tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post4384459170202727988..comments2024-03-28T16:45:51.051+00:00Comments on The IPKat: Wiltshire shaken by sale of unauthorised plant varietyVerónica Rodríguez Arguijohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05763207846940036921noreply@blogger.comBlogger14125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-62943138055292022212011-11-16T18:35:04.044+00:002011-11-16T18:35:04.044+00:00George, thanks for this, but I think your referenc...George, thanks for this, but I think your reference favours my side of the argument rather than yours. I quote "<i> A variety of common knowledge is not required to meet the same standards required for protected varieties and could include unnamed varieties, ecotypes and landraces.</i>".P Dantnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-30257502183700041232011-11-12T20:24:42.720+00:002011-11-12T20:24:42.720+00:00@P Dant: irrespective of the logical attraction of...@P Dant: irrespective of the logical attraction of your argument it seems that the 'common knowledge' refers to knowledge about those varieties that are already entitled to carry the designation, i.e. by being registered in any country that has a PVR (Plant Variety Right) institution. See for instance:<br /><br />http://www.iponz.govt.nz/cms/pvr/technical-notes-guidelines/varieties-of-common-knowledge-identification-and-usage<br /><br />(sorry about the long link)<br /><br />George Brock-NannestadAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-64312547838483228532011-11-12T09:19:49.704+00:002011-11-12T09:19:49.704+00:00The idea that you can only talk about a variety if...The idea that you can only talk about a variety if it's been registered is no sounder than the notion that you can only talk about an invention if a patent has been granted. The UPOV convention talks about varieties 'of common knowledge' - clearly this includes things that aren't registered. A plant variety is something potentially capable of being protected by registration, should it meet the statutory requirements (novelty, distinctness, uniformity, stability, etc.,).P Dantnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-50495575557264405212011-11-12T00:19:04.215+00:002011-11-12T00:19:04.215+00:00@Anonymous Friday, November 11, 2011 8:50:00 AM:
...@Anonymous Friday, November 11, 2011 8:50:00 AM:<br /><br />King Edward is most likely a variety, because it is registered with the authorities. So, it would be ok for you to call your bunch a variety. But you might have King Edward look-alikes, even though they may be fine tubers, they do not constitute a plant variety until they have passed official tests and have been registered against payment. And they would get a different name.<br /><br />As to Ashley's laws of thermodynamics I recommend Flanders & Swann for the first and second: "Heat is Work and Work is Heat" and "Heat cannot by itself pass from one body to a hotter body" -- very early rap of sorts.<br /><br />George Brock-Nannestad<br /><br />P.S. would you believe it: the Word Verification is ANTUBAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-65287194484440274252011-11-11T16:55:34.038+00:002011-11-11T16:55:34.038+00:00Ashley says
I did my PhD in thermodynamics and co...Ashley says<br /><br />I did my PhD in thermodynamics and combustion. Never once have I had an IP case (and I've done a few) which has called upon my many skills in this area.<br /><br />Anyway, the laws of thermodynaice are four in number (zero, one, two and three). Basically they say (1) that there have to be rules concerning thermal transfers, (2) that you cannot change those rules, (3) that when it comes to thermal transfers you cannot win and (4)likewise you cannot break even.<br /><br />The third law of thermodynamics simply says that heat can be stored in various ways, much like storing boxes in an empty lockup; you can put them on top of each other or in a single layer on the floor or other combinations - even hanging in the air with no support if you like.<br /><br />Never say you don't understand T3 again.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-13891653380809031562011-11-11T16:21:29.059+00:002011-11-11T16:21:29.059+00:00It may be that her website used the image of the p...It may be that her website used the image of the poppy at one time (as she claims, with permission) but it does so no longer.Francis Daveyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10228026893626221724noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-21524616762320994432011-11-11T15:08:18.530+00:002011-11-11T15:08:18.530+00:00Looks like it is from a report in the "Wiltsh...Looks like it is from a report in the "Wiltshire Times" as noted in the teardrop's web site here: http://teardroptime.co.uk/news<br /><br />"November 4, 2011 | Posted by Lynda In today’s edition of The Wiltshire Times newspaper (4th November), there is an article which talks about The Teardrop project, enabling the public to silently show their appreciation to everyone involved with repatriations, and especially to Royal Wootton Bassett for their dedication over the last 4 years.<br /><br />However, the article also claims that on October 27, the day the Poppy Appeal was launched that I was told I could not promote the teardrops, because I did not have the right to use the image of the poppy."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-40065690784117085282011-11-11T14:36:10.828+00:002011-11-11T14:36:10.828+00:00@Anonymous 1:56pm
I don't know whether the con...@Anonymous 1:56pm<br />I don't know whether the content of the BBC has been amended from time to time, but I can't find your quote in the version I read. The objection of the RBL also appears to be to the sale of the poppy. Are you using another (possibly more reliable) source?Jeremyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01123244020588707776noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-77873378351621738332011-11-11T13:56:32.788+00:002011-11-11T13:56:32.788+00:00A little reading will show that the objection was ...A little reading will show that the objection was that she "did not have the right to use the image of the poppy"Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-20070470881092066262011-11-11T10:41:09.183+00:002011-11-11T10:41:09.183+00:00Well, for a start, the rules of English grammar an...Well, for a start, the rules of English grammar and spelling mandate that you should call your tubers "potatoes" rather than "potatos".Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-30147549457258392912011-11-11T10:18:54.527+00:002011-11-11T10:18:54.527+00:00I'm obviously missing something here, but as f...I'm obviously missing something here, but as far as I can tell from the teardrop website:<br /><br />http://teardroptime.co.uk/teardrop<br /><br />Mrs Beaven doesn't "attach" the tears to a poppy (genuine or otherwise). She sells the tears pure and simple which can then be used by members of the public to attach to their own poppies. So surely we don't get to exhaustion. There is, surely, no trademark use at all.<br /><br />At least not of the poppy. She does say "The Royal British Legion are aware of the project and are happy for the donation to be made" and one can imagine a number of claims that might be made about that, although if its true they would be rather difficult to mount.<br /><br />And of course (here exhaustion does come in) the RBL really can't control what people do with their poppies once bought. <br /><br />So, either I'm showing my ignorance of the true breadth of trademark law, or there's something odd here.Francis Daveyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10228026893626221724noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-36525289995570019902011-11-11T08:50:41.491+00:002011-11-11T08:50:41.491+00:00I was unaware that it is possible to legislate as ...I was unaware that it is possible to legislate as to how the English language is used. If I am not allowed to refer to my King Edward potatos as a potato variety what wording should I use?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-59867065599653872152011-11-11T08:20:45.190+00:002011-11-11T08:20:45.190+00:00@George -- The title should have read "unauth...@George -- The title should have read "unauthorised sale of plant variety", not "sale of unauthorised plant variety". Such are the dangers of late-night blogging!Jeremyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01123244020588707776noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-63867327371510262011-11-11T00:37:45.623+00:002011-11-11T00:37:45.623+00:00Jeremy, this is an interesting story with a sting ...Jeremy, this is an interesting story with a sting in its tail. However, your title is contradictory: you cannot have an unauthorised variety, because the term "variety" is reserved for a group of plants that are registered as being stable in several defined characteristics or traits. Contrary to the fields we are forever dealing with (not Strawberry), the useful term covering something that is unregistered does not exist.<br /><br />GeorgeAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com