NIPC Law

I discussed HM Government's proposal to introduce a new small claims track for the Patents County Court from the beginning of October 2012 in "The New Small IP Claims Jurisdiction"  (5 March 2012) and "Small IP Claims"  (Chambers website 8 May 2012). We now have the rules for the new court. Overview Rule 10 of The Civil Procedure (Amendment No.2) Rules 2012 (S! 2012 No 2208) amends Part 63 of the Civil Procedure Rules as follows: "Amendments to the Civil Procedure Rules 1998 10. In Part 63— (a) In the table of contents, after the entry for rule 63.26, insert— 'Allocation to the small claims track ........... Rule 63.27 Extent to which rules in this Part apply to small claims ........... Rule 63.28;' (b) in rule 63.1 (3), for 'Claims', substitute 'Save as provided in rule 63.27, claims'; and (c) after rule 63.26 , insert— 'Allocation to the small claims track 63.27.—(1) A claim started in or transferred to a p

On 5 Nov 2009 Oracle America Inc, which was then known as Sun Microsystems Inc. ( "Oracle" ), applied to Mr. Justice Kitchin for summary judgment against M-Tech Data Ltd. ( "M-Tech" ) (see Sun Microsystems Inc v M-Tech Data Ltd and another [2010] 2 CMLR 7, (2010) 33(2) IPD 33010, [2010] ETMR 13, [2009] EWHC 2992 (Pat), [2010] FSR 9). Oracle is the registered proprietor of a series of UK and Community trade marks comprising or consisting of the word "Sun" in respect of, inter alia, computers, computer hardware, computer software and computer peripherals.   M-Tech, which supplies computer hardware in what has been described as the secondary market for hardware, had purchased 64 Sun disc drives from a broker in the USA, imported them into the UK and sold them to a business called KSS Associates. Oracle contended that those disc drives were put on the market by M-Tech in the UK without its consent and thereby infringed its British and Community trade marks.

In my post on Lord Marland ( "Lord Marland becomes Minister for Intellectual Property"  15 Sept 2012I) I referred to The UK’s International Strategy for Intellectual Property , As there was considerably more interest in that policy document than there was in the Minister in my feedback I have decided to take a closer look at that document. In  Digital Opportunity A Review of Intellectual Property and Growth   Professor Ian Hargreaves recommended that "The UK should resolutely pursue its international interests in IP, particularly with respect to emerging economies such as China and India, based upon positions grounded in economic evidence. It should attach the highest immediate priority to achieving a unified EU patent court and EU patent system, which promises significant economic benefits to UK business. The UK should work to make the Patent Cooperation Treaty a more effective vehicle for international processing of patent applications." He amplified his thinkin

One of the least reported changes in the recent ministerial reshuffle has been the replacement of Baroness Wilcox  as Minister for Intellectual Property by the Rt. Hon. Lord Marland .  As he is not exactly a household name I looked him up Lord Marland on Wikipedia and found that he had enjoyed a successful career in business. One of his businesses was Hunter  Boot Ltd  which he saved by transferring production from Britain to China (see "Hunter Boots owner Lord Marland looks for new prey" The Telegraph 14 Feb 2009). He had been less successful in politics  contesting Somerton and Frome for the Tories in the 2001 general election and coming second. Lady Wilcox had been rather a good minister in my view. For instance, she had backed patent reform opening the first WIPO patents symposium in London on 6 March 2012. That is one of the objectives of the IPO's international strategy (see "The UK’s International Strategy for Intellectual Property" 11 Aug 2012). I