‘All You Are Ever Likely to Need to Know About Patents So long As You Stay In Manchester’

Manchester Law Society
Friends Meeting House
6 Mount Street
Manchester
M2 5NS
Wednesday 15 Feb 2006
17:30 - 19:00
£50.00 + VAT for members £75.00 + VAT for others
Advanced Seminar: ‘All You Are Ever Likely to Need to Know About Patents So long As You Stay In Manchester’
I know this is a cheeky title for a talk to the eminent lawyers of our second city but it is one way to get an audience. I gave a similar talk to the same group a few years ago and they have invited me back.

This time I shall be trying something new. I have divided the talk into the four topics upon which I am most frequently consulted, namely:
o The best way of protecting a client’s investment in R & D;
o Disputes between joint inventors and others seeking rights in same invention;
o Infringement and revocation disputes;
o Commercialisation.
I will deal with each topic in a Socratic manner. For instance, on the best way to protect investment I will come up with three hypothetical new products or processes, two obvious and one border line (business method with excluded method but with enough to clear the obvious thresholds) and we will discuss.

Similarly, the discussion on infringement and revocation disputes will not be confined to CPR Part 63 and the Patents Court Guide (though they will indeed be covered) but will address choice of forum, funding and the Patent Office's new advisory opinions service.

I am pulling out all the stops for this one so you will get a really, really, good talk. Call Donna Brown on +44 (0161) 819 1927 or email her on DonnaBrown@manchesterlawsociety.org.uk to book your place.

Comments

Anonymous said…
As a law student interested in IP/IT can I ask where the time machine can be boarded to attend this meeting last February.
15:19
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Copyright in Photographs: Temple Island Collections and Creation Records

Image
In our very first NIPC newsletter which we published in June 1997 I wrote a case note on Mr. Justice Lloyd's decision in  Creation Records Ltd. and Others v News Group Newspapers Ltd   [1997] EMLR 444, [1997] EWHC Ch 370, (1997) 16 Tr LR 544. In that case Mr. Noel Gallagher of Oasis and others applied for an interlocutory injunction to restrain The Sun from offering for sale and selling a poster of Oasis that featured a photo of an elaborate set that included a white Rolls Royce in a country club swimming pool. The Sun's photograph was very similar to the photograph that appeared on an Oasis album cover. The similarity arose because The Sun's photographer shot the same scene at roughly the same time and from the same angle as Mr. Gallagher's photographer but he did not reproduce any part of Oasis's print or negative. The learned judge held that the plaintiffs had no arguable case for infringement of copyright though he accepted that they had an arguable case for br...
Read more

"What is meant by "Due Cause" in s.10 (3) of the Trade Marks Act? The Red Bull Case

Image
Amsterdam   Source Wikipedia According to Wikipedia  Red Bull is the most popular energy drink in the world, with 5.2 billion cans sold in 2012. Its manufacturer, Red Bull GmbH , has registered the RED BULL mark has registered those words and their accompanying logo as word and device marks in trade mark registries around the world including the Benelux Office for Intellectual Property ( "BOIP" ) . The company registered that sign with BOIP for non-alcoholic drinks in class 32 with effect from 11 July 1983. After decades of massive sales and extensive advertising nobody could argue that that mark has a reputation within the meaning of art 5 (2) of the Trade Marks Directive (Directive 2008/95/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 22 October 2008   to approximate the laws of the Member States relating to trade marks OJ 8.11.2008 p 299/25).  S.10 (3) of our Trade Marks Act 1994   implements that provision. There is in the Net...
Read more

Copyright: Creation Records Ltd. v News Group

It is trite law that if two photographers take identical pictures of the same scene at the same time from the same position each of their photographs is an original work and neither infringes the copyright in the other. However, much of the skill of a photographer lies in his choice of subject and the arrangement of the scene. The question whether copyright subsists independently in such an arrangement arose in Creation Records Ltd. v News Group Newspapers Ltd . (1997) The Times 27 April.   The Facts A swimming pool at a country club was drained and various props including a white Rolls Royce motor car assembled for a photograph of a well-known group of musicians for reproduction on their album cover. Although the public was not admitted to the session certain fans of the group who happened to be there were allowed to photograph the scene before official pictures were taken. A freelance photographer who was booked into the club photographed the scene during the session. One of his pict...
Read more