Home » Posts tagged 'intellectual property'

Tag Archives: intellectual property

Cyberattackers and IP – Deloitte webcast


Photo by clarita at Morguefile.com

IPcopy happened upon this slide pack on LinkedIn from Deloitte relating to cyberattackers and IP (Valuing and guarding prized business assets). The slides capture the poll responses of nearly 3000 professionals from the banking, tech, investment management, travel, insurance and retail sectors.

Over 10% of the participants reported a cyber theft within the last 12 months with employees regarded as the most likely group to attempt such a cyber theft (c. 20% of the vote). IPcopy noted with a slightly raised eyebrow that “nation states” attracted 10% of the “potential adversary” vote, though given the suggestions that the recent US election was hacked by a nation state, perhaps we shouldn’t be surprise….  (more…)

Are You Protecting Your Most Valuable Assets? An Introduction to Intellectual Property

IP imageOver the next couple of weeks, IPcopy will be republishing some general introduction to IP articles that we prepared to present some topics, facts and issues from the area of intellectual property law for people who have had little or no contact with intellectual property. The articles are designed as (brief) primers to highlight some particular elements of the subject area.

Intellectual property (IP) can sometimes be overlooked. Intellectual assets are not tangible and, as such, can be difficult to value. Often, they are not taken into consideration properly when assessing the worth of a business. However, these assets can be the most important to a business, contributing significantly to its goodwill and reputation, and need to be protected properly. (more…)

Intellectual Property Act – Top 5 changes to UK design law

UKSome of the provisions of the Intellectual Property Act come into force today. We’ve already touched on the patents opinions service and web marking of products with patent numbers and today we’ll be taking a quick look at the changes to UK design law. So here’s our top 5 changes to UK design law….. (more…)

Intellectual Property Act – Patents Opinions Service

Court (Small)The Intellectual Property Act 2014 received Royal Assent on 14 May 2014 and makes a number of changes to intellectual property (IP) law in the UK.  The provisions of the Intellectual Property Act start to come into force from 1 October 2014. In this post we take a look at the UKIPO’s Patents Opinions Service. (more…)

Intellectual Property Bill – 2nd Reading today (20/1/14)

Parliamentary copyright images are reproduced with the permission of Parliament

Parliamentary copyright images are reproduced with the permission of Parliament

Today will see the delayed second reading of the Intellectual Property Bill in the House of Commons. We’ve previously highlighted the main provisions of the Bill on IPcopy including our issues with Clause 13 (criminal sanctions for the copying of registered designs).

Clause 13 in its current form doesn’t appear to achieve what its supporters claim it does and I contacted my MP over the weekend in the hope that he will might help secure amendments to the wording of the Bill. A copy of my email is below. Feel free to adapt it if you wish to contact your own MP. You can find your own MP here.

The association Anti Copying in Design (ACID) are of course big supporters of Clause 13 of the IP Bill and actually are pressing for it to be extended to cover unregistered design rights. They are even quoting Churchill today on Twitter in an effort to drum up support for their position. Well, two can play that game! Here’s another Churchill quote that sums up my feelings about Clause 13: “Oh no, no, no!” (more…)

IP News Nuggets

newspaperHere’s a selection of IP related news articles that caught the eye of IPcopy in the last few days. (more…)

The Bridge Inspection Authority – the FTC and “Patent Trolls”

Troll_Bridge_by_BlazeTwoeEveryone in the intellectual property community will be aware that the debate over the activity of “patent trolls” has lasted years, and has always contained plenty of heat and not a lot of light. The heat shows no sign of diminishing, as journalists realise that there’s an easy story to file in a day trip to Tyler or Beaumont to look at a corridor of brass plated doors with no-one behind them – but there are at least some attempts to shine a light under the bridge to see what these trolls really look like. The latest of these is the recently announced proposal for a collection of information by the Federal Trade Commission (the FTC).

There has been little unanimity on what a patent troll is – except than that no definition ever covers the commercial activity of whoever is making the definition. It has even been difficult to find a neutral generic term for such behaviour. We used to use NPE (“Non Practising Entity”), to distinguish patent owners only interested in licensing from patent holders who used patents to support their own commercial activity in selling products and services. This term fell out of use when it was appreciated that one class of NPEs is long established, generally respected, and considered by most to be behaving in an acceptable way with its stock of intellectual property – such NPEs are often known as “universities”.


IP – Hit or Miss? Patenting the socks off of your copyright (TM)

Not another newspaper article about IP! (Image from flickr – Brandon Grasley – source link below)

OK, before we begin, please note that this could turn into a mild rant. There, you’ve been warned.

One of the recurring topics on this blog is the series of articles called “IP – Hit or Miss?” which we use to analyse the representation of intellectual property (IP) in films, TV and the media. We’ve generally focussed on film and TV references but recently I’ve noticed a number of articles in the press where the terms “patent”, “trade mark” and “copyright” have been used seemingly interchangeably. Now come on guys, it’s not that hard to get it right? Is it?

Well, maybe it is. So it’s time to name and shame and then educate. In the words of Popeye “That’s all I can stand, I can’t stands no more”.


IP Hit or Miss?

Ever been watching a film or something on TV and noticed that the intellectual property (IP) reference that just cropped up in the script is wrong? No? Well, you probably manage to get out more than me.

To this author at least (patent attorney, tech nerd and SF geek) references to patents, trade marks and the like seem to pop up quite frequently in the entertainment media.

 IP Hit or Miss? is an occasional series of articles that takes a light-hearted look at IP as it appears in the media (films, TV, news reports etc) as an excuse to talk about different IP topics. A vague rating of “IP hit or miss?” may also be given depending on how well the particular IP concept has been incorporated into the media in question.

Want to suggest a film, TV show or other reference that we can take a look at? Drop us an email or leave a comment below.