PatLit's latest PCC Page investigates the often essential inconvenience of finding the right expert witness here.

Want to impress your friends?
Judicial fancy dress available
The IPKat wonders what fate is about to befall intellectual property litigation in England and Wales. Only a short while ago he was celebrating the elevation of two of the country's Patents Court judges to the Court of Appeal.  Now he has just read the following snippets:
  • The Queen has been pleased to approve the appointment of Robert Henry Thoroton Hildyard, Esq., Q.C., to be a Justice of the High Court with effect from 3 October 2011 on the elevation of Mr. Justice Lewison to the Court of Appeal.
  • The Queen has been pleased to approve the appointment of Rabinder Singh, Esq., Q.C., to be a Justice of the High Court with effect from 3 October 2011 on the elevation of Mr. Justice Kitchin to the Court of Appeal.

Like any well-mannered feline, the Kat welcomes the new appointments, who appear well qualified for the bench, and wishes them the best of luck. He is however a little anxious since, to his great embarrassment, he hasn't heard of either of the new judges before and has a trifling suspicion that they're not main-line IP-ers.  This leaves him wondering whether the vacancies in the Patents Court will be left empty, or filled by 'outsiders' (as has been done before, sometimes with notable success). Or maybe we'll be cutting down on those expensive High Court types and stocking up on cheap-and-cheerful Patents County Court judges instead, now that Judge Birss has made that court so popular.  Does any reader know?
Friday fantasies Friday fantasies Reviewed by Jeremy on Friday, July 29, 2011 Rating: 5


  1. Although entirely happy to be proved wrong, the thought of a non-IP judge doing IP cases makes this Kat's heart sink....

    Where are our IP QC's that should be being appointed to the bench?!

  2. raking it in as IP QC's, I imagine ... ;-)

  3. They're obviously reserving a place for Mr Justice Merpel (as he will hopefully soon be).

  4. I vote for Lord Merpel of Catterick to go straight to the Supreme Court. As well as being an excellent choice, having a cat on the panel will help them with their diversity statistics.


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.