NIPC Law

  Author  Interdigital  Licence   CC BY-SA 4.0   Source  Wikimedia Commons   Jane Lambert Patents Cour t (Mr Justice Mellor) Interdigital Technology Corp and others v Lenovo Group Ltd and others [2023] EWHC 1577 (Pat) (28 June 2023 I discussed Mr Justice Mellor's judgment in Interdigital Technology Corp and others v Lenovo Group Ltd and others [2023] EWHC 539 (Pat) in Patents - Interdigital Technology Corporation and others v Lenovo Group Ltd. and others   on 21 March 2023.  That had been a trial to determine the payments and other terms upon which patents that were essential for compliance with technical standards could be used.   At the end of my case note, I wrote: "This has been an extraordinarily difficult case note to write partly because the judgment is 225 pages long and partly because large chunks of it have been redacted, The judge has promised to publish a fuller version of his judgment in due course but even that will be incomplete. Many of the findings are diff

Author Satoshi Nakamoto Copyright released   Jane Lambert Court of Appeal (Lady Justice Asplin and Lord Justices Arnold and Warby)  Wright and others v BTC Core and others (Rev1) [2023] EWCA Civ 868 (20 July 2023) This was an appeal against Mr Justice Mellor's refusal in   Wright and others v BTC Core and others  [2023] EWHC 222 (Ch) (7 Feb 2023 to permit service outside England and Wales of claim forms alleging copyright infringement.  The claimants were Craig Steven Wright who claims to have created  Bitcoin  and two of Dr Wright's companies.  Bitcoin is a  cryptocurrency  that is attributed to one  Satoshi Nakamoto .  Dr Wright claims to be Mr Nakamoto.  The defendants are companies and individuals from around the world who are accused of copying matter known as "the Bitcoin File Format."  Dr Wright and his companies say that copyright subsists in the Bitcoin File Format and claim ownership on the basis that they wrote it.  They complain that the defendants have i

Author ERab123   Licence CC BY-SA 4.0   Source Wikimedia Commons   Jane Lambert Court of Appeal (Sir Andrew McFarlane P, Lord Justice Arnold and Lady Justice Elisabeth Laing) JC Bamford Excavators Ltd v Manitou UK Ltd and another [2023] EWCA Civ 840 (17 July 2023) This is an important case on the law of confidence and trade secrets as well as Patent Court Practice.  In   JC Bamford Excavators Ltd v Manitou UK Ltd and another  [2022] EWHC 1724 (Pat) (4 July 2022) which I discussed in  Patents - J C Bamford Excavators Ltd v Manitou UK Ltd   on 7 March 2023 the defendants, Manitou UK Ltd. and Manitou BF SA ("Manitour"), disclosed information relating to the configuration of the control system of their telehandlers  to a group of nominated lawyers and experts from both parties known as "a confidentiality club ". The reason Manitou limited their disclosure to that group was explained by their solicitor: "Manitou should be entitled to protect as confidential the

Author Basher  Eyre Licence CC BY-SA 2.0   Source Wikimedia Commons   Jane Lambert Patents Court (Campbell Forsyth)  Safestand Ltd v Weston Homes Plc and others [2023] EWHC 1098 (Pat) (10  May 2023) A fundamental principle of civil litigation in England and Wales is that each party discloses to the other(s) any and all documents in his or her possession, custody or control that relate(s) to an issue in the proceedings.  An important exception is that documents that are prepared for the purpose of litigation do not have to be disclosed because they are protected by legal professional privilege.  The concept of "legal professional privilege" is explained conveniently by this  anonymous article dated 30 Aug 2022 on the Law Society website. Legal Professional Privilege and Experiments In patent proceedings, parties often carry out experiments to prove or disprove facts that may be in issue.  Those experiments are covered by legal professional privilege and there is no need for

Photo   Maebmij   Licence CC BY-SA 3.0   Source Wikimedia Commons Jane Lambert Court of Appeal (Lord Justices Newey, Arnold and Birss)    Optis Cellular Technology LLC and others v Apple Retail UK Ltd and other s [2023] EWCA Civ 758 (4 July 2023) This was an appeal by Applie Inc and two of its subsidiaries ("Apple") against the judgment of Mr Justice Meade in    Optis Cellular Technology LLC and others v Apple Retail Uk Ltd and others [2022] EWHC 561 (Pat) (15 March 2022) that European patents (UK)  2 187 549 B1  and 2 690 810 B1  were valid, essential to the LTE standard  and infringed by Apple.  The action before Mr Justice Meade was called "Trial D" because it was the last of a series of trials to determine whether a portfolio of patents that had been granted to Panasonic and subsequently assigned to the respondents were valid and essential to the LTE standard and whether they had been infringed.  To put this litigation into context, the respondents claimed rem