‘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

Copyright: Primary Infirngement - Copying

The right to copy a copyright work is restricted to the copyright owner by s.2 (1) and s.16 (1) (a) of the  Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 . The restriction applies to every description of copyright work though different provisions apply to different types of work (s.17 (1)). This right to restrict copying is referred to as the right of reproduction in art 9 of the Bern Convention and art 2 of the "Copyright in the Information Society" or  Copyright and Related Rights Directive  (Directive 2001/29). Literary Musical, Dramatic or Artistic Works Copying in relation to an artistic, dramatic, literary or musical work  work means reproducing the work in any material form including storing the work in any medium by electronic means. In the case of an artistic work this includes making a copy in 3 dimensions of a 2 dimensional work and the making of a copy in 3 dimensions of a 3 dimensional work. Films and Broadcasts S.17 (4) of the 1988 Act as amended  includes within the
Read more

Patents - Gilead Sciences Inc v NuCana Plc

Image
  Jane Lamber t Patents Court  (Mr Justice Meade) G ilead Sciences Inc and another NuCana PLC  [2023] EWHC 611 (Pat) (21 March 2023) This was an action by Gilead Sciences Inc. and its British subsidiary Gilead Sciences Ltd ("Gilead") for revocation of two European Patents (UK) that had been granted to NuCana Plc ("NoCana"), namely  EP 2 955 190 B1 (“EP190”)  and   EP 3 904 365 B1 (“EP365”) .  NuCana complained that Gilead's product  sofosbuvir  infringed its patents. Mr Justice Meade, who tried the action, could see no real defence to the counterclaim if the claims of the patents were valid. Grounds of Revocation Gilead sought revocation of the patents on the following grounds: Added matter in that the  Markush group definitions of the claims  of the patents are not clearly and unambiguously disclosed in the original application; Lack of plausibility in that the Patents do not plausibly disclose any technical contribution common to substantially all the claimed
Read more