Monday miscellany

Fun in the sun. This year's IP Summer School -- IBC Legal's 14th Annual IP Law Summer School to be precise -- is coming up soon. From 18 to 22 August 2014, a happy crew of IP enthusiasts will be gathering together in the splendid setting of Downing College, Cambridge, to enjoy each others' company as well as five days of intensive fun-filled instruction. The latter is supplied by a team of highly-experienced IP practitioners and personalities, not excluding blogmeister Jeremy.  This is now the fourth fifth severalth time that Jeremy has been involved: his input is in an IP arbitration exercise that focuses on resolving a simulated trade mark dispute. All good fun, but there's always a serious edge to it and the objective is to inspire and to instruct. Click here for further details and registration -- and don't forget to quote your IPKat VIP Katcode FKW82458IPKL to claim your 20% discount.

Readers' comments. The lead item in last week's Friday Fantasies on the subject of abusive comments, particularly from unidentifiable readers, attracted a large and animated response in the form of readers' comments and emails.  This Kat is glad that he raised the subject. If nothing else, it showed that a large number of readers are happy with the notion of this blog continuing in its role as a didactic weblog that promotes its writers' largely pro-IP views while welcoming opposing opinions and constructive criticism and jettisoning abuse; a smaller number are manifestly unhappy, possibly because they think this weblog should be some sort of unmoderated chat-room for the venting of personal spleen and ire. Another small minority appears to make no distinction between criticism and personal abuse at all.  This Kat proposes to post no further comments on this topic. Merpel, who agrees, suggests that those who feel that this blog strangles debate rather than promotes it are welcome to start their own blog and do things their own way: just let us know and we'll give you a plug in the next available 'Around the weblogs' feature, she adds. One final point: one of the anonymous commentators has posted an allegation of plagiarism in relation to an unspecified contributor to this weblog: the IPKat, as is well known, does not condone or tolerate plagiarism in any shape or form (and, curiously, has been criticised for his position on this topic: see here). Both he and Merpel are willing to pursue any allegation of plagiarism that is supported by evidence

Around the weblogs.  The Class 99 design law and practice weblog, hosted by European trade mark organisation MARQUES, has just reached and indeed surpassed the 1,000 mark for email subscribers: well done! On SOLO IP, Barbara Cookson introduces us to the Cateys, an awards event for those involved in the catering industry, reviewing the centrality of IP to this important sector (a Catey is displayed on the right). On Class 46, Edith Van den Eede reviews a recent Italian action in which the Rome Court refused applications for declarations of non-infringement against protected designations of origin MAREMMA TOSCANA and CAPALBIO for wine. Finally, on Art & Artifice, Angela Saltarelli writes on a battle over ownership of two paintings by Lucas Cranach the Elder, another unhappy chapter in the story of art works separated from their owners during the Second World War.

COMING SOON: tomorrow we name our three new guest Kats for the period 1 July to 31 December 2014.
Monday miscellany Monday miscellany Reviewed by Jeremy on Monday, June 30, 2014 Rating: 5

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:

Powered by Blogger.