-
Archives
- October 2010
- July 2010
- May 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- November 2009
- October 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- February 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
- February 2006
- January 2006
- December 2005
- November 2005
- October 2005
- September 2005
- August 2005
-
Meta
Monthly Archives: February 2007
Enforcement: English Patent Court Practice
Paragraph 7.9 (2) of PD63 requires claimants in the Patents Court to file a Reading Guide for the judge not less than 4 days before trial. Such Reading Guide must set out the issues, the parts of the documents that … Continue reading
IP and Development: Provisional Committee on Proposals related to a WIPO Development Agenda
William New has reported in Intellectual Property Watch that the WIPO Provisional Committee on Proposals related to a WIPO Development Agenda (“PCDA”) has reached broad agreement on 40 issues at their latest meeting which took place between 19 and 23 … Continue reading
Posted in WIPO Development Agenda PCDA
Leave a comment
Domain Names: A French Perspective
One of the advantages of registering my .eu domain name with indom.fr is that I receive a very good newsletter called “DomainesInfo” on domain names and internet governance from a French perspective. Today’s lead story, for instance, is “A quoi … Continue reading
Patents: More Macrossan Fallout
Patent Office hearing officers have added three new decisions to the ones I mentioned in “Patents: The Macrossan Aftermath” on 15 Feb 2007. All dismissals, I’m afraid.In NEC Corporation’s Application Mr Bartlett found on 16 Feb 2007 that the technical … Continue reading
Security for Costs: Hart Investments Ltd v Larchpark Ltd. and Another
In England and Wales and a number of other countries costs (that is to say, lawyers’ fees and expenses) follow the event. Another way of putting it is that the loser pays. Not every country in the world has such … Continue reading
Confidential Information and Restraint of Trade: Thomas v Farr Plc – Ocular Sciences to join Series 5?
Nearly 10 years ago I wrote a case note on Ocular Sciences v Aspect Vision Care [1997] RPC 289 entitled “Have Faccenda’s Chickens had their Chips?” I chose that title because the CA had appeared to draw a distinction in … Continue reading
400th Post: US SAFE Port Act
Not for the first time I am indebted to my distinguished colleague Toni Tease of Billings, Montana for providing material for a post. Toni publishes an excellent monthly newsletter on IP called Intellections. This month’s issue discusses The Security and … Continue reading
IP Clinics: Huddersfield and Bradford 15 Feb 2007
We had a really good day in Huddersfield and Bradford last Thursday. Particularly in Huddersfield. All the inventors we saw there were young. Two were from the University. We obviously can’t identify those ideas or inventions were but they ranged … Continue reading
Patents: The Macrossan Aftermath
Not long after the Court of Appeal’s decision in Aerotel Ltd. v Telco Holdings Ltd and Others (Macrossan) [2005] EWCA Civ 1371 (27 Oct 2006) the Patent Office published a practice notice on patentable subject matter which replaced a whole … Continue reading
China: Happy New Year – see you in Chongqing
The reason everything is in red and gold is that today is the Chinese New Year and those are the colours for celebration. I should like to wish all my readers – especially those from China – a very happy … Continue reading
IP/IT Update 