tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15652882.comments2024-02-27T10:36:25.377+00:00NIPC LawJane Lamberthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14448574554083999342noreply@blogger.comBlogger259125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15652882.post-28603732999112218652023-12-21T09:00:04.007+00:002023-12-21T09:00:04.007+00:00I wonder, could it be that the trade secrets direc...I wonder, could it be that the trade secrets directive was not mentioned because it did not change the substantive law? And a claim of database right infringement would, if successful, not mean the claimant recovered any more damages (on the Naomi Campbell principle, where there was breach of confidence and a claim under the Data Protection Act but damages were only awarded once)? To my mind, it Peter Groveshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05020506617934637856noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15652882.post-7931623160874813522023-10-03T10:24:46.912+01:002023-10-03T10:24:46.912+01:00That's what the recorder found and that is why...That's what the recorder found and that is why I am slightly surprised about her judgment. Her inference that the company that bought the cable business did not acquire the goodwill seems to have been based on the rebranding exercise and the letter between the in-house legal advisors. <br /><br />It will be interesting to see whether there is an appealJane Lamberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14448574554083999342noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15652882.post-86698133093137278872023-10-03T10:08:39.544+01:002023-10-03T10:08:39.544+01:00This story takes me back to the mid-1980s, when Br...This story takes me back to the mid-1980s, when Britain had a substantial manufacturing sector (before the Big Bang moved the goalposts), I worked at the CBI, and BICC was a large and influential member - their legal adviser was a member of the commercial law committee, of which I was secretary, and their HQ was just down the road from Centrepoint in what I believe had been (and has since Peter Groveshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05020506617934637856noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15652882.post-40190501304447508742023-03-30T05:46:58.376+01:002023-03-30T05:46:58.376+01:00And see Green v Broadcasting Corporation of New Ze... And see Green v Broadcasting Corporation of New Zealand. I instructed David Baragwanath and appeared as his junior. Held: No copyright in television talent show "Oppurtunity Knocks." Jim Thomson.Jimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05348031378913239888noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15652882.post-64501011042024919112023-03-16T12:15:16.799+00:002023-03-16T12:15:16.799+00:00My very limited experience of an appeal to an Appo...My very limited experience of an appeal to an Appointed Person was highly unsatisfactory. In one particular case, they were too accommodating to the appellant, and unwilling to deal with the appeal on the basis that it was patently asking for a rehearing - which I argued should have meant rejecting it summarily. I felt that because I needed space in a busy barrister's diary the appeal would Peter Groveshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05020506617934637856noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15652882.post-33965493408114316422022-08-13T14:28:00.509+01:002022-08-13T14:28:00.509+01:00In answer to question "A" these are the ...In answer to question "A" these are the court's sanctions for non-compliance:<br /><br />"(a) an order that the party at fault pays the costs of the proceedings, or part of the costs of the other party or parties;<br /><br />(b) an order that the party at fault pay those costs on an indemnity basis;<br /><br />(c) if the party at fault is a claimant who has been awarded a sum Jane Lamberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14448574554083999342noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15652882.post-40896477047314925162022-08-06T19:50:14.511+01:002022-08-06T19:50:14.511+01:00Can someone tell me what the Consequences are of (...Can someone tell me what the Consequences are of (A) Not complying with the Pre Action Protocol and (B) Stating that you have complied in the Particulars of Claim even if you haven'Melvin Smithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05086104428758821916noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15652882.post-90679421640540258402021-03-20T00:00:16.030+00:002021-03-20T00:00:16.030+00:00I think it is just as well the learned judge did n...I think it is just as well the learned judge did not make findings in respect of the alleged circumvention/infringement of TPMs. I'm not sure if Mr Walsh the IT specialist who gave evidence on behalf of the claimants was accorded expert witness status, but since there was no counsel for the defendants his evidence clearly wasn't tested in cross-examination. Thus the judge seems to have Andy Jnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15652882.post-59089437761646642702021-02-16T08:44:57.610+00:002021-02-16T08:44:57.610+00:00I had thought that one tiny benefit of Brexit woul...I had thought that one tiny benefit of Brexit would be that we could drop this absurd and nearly-useless form of intellectual property. Yes, it protects some aspects of a design that design right doesn't. but copyright is a pretty effective form of protection for surface decoration and one has to ask whether the additional scope serves any useful purpose. The fact that designs have to be Peter Groveshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05020506617934637856noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15652882.post-70982432960204477672021-01-30T17:53:00.937+00:002021-01-30T17:53:00.937+00:00Issue 6 - the judge actually found the contributio...Issue 6 - the judge actually found the contributions of Martin and Kogan were NOT distinct - this is essential for a finding of joint authorship (s.10.1 Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988). Where the contributions of the authors are distinct creates co-authorship in the work.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13151441192783292752noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15652882.post-22182527697647814982020-02-22T09:35:08.126+00:002020-02-22T09:35:08.126+00:00The costs accruing after the transfer of the claim...The costs accruing after the transfer of the claim to IPEC will be limited by CPR 45.30 and Section IV of the Fixed Costs Practice Direction. Much less than in the rest of the High Court but probably still quite heavy. Jane Lamberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14448574554083999342noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15652882.post-43098291561749737602020-02-20T23:25:15.539+00:002020-02-20T23:25:15.539+00:00Any idea what the Costs Order is going to be again...Any idea what the Costs Order is going to be against this Claimant? As a Litigant in Person with costs following the event they should be substantial.Alistair Kelmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11639538769360951247noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15652882.post-59834914529953019622020-01-07T15:29:57.364+00:002020-01-07T15:29:57.364+00:00I say its beacause the benefit derived from the pa...I say its beacause the benefit derived from the patent itself was so great and easy to prove with records of profit over the years.. the benefir was great enought to establish the requirement of oustsnding benefit to the corporationAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15652882.post-37235924817684544172019-11-25T15:32:13.512+00:002019-11-25T15:32:13.512+00:00The reason for my curiosity is that "prototyp...The reason for my curiosity is that "prototypes" are not protected or even mentioned in Part I of the CDPA which deals with copyright but they are in Part III (see s.213 (6) in the sense of "articles made to a design").Jane Lamberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14448574554083999342noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15652882.post-56443296110746997462019-11-25T13:07:52.016+00:002019-11-25T13:07:52.016+00:00I read it as the prototype fabric which is defined...I read it as the prototype fabric which is defined as the Evangeline Design and illustrated with a photo in para 2. Surely not the paper or the cad as neither of those are fabric.<br />I don’t see the ambiguity that you see I guessAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15652882.post-19111383306541584602019-11-25T03:05:12.596+00:002019-11-25T03:05:12.596+00:00Yes, but what did she mean by a "prototype&qu...Yes, but what did she mean by a "prototype"? Was it the paper model or the fabric model mentioned in paragraph [47] of the transcript, the CAD mentioned in [49] or what. S.4 (1) of the CDPA does not mention "prototypes" as such - only ("a) a graphic work, photograph, sculpture or collage, irrespective of artistic quality, )b)a work of architecture being a building or a Jane Lamberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14448574554083999342noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15652882.post-71883588408408012082019-11-25T00:53:30.654+00:002019-11-25T00:53:30.654+00:00You say the judge didn’t identify the copyright wo...You say the judge didn’t identify the copyright work, but it says in paragraph 2 the copyright is in an original artistic work namely a prototype fabric...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15652882.post-67104392191797937942019-01-07T10:55:14.507+00:002019-01-07T10:55:14.507+00:00You ask "what evidence, could possibly be nee...You ask "what evidence, could possibly be needed to prove the obvious?", but I am not sure what you think is obvious. That "LR" denotes Land-Rover? In that case, please let me say that I think there is a distinction to be drawn in the motor trade (and other fields too, I am sure) between consumers who are well-informed enthusiasts and those who are not. The case concerned Peter Groveshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05020506617934637856noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15652882.post-3780111508565247392018-06-08T01:00:20.211+01:002018-06-08T01:00:20.211+01:00The usual sanction is to refuse costs that would o...The usual sanction is to refuse costs that would otherwise have been awarded where the non-complying party has been successful or to award a larger amount of costs than would otherwise have been awarded against an unsuccessful non-complying party. That is tantamount to s fine.Jane Lamberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04987025483761092818noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15652882.post-71157144874246987972018-05-21T12:18:13.973+01:002018-05-21T12:18:13.973+01:00Can someone tell me what the Consequences are of (...Can someone tell me what the Consequences are of (A) Not complying with the Pre Action Protocol and (B) Stating that you have complied in the Particulars of Claim even if you haven't ?.<br /><br />ThanksAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15652882.post-62705940180609699942017-08-02T09:16:14.130+01:002017-08-02T09:16:14.130+01:00And remember also section 10A, which makes songs (...And remember also section 10A, which makes songs (not a word used in the legislation) works of co-authorship if the music is written by one person and the words by another. The principal effect is that copyright expires 70 years after the death of the last of them to die.Peter Groveshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05020506617934637856noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15652882.post-9578897605174220752017-04-05T15:14:37.667+01:002017-04-05T15:14:37.667+01:00Thanks for the post. Very useful summary.
Just to...Thanks for the post. Very useful summary.<br /><br />Just to point out I think a sentence was left incomplete:<br /><br />"That cut no ice with Mr Ham because the defendants had not been party to the negotiations and knew every little about the,.."psychrophilehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05744016430575059130noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15652882.post-19227604022109429742017-03-09T19:42:08.004+00:002017-03-09T19:42:08.004+00:00Informative articleInformative articleBernadette G. Runyanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02063344413012212939noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15652882.post-17961201492073492022017-03-05T17:55:54.045+00:002017-03-05T17:55:54.045+00:00This makes no sense and doesn't say the main d...This makes no sense and doesn't say the main differences between UK and US Copyright law.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15652882.post-34264138669447423942015-12-02T13:18:19.432+00:002015-12-02T13:18:19.432+00:00The following statement in the blog is false:
&quo...The following statement in the blog is false:<br />"Both sides' experts agreed that it would have been obvious to use a titanium connector with a zinc anode because unlike steel it did not corrode and titanium crimped connections were known to be convenient to use."<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com