Friday fantasies

Following the sad news of  David Keltie's passing, the IPKat has now learnt the details of the celebration of David's life: it will take place in Southwark Cathedral at 3:30pm on Thursday 10 March. Space is limited, and those who would like to attend are asked to let the organisers know as soon as possible please, by email to


The Old Nick (IPKat’s favourite pub) is hosting another IP-heavy band evening on 4th Feb – see flyer here – in aid of Leukaemia and Lymphoma research.  Acts include Kilburn & Strode’s The Black IPs, Collyer Bristow’s IP Freely and the Incontinents and Trade Mark Attorney and Youtube sensation Flora Cook

Gwilym Roberts tells us there's a slight Bowie theme to the evening. "The last one was fantastic," he saysm "this one’s bigger so come along and party like a patent agent." The IPKat notes that David Bowie had another connection with patents. In The Man Who Fell to Earth he played the lead character: a visiting alien who used the advanced technology of his home planet to patent many inventions on Earth, becoming immensely wealthy in the process, aided by a patent attorney who becomes his business partner. 


The IPKat is not the only one with a Forthcoming Events page. An even more comprehensive list of IP related events is published monthly by the Queen Mary Journal of Intellectual Property, so if you're looking for somewhere to collect CPD points or just want to hear interesting speakers on IP, their February listing is here.


Taylor Wessing have launched an interactive patent litigation map enabling users to find information on patent litigation in 30 different countries, allowing questions to be asked of all countries, an overview of one country or a comparison of 5 countries. Paul England of that firm invites readers to explore the tool here.


Last week, the European Patent Litigators Association, EPLIT, ran a mock trial in Munich based on the famous Improver v Remington litigation. A report provided by Chris Ryan was hosted on sister blog Patlit, which the IPKat thought many of his readers would also be interested in reading, so do head over there to check it out, along with all the other news and information on patent litigation practice.


Nestlé's high end coffee brand Nespresso is reportedly suing an Israeli rival (Espresso Club) for using an actor with a resemblance to its own brand ambassador George Clooney in an advert (watch it here on YouTube). The Evening Standard reports that Nestlé is seeking $50k in damages and to have the ad taken down, but the defendant contends that it was all just a bit of tongue-in-cheek fun.

Friday fantasies Friday fantasies Reviewed by David Brophy on Friday, January 29, 2016 Rating: 5


  1. According to other online media, the Nestle / Espresso Club suit was originally filed 2 years ago - the current proceedings being an appeal of that decision (which was in Espresso Club's favour). Interesting that Nestle are bothering with the appeal in a pragmatic sense, because now the offending ad is being shared across mainstream media and lots more people are watching (and possibly enjoying) it.

  2. David,

    I've reported on the original ruling on the IP Factor here:

    The decision in favour of free speech was appealed to the District Court. There was a hearing earlier this week that got newspaper coverage in Israel and was, it seems, picked up by the Evening Standard. I am waiting for the District Court to publish its ruling before posting an update.


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.