We previously reported that both France and Malta had ratified the unified patent court agreement. Despite this we had held off updating the “Ratification” Game post until the European Commission website showed that further instruments of ratification had actually been deposited in Brussels.
So, who would grab second place after Austria? Malta or France or maybe an outsider?
Well, we can now reveal that (more…)
Last week, the government published the “final Exceptions to Copyright” regulations for consideration by parliament. The draft regulations propose changes that modernise UK copyright law in light of recommendations in the Hargreaves Review completed in 2011 (the same review that formed the basis of the Intellectual Property Bill currently in ping pong).
The proposed legislation comes in the form of five draft Statutory Instruments that would amend the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (CDPA) and covers Personal Copies for Private Use, Quotation and Parody, Disability, Public Administration and Research, Education, Libraries and Archives. The draft regulations will be debated in both Houses of Parliament and, if approved, they will come into force on 1 June 2014. (more…)
The Report Stage and the third reading of the Intellectual Property Bill took place on 12 March. After some significant discussion time over the last few weeks on all the provisions within the Bill, the IP Bill leaves the Commons with amendments to Clause 3 (Qualification criteria for Unregistered design right) and Clause 13 (the criminal offence for copying a registered design) only. A full list of the Commons Amendments can be found here and marked up versions of the two clauses in question are below.
Since the Commons has made amendments to the Bill, the Lords needs to have another look and (i) agree to the amendments; (ii) disagree with the amendments; or (iii) propose an alternative. When a Bill passes back between the two Houses it is referred to as “ping pong” (or whiff whaff if you prefer….). When the exact wording has been agreed by the two Houses then the Bill will be ready for royal assent. Whiff whaff is currently scheduled for 2 April 2014.
We have taken a quick look at the changes made by the Commons to the Bill down below.
This rule change follows a consultation that ran during March 2013. Although the consultation can still be accessed on the EPO website (here) it is noticeable that the EPO has not published a summary of responses to their “Completed Consultations” page.
Recently however Heli Pihlajamaa, Director of Patent Law at the European Patent Office, spoke in a live webinar session on the new rules and links to the presentation and the video of the seminar have appeared on the EPO website (though for some reason the link to the video recording has subsequently been taken down). (more…)
On Friday 4th April Manuela Macchi (Keltie) will be joining a panel at the 29th Annual Intellectual Property Law Conference of the American Bar Association in Arlington, Virginia.
The Non-Traditional Trademarks and the Entertainment & Sports Industries CLE will be covered on Twitter (#IPLSpring) by Phillip Turner, a first-year law student at Belmont University College of Law in Nashville, Tennessee. Phillip explains further on the ABA-IPL Law Student Action Group blog: (more…)
Following IPcopy’s post last week regarding the amendment to divisional deadline rules, ipcopymark reached out to the UK Intellectual Property Office to seek clarification over why the rule was being changed and whether the new rule will change any procedures at the UKIPO going forward.
The response from the UKIPO confirmed that there is not intended to be any change to the practice of filing divisional applications at the UKIPO. However, it was confirmed that incoming Rule 19 is being introduced to address a perceived flaw in the drafting of the current Rule 19 in which it could be argued that the two-month divisional period would be reset following the issuance of every communication under Section 18(4) Patents Act 1977. Whether or not you interpret current Rule 19 in this way, the incoming Rule 19 closes this potential loophole.
IPReg Consultation on simplifying and modernising the examination system for qualifying as a patent attorney
IPReg has now confirmed that their recent consultation looking at the UK patent attorney exam system has closed. Not surprisingly there were a large number of responses and IPReg is suggesting a minimum of 3 months but more likely 6 months before their conclusions are published.
All the responses will, in time, be published unless you contact them and inform them otherwise.
See below for a selection of published responses to the consultation.
Today we have a quick round up of some unitary patent related news items that have cropped up in the last week or so. Read on for news on the Danish referendum, the opening of the training centre for UPC Judges, an update on the ratification process in Germany and a slip in the official start date for the whole unitary patent package. (more…)
Today we have a guest post from Suleman Ali of Holly IP and K2 on the subject of UK Pharma caselaw in 2013. This post was originally posted on the Holly IP blog IP Trends and is reproduced with the permission of the author. These points are gleaned from a talk by Neil Jenkins given at the CIPA Life Sciences Conference on 14 November 2013.
As highlighted in Adam Brocklehurst’s earlier post, Keltie hosted a webinar on “IP in the Space Sector” on 27 February. The speakers were Adam Brocklehurst and Richard Lawrence and the webinar covered IP fundamentals and myth-busting, issues in space sector IP and other relevant topics.
Since the webinar we’ve had a few requests for access to the slide show and this is embedded below. If you have any questions regarding the topics covered or have a spaced-based IP question then please sound off in the comments section. (more…)