Wednesday whimsies

Ha anyone a good caption
for this piece of P2P artwork?
It is sometimes said of dogs that, when they get their teeth into a nice juicy bone [Merpel queries the use of the term "juicy bone" -- the only bones she ever sees are dry], they are reluctant to let go of it.  The same actually applies to Kats, and a juicy bone of which this particular Kat is especially fond is the UK IPO's version of the Peer to Patent trial.  Latest news of this exciting project can be found on the trial's web page here.  Incidentally, the IPKat really liked the piece of artwork on the Peer to Patent page, which is depicted on the left. With the little penguinlike icons surrounding their prey, arrows pointed ready to shoot, the illustration reminded him of the Pollaiuolos' Martyrdom of St Sebastian (right).

An early applicant for one
of the new gTLDs
On Tuesday morning this Kat braved the storms to attend a seminar on the new gTLD regime for domain names, hosted in the London office of Taylor Wessing. The star attraction was veteran domain name guru and MARQUES Council member Nick Wood, wearing his Valideus hat. Nick's presentation struck a curiously neutral stance as he explained the strengths and weaknesses of the controversial ICANN operation. The IPKat's takeaway message was that we are all guinea pigs and, despite a decade of consultation, rule-drafting and fine-tuning, no-one can predict how the prospect of becoming the registrar of the dot-whatever domain of one's choice will actually work out. Another point that struck him as significant was the fact that ICANN's approval would be needed in respect of any attempt to transfer a registry, or operate it under changed ownership. This would appear to mean that, for instance, if a major bank (let's call it Megabank) which acquired and operated the dot-megabank gTLD, hit financial difficulties and was taken into public ownership by the government, its continued ability to run the dot-megabank gTLD would be contingent on ICANN deciding to approve it. This could lead to political strains as well as embarrassment, this Kat thinks.

A day later, the same Kat braved the brisk and bristly breezes that swept Lincoln's Inn to attend the Hardwicke seminar on Initial Interest Confusion, yet another American invention that is taking root in Europe [and not a moment too late, adds Merpel, who thinks it's cool].  Two star speakers were lost from the line-up, Annsley the AmeriKat being stranded in Italy by local industrial (in)action that grounded all flights while Alice Gould had to put in a court appearance [Nothing to do with the London riots, we are informed]. Anyway, Simon Bennett (Fox Williams) filled in admirably for Alice while IPKat team member Jeremy -- who only two short days ago declared on this weblog that he had given up all lecturing -- pretended to be Annsley and delivered her paper, managing to keep going for 42 minutes despite a power cut and the disappearance of Annsley's PowerPoimts.  If you missed the seminar, don't worry: two of the Kats' friends have been taking notes which, once edited and tidied up, will be placed before you.

Around the weblogs.  On the 1709 Blog, Hugo Cox has a quick and entirely serious question to ask the Pirate Party UK, having read its 2011 manifesto.  Gino Van Roeyen regales MARQUES Class 46 readers with news of General Biscuits' triumph in a dispute as to whether rights in its iconic TUC biscuit packages were being infringed by the upstart brand Apéro.  Leigh Smith (McDermott Will & Emery) explains the thrust of the EU's Memorandum of Understanding on the sale of counterfeit goods on the internet for the benefit of jiplp readers.  Finally, IP Tango's Patricia Coverrubia covers the fascinating facts behind the battle of Kellogg's and the Maya Archaeology Initiative over a toucan called Sam.

Harry Bloom was an extraordinary individual.  A witty, gregarious and talented man, his life encapsulated several careers and a multitude of adventures before he died of a stroke at the early age of 68. The brief note on his life on Wikipedia scarcely does justice to him.  During the 1970s he was a founder-director of the  University of Kent's Unit for Legal Research in Computers and Communications which, like Harry, died young after the university decided that there was no future for the subject and closed the unit down.  Among those whom Harry -- a passionate enthusiast for intellectual property, information technology and cybernetics -- persuaded to enter the territory of information and communications law were IPKat team member Jeremy and the University of Southampton's Professor Stephen Saxby.  Now David Goldberg (University of Oxford, Centre for Socio-Legal Studies) has emailed to say that he and Stephen are putting together a seminar, to be held in Southampton in late 2012, to commemorate the centenary of Harry's birthday, 1 January 1913.  If you too have been touched by Harry's magic and/or just want to be kept in touch, email David here and tell him.
Wednesday whimsies Wednesday whimsies Reviewed by Jeremy on Wednesday, September 07, 2011 Rating: 5

1 comment:

  1. And Andrew Robinson has now provided a lengthy and refreshingly coherent reply. I am not sure that I agree with him but this is a good level for the discussion to be at rather than the predictable freetards vs paytards playground bickering.

    Kudos to him.


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.