Monday miscellany I

What could be more enjoyable, in
between IP lectures, than a gentle
round of croquet on a Cambridge
college lawn ...?
Summer splendour.  Last weekend IPKat team blogger Jeremy was mewsing about Sweet & Maxwell's forthcoming June 2013 one-day trade mark conference at London's Holborn Bars (see blogpost here). This week his thoughts turned to an event that's taking place rather later in this Kat's IP-rich summer, and which lasts considerably longer -- IBC's annual Intellectual Property Law Summer School, which takes place in the splendid comfort of Downing College, Cambridge, from 19 to 23 August. In each of the past few years, Jeremy has been inveigled into attending this event, initially as a speaker and now as author of the mock IP arbitration on Thursday 22 August, the trade marks and designs day. Although there is a serious side to it, which is why people are willing to pay substantial sums and travel some distance to attend, this Kat particularly enjoys the festive atmosphere which the Summer School setting imparts. IP students who are happy and relaxed are far easier to coax through difficult IP exercises than those who are stressed.  Then there is the social side to the week: mountaineering, deep-sea diving, or whatever people do in between the IP bits. Anyway, if you are thinking of coming this year, or even if you're just curious to see what the programme looks like, all you have to do is click here. Readers of the IPKat weblog are entitled to a 20% reduction of the cost of registration if they quote the IPKat's VIP code, FKW82373IPKBP (Merpel's sure this stands for something, but she's not sure what ...).

While on the subject of events, Sir Robin Jacob has been jogging the Kat's elbow to remind him to spread the word concerning an original and challenging conference on a topic that doesn't look as though it has been aired before -- the role of experts and scientific advisors in European patent litigation.  Date date is 11 June 2013, it's an IBIL event that will be hosted at UCL, London, and you can get information via PatLit or from IBIL itself.

The IPKat's nightmare: so much
animal life -- and just one tree ...
Whatever happened to Brüstle? In October 2011 the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) issued its ruling in the keenly-contested dispute in Case C-34/10 Oliver Brüstle v Greenpeace over the patentability of human stem cells. This has led to continued debate, the issue of a new set of guidelines from the European Patent Office, and even a further reference for the attention of the Court of Justice.  But whatever happened to the original litigation in Brüstle v Greenpeace? What happened to it once the case, dealt with by the CJEU, returned to the German Bundesgerichtshof which sent it to Luxembourg back in 2009.  Thanks to Martina Brady we now know the answer: an English translation of the Bundesgerichtshof's rulig of 27 November 2012 can be read here.  It is a concise, clear ruling in which that court amends the earlier decision of the Bundespatentgericht, partially invalidates the patent in question, dismisses the rest of the appeal and declines to make a further reference to the CJEU.  A Katpat goes to Martina Brady for her persistence in looking for an English translation.

Spring surprise.  "EAPO Abolishes Accelerated Examination Of Patent Applications" was the headline that most startled this Kat last week.  Just when it seemed that everyone who really knew about patents was singing the praises of accelerated patent examination, could it really be that the Eurasian Patent Organization had signed a resolution abolishing accelerated examination of patent applications with effect from 1 March 2013?  Apparently so, though those lucky souls who had both sought accelerated examination and paid the appropriate fees before that date would get the promised examination. This news came from the newsletter of Petosevic (here), in a succinct report which conveys no explanation.  Does any reader know why the EAPO is not only bucking the trend but turning down the chance to earn some money?

Around the weblogs. The International Trademark Association (INTA) has gone public on its very own INTABlog. Very handsome it is too, says the IPKat, who has been perusing it here.  Class 99 has reminded readers that there are still a few days to go till its "Design a Design for Class 99" competition finishes. Do have a go!  Kat congratulations go to the jiplp weblog -- the informal site of the Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice -- for finally securing its 800th email subscriber.

Why books are like teeth: Merpel's explanation.  Readers may well recall Rhoda Baxter, the illustrious author of Patently in Love [reviewed on this weblog here]  Well, Rhoda has emailed the Kat to tell him this: "To bookend World IP Day [last Friday], I asked 'IP Lit' novelists Ivan Cotter [author of The Schmetterling Effect, on which see Katpost here] and Kalyan Kankanala [who wrote Road Humps and Sidewalks, reviewed on this blog here] to do guest posts in Rhoda's Inheritance Books feature (this involves naming the book from earlier generations that means the most to you, and the book you most want to hand down to future generations). You can check out Kalyan's post here, and Ivan's here.  This Kat is still struggling to name his two books since, every time he makes an effort to do so, his choice seems to vary with his mood and temperament. But Merpel asks: isn't that the thing about books?  They're a bit like teeth.  In first place, you generally need a whole load of them if they're going to be much use. Secondly, they don't normally make a lasting impression. Thirdly, however much you benefit from them, you can't usually count on future generations finding them much use.
Monday miscellany I Monday miscellany I Reviewed by Jeremy on Monday, April 29, 2013 Rating: 5

1 comment:

  1. Is that Queen Elizabeth playing on the lawn?

    Gregory Chandler, Attorney at Law


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.