Cutting edge for greens. Cutting edge – Green Innovations and IPR
Management, edited by Andree
Bother in the Bahamas. From Serena Tierney (Consultant and Head of Intellectual Property, Bircham Dyson Bell LLP) came a slightly disconcerting piece of news earlier this week. She told the IPKat:
Lassies on the Bench. Earlier this week, Merpel asked if the Lundbeck case was the first time an appeal in IP proceedings in the UK was heard by a predominantly female tribunal. Lindesay M. Low (Legal Adviser to the Scotch Whisky Association) reports delightedly that Scotland got there first back in July 2008 when Ladies Paton, Smith and Dorrian, an all-female bench of the Inner House of the Court of Session (Scotland’s Civil Appeal Court), heard the appeal in the passing off case of Wise Property Care Limited v White Thomson Preservation Limited and Others. Not only was it the first all-female bench in an IP case but the first all-female bench in an appeal of any sort in Scotland. Thanks Lindesay, you've earned your katpat!
builds on existing WIPO programs and lends support to the initiatives of other organizations (e.g. UNDP, UNEP, UNFCCC, UN Global Compact, UNIDO) [the letter 'u' appears between those brackets more frequently than in the standard English Scrabble set, notes the IPKat] and the World Bank’s Climate Technology Program.Bibliographic data: Publisher: Kluwer Law International; hardcover, ISBNs 9041133445 and 9789041133441, 344 pp. Price £89. Rupture factor: sustainable. Web page here.
The list of contributors is as extensive as it is impressive and – other than the editors themselves - includes practitioners, academics, policymakers and officials. The first impression of this book is that it has the potential to be a helpful resource for the practical application of IPR’s relating to green technology not only for lawyers, policymakers, agency officials, academics but also for inventors and technology companies".
Bother in the Bahamas. From Serena Tierney (Consultant and Head of Intellectual Property, Bircham Dyson Bell LLP) came a slightly disconcerting piece of news earlier this week. She told the IPKat:
"I have just received an email from CompuMark, who provide our watching service, headed 'Alert - short opposition'. As I do a lot of work in China where the notice periods are very short, I opened it to find that I was being notified of an opposition period (in the Bahamas) that expired on 3 June 2013! Luckily, my client does not need to take any action but I checked and found that the firm's time travel machine seems sadly out of order. Here is the explanation from CompuMark:Thanks, Serena, for letting us know. Readers who may be affected by this Bahamian practice should take note.
"BAHAMAS: In the beginning of July it came to our attention that the trademarks in the Bahamas are issued in an additional publication, alongside the official publication. As a result of our new subscription to this new publication, we received journals after the expiration of the opposition deadlines. We are of the opinion that it is our duty to report any similar trademarks to you. We apologize for any inconveniences this might cause you."
Lassies on the Bench. Earlier this week, Merpel asked if the Lundbeck case was the first time an appeal in IP proceedings in the UK was heard by a predominantly female tribunal. Lindesay M. Low (Legal Adviser to the Scotch Whisky Association) reports delightedly that Scotland got there first back in July 2008 when Ladies Paton, Smith and Dorrian, an all-female bench of the Inner House of the Court of Session (Scotland’s Civil Appeal Court), heard the appeal in the passing off case of Wise Property Care Limited v White Thomson Preservation Limited and Others. Not only was it the first all-female bench in an IP case but the first all-female bench in an appeal of any sort in Scotland. Thanks Lindesay, you've earned your katpat!
Friday fantasies
Reviewed by Jeremy
on
Friday, November 08, 2013
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