Home » 2013 (Page 6)
Yearly Archives: 2013
UPC Rules of Procedure Consultation Event for Stakeholders: A round-up, and a few views
Last week, ipcopymark and ipcopyemily ventured out of the open plan, into the late summer sunshine, and headed towards Bristows’ offices for the ‘UPC Rules of Procedure Consultation Event for Stakeholders’, jointly hosted by Bristows LLP, the IPO, CIPA and the IP Federation. What unfolded was a thoroughly interesting two hours of discussion, explanation, comment and debate. The level of knowledge of the UPC among the audience was remarkably high, and it was clear that everyone in the auditorium was highly invested in the eventual content of the Rules of Procedure.
The event was chaired by Bobby Mukherjee from the IP Federation; Neil Feinson from the IPO, who is a member of the Preparatory Committee, also spoke, and the discussion panel consisted of Lord Justice Floyd, Kevin Mooney of Simmons and Simmons (both members of the Drafting Committee that has been preparing the draft of the Rules of Procedure), Alan Johnson of Bristows and Richard Vary of Nokia. A recording of the event can be found here.
Seven topics of particular interest were discussed, and below is a brief summary of the issues and commentary on each. But before we turn to these seven topics. IPCopy would like to offer some brief musings of its own on why all of this matters… (more…)
Ministry of Sound releases Spotify Mash Up in UK High Court
Monday 2 September 2013 saw Ministry of Sound, the well-known dance music brand, launch UK copyright infringement proceedings against the music-streaming service Spotify on the grounds that it has refused to take down users’ playlists that copy many of Ministry’s compilation albums. (more…)
UPC Rules Consultation Event – Political wrangling/mangling
IPcopy was pleased to attend the London based version of the UPC Rules of Procedure Consultation Event for Stakeholders yesterday hosted by Bristows LLP in conjunction with the IPO, CIPA and the IP Federation. We will have a post along shortly (update: this can now be found here) highlighting some of the sections in the rules that are causing a few headaches but in the meantime it is interesting to note some of the comments made by Kevin Mooney who has, of course, been heavily involved in the mammoth task of preparing the various draft rules documents. (more…)
IPcopy during late July/August
The summer holiday season is winding down now but IPcopy has been busy throughout! Just in case you’ve missed the odd article or two, here’s a summary of what we’ve been on about since late July.
New Zealand has NOT banned “software patents”
Seemingly from New Zealand to London and from New York to Kalamazoo, the Internet has been awash with news articles announcing that New Zealand has banned software patents*. There’s only one small problem: the “NZ bans software patents” title is bobbins because, simply put, New Zealand has not banned “software patents”! So what’s this hullabaloo about and why are all the popular articles such an omnishambles? (more…)
Inventive step at the UK IPO – Report of CIPA seminar
It is one thing to argue against an inventive step objection. It is quite another thing to construct the inventive step objection in the first place.
That was the premise behind this seminar, in which two experienced examiners from the UK IPO, Stuart Purdy and Andrew Hole, offered the opportunity for attorneys to see patent examination from an examiner’s perspective, in a friendly and accessible manner. (more…)
Superfast Patent Processing: Government response
Need for speed? UK decides not to “Be more dog”
As reported here on 22 April, the UKIPO opened a consultation on a new accelerated prosecution service dubbed “superfast”. The intention of this service was to offer a premium accelerated prosecution service in addition to the free acceleration services currently available, which can already bring the time taken to obtain a UK patent to less than a year.
The Government has now publised their response to the consultation which can be found here. Not unsurprisingly, a number of concerns were raised and the Government has decided not to go ahead with the proposal.
A stocktake of your IP
Today on IPcopy we are pleased to welcome guest contributor Annette Freeman:
This article by Ian Cockburn lists five reasons why businesses should identify, understand, account for and manage their intellectual property, the so-called “intangible assets” that often hide real and unexploited value. You might be surprised by some of these reasons. Let’s take a closer look:
How to Cut the Cost of Filing PCT applications in the UK (and Europe)
In a world where it is rare to get something for nothing, most would view the headline for this story with a hint of cynicism and an expectation that somewhere there is a hidden catch. However, this IPCopy correspondent wishes to assure you that there is a way for the UKIPO and other national receiving offices in Europe to cut the costs of filing PCT applications without losing a single penny/cent/krona of national revenue. The answer is to follow the market-led approach of our enlightened American counterparts. (more…)
IP challenges and solutions
Today on IPcopy we are pleased to welcome the return of guest contributor Annette Freeman (Freeman IP/K2):
In 2012 IQPC released a paper reporting on trends in IP as seen by owners and practitioners worldwide.
Some of the Key Findings make interesting reading: (more…)
IPcopy 