IP enforcement was the topic of my very first post, "Porridge for Patent infringement" on 22 Aug 2005. I also rabbited on about it at some length on 2 Sep 2005 in "Patents: Why are there no British Names in the Patent Office's Top Ten?". It is such an important subject that I make no apologies for returning to it. I do so now for two reasons.
The first is that the Patent Office has advertised a seminar entitled "Intellectual Property "The Commercial Reality for SMEs" on 27 Sep at The Institute of Child Health in London. According to the press release, the speakers will be:
Lawrence Cullen of the Patent Office,
David Begg, Principal, Tanaka Business School, Imperial College, London
Henry Carr, QC Pitfalls and problems of litigation
Kim Cauthorn, Kroll USA Risk assessment
James Riddiough, Smith & Williamson IP valuation
Ian Lewis, Miller Insurance Service Limited Insurance for litigation and liability risks
Matthew R Hogg, Kiln Insurance for economic loss
Vanessa Winspeare, Smith & Williamson Valuation of damages.
The choice of names is interesting. The Tanaka Institute at Imperial College have recently been conducting a survey on the future of the IP Institute. I spent some earlier over the last few weeks being interrogated by one of their researchers (see IPKat at "IPI Survey, Have your Say"). Henry Carr QC gave a good contribution at the IP Institute's seminar on advisor opinions at the Patent Office on 1 July 2005. Miller claims to be market leaders in insurance.
The other thing that I should mention is a rather interesting debate on IPR Talk. This is a service offered by Ideas21 though I think anyone can subscribe. I posted a link to my post on the proposal for another enforcement directive which nobody seemed to be interested in until a day or so ago. A contributor then posted a contribution welcoming the development on the grounds that it would be good for "UK Plc" whatever that may be. I waded in with a response that the proposal was ill thought through and unlikely to be adopted. John Mitchell of the Patent Reform Group has now joined in. There are some good debates with real inventors (ie people who are not lawyers or patent agents). It's worth joining IPR Talk.