Monday miscellany

The saga of the EPO is increasingly looking
like a Punch and Judy show, in which everyone
gets hurt and there are no real winners: but is
it not too late to achieve a workable solution?
Around the weblogs.  The IPKat doesn't usually lead his Monday Miscellany weblog with the "Around the weblogs" feature, but the current governance and operations of the European Patent Office (EPO) have attracted so much attention of late that it seems somehow inappropriate to let this subject slip down the page.  Roy Schestowitz's TechRights blog has been unstinting in its criticism of the EPO, his Friday blogpost being sparked by the EPO's objection to his use of its logo as it appears on the now archival Unitary Patent website, among other things.  In contrast, "Pilot project with Microsoft and other big filers will directly help SMEs, not hinder them, says EPO" is IAM editor Joff Wild's post on the IAM Blog, following the World Intellectual Property Review story, "EPO defends claims it favours big applicants", along similar lines last Wednesday.  Meanwhile, there has been a flurry of statements, counter-statements and newspaper articles representing a range of positions and accusations. This Kat understands the Merpel is waiting for the dust to settle before putting paw to paper. He contents himself at this stage with expressing deep regret that this unprecedented lack of trust and confidence in the running of one of the world's major patent-granting institutions should have been allowed to occur, and his hope that even at this late stage the vast amount of damage that is being done can be limited and ultimately repaired.

Here's news of a fun event, if you are around in London and able to avail yourself of it.  It takes place on Tuesday 27 October, thanks to the University of Westminster, and it's free.  The details read like this:
"The artist contract in the digital world" is a conversation between Nick Mason (Pink Floyd), Chris Ancliff (Warner Music Group) and Paul Pacifico (Featured Artists Coalition) on the evolution of the artist/record company contract.

Pink Floyd, 1967
Following on from previous successful music business related events at Westminster Law School, including the Once in a Lifetime negotiation, we are delighted to be able to announce this very special event to take place in October. Chris Ancliff is the General Counsel (International) at the Warner Music Group and was previously General Counsel at EMI Group plc. Paul is the first full time CEO of the Featured Artists Coalition. Nick Mason is a renowned composer, musician and producer, who in some ways will be ‘coming home’ for the event – along with fellow architecture student Roger Waters, he held rehearsals for their band Sigma 6 in the student common room in what is now the Law School building. As part of Pink Floyd he later returned to play in the building’s grand art deco Portland Hall, where this event takes place.

It is now almost 50 years since Pink Floyd signed their first contract with EMI, and the evolution of this relationship will be discussed, along with consideration of various current issues.

Attendance is free, please register online.

Ethical dilemmas of online piracy: now for a survey.  The Kats have received a request from Tina Šalamun, a student from Slovenia who studies at the Faculty of Business and Economics in her local university.  Says Tina: "My research is about ethical dilemmas of online piracy. In my research I have included British students and all who live there. I would ask you if you could share a survey on your site. It would be a great help because it is very difficult to obtain a sample for later analysis. Thank you!"  The survey, which should take around 10 to 15 minutes to complete, can be accessed here.
Monday miscellany Monday miscellany Reviewed by Jeremy on Monday, October 19, 2015 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.