tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post9156041020532377060..comments2024-03-29T09:21:58.696+00:00Comments on The IPKat: Unjustified threats to sue for IP infringement: a bit of British patching up, but more remains to be doneVerónica RodrÃguez Arguijohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05763207846940036921noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-65491399143193689472015-10-14T10:32:33.348+01:002015-10-14T10:32:33.348+01:00@Hector MacQueen: Great idea. Other common areas t...@Hector MacQueen: Great idea. Other common areas that might be covered include employer/employee ownership, initial vesting, assignment of future IP, assignments generally, licensing, whether licences binding on future owner, joint ownership. <br /><br />Might also be used as an opportunity to address unexplored issues such as implied warranties of title etc in assignments and licences, assignment of a determinable interest, and whether royalty obligations can "attach" to ownership (like negative covenants on land in English law). See further my chapter on patent licensing in Research Handbook on Intellectual Property Licensing (editor, de Werra, Edward Elgar Publishing) which proposes a codification of licence agreements.Mark Andersonhttp://www.ipdraughts.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-19446213539563598452015-10-14T09:21:23.330+01:002015-10-14T09:21:23.330+01:00One wonders if there isn't room for at least a...One wonders if there isn't room for at least a mini-codification of what might be called the common parts of IP, such as groundless threats, remedies etc; and perhaps also on the bits where IP inter-faces with other parts of the law such as charges and securities. In the work I did for the Law Commission on groundless threats, I couldn't help thinking that the present differences in the various Acts was down to the draftsman and his/her instructors thinking only about patents, trade marks, or designs, or whichever was the current subject, rather than in any sort of holistic systematic way. If you had common legislation for this sort of thing, it could be easily referred to, simply up-dated as and when the occasion arose, and any variations between different IPRs clearly justified by appropriate policy considerations. Hector MacQueennoreply@blogger.com