|Two of Europe's most |
slippery customers: will they
get to grips?
- Annul Council decision 2011/853/EU of 29 November 2011 on the signing, on behalf of the Union, of the European Convention on the legal protection of services based on, or consisting of, conditional access [reminder to readers -- 'conditional access' is a polite way of saying you can't watch, listen to, play with or download something, usually an IP-protected work, unless you sign up to pay];
- Order the Council of the European Union to pay the costs.
" ... Article 114 TFEU is not an appropriate legal basis for the adoption of the contested decision. According to the applicant, the decision should have been based on Article 207(4) TFEU which authorises the Council to conclude international agreements in the field of the common commercial policy, as defined in Article 207(1) TFEU. The present convention does not aim to 'improve the functioning of the internal market', its principal objective being to 'facilitate' or 'promote' the provision of services based on conditional access between the European Union and other European countries. It would have a direct and immediate effect on the provision of services based on conditional access and on the trade in illicit devices and on the services relating to those devices. Consequently, the convention falls within the scope of the common commercial policy.
... the European Union's exclusive external competence (Article 2(1) and 3(1) and (2) TFEU) has been infringed because the Council considered that the conclusion of the convention did not fall within the European Union's exclusive competence whereas the convention falls within the common commercial policy or, in any case, that the conclusion of the convention is capable of affecting common rules or of altering their scope".If you want to tell the UK government either (i) what you think about these issues or (ii) what it should think about them, don't hesitate to email email@example.com. Initially the Intellectual Property Office asked for comments before the gratifyingly distant date of 17 July 2012 and a special katpat was prepared in order to honour the IPO's recognition that mature thought is a time-consuming activity - even for Kats. Alas, before it could be conferred, the precious katpat had to be retracted; the IPO withdrew its earlier request in place of another, soliciting comments by this coming Wednesday, 20 June. As an aside, does it really matter whether the Commission or the Council pays the costs? Ultimately, is it not the same European Union taxpayers who are paying them?
|Chi Onwurah: showing that|
you're allowed to remain as
an MP even if you're not
actually talking ...
On the subject of the same Bill, there has been a call for written evidence. If you have relevant expertise, you can submit your views in writing to the Committee. If you want to know to submit written evidence to the Public Bill Committee, just click here
Via Patent Docs comes news of the recent release by the Intellectual Property Owners Association of its 29th annual list of the top 300 organizations receiving US patents. The US Patent and Trademark Office abandoned its annual list of top patent recipients in 2006, apparently in order "to discourage any perception that ... more is better". The IPKat lists the top 15 here for your curiosity but, if you go to the link above, you can check out the other 285 via a handy link. There's not much cheer for the Europeans here; no doubt it will be argued that the absence of a single European patent results in European companies filing fewer US patent applications. A katpat goes to Chris Torrero for tipping the Kats off about this.
|Licensing and enforcement are handled|
by the same department ...
here and the CIPA textbook page here.
here sparked off quite a bit of email correspondence with readers who had enjoyed distance learning, were currently toying with the idea of doing so. While the range of comments and observations was wide, and much of it personal and anecdotal, the overall consensus was that distance learning can be a rewarding experience, subject to two conditions: the quality of the syllabus and the course contributors has to be at least adequate, and the distant student has to cultivate enough self-discipline to follow the course conscientiously and not be distracted by the domestic and/or professional commitments that help the student decide to register for a distance course in the first place. Reminder: details of the Kings College London/Informa course, leading to a choice of diploma or Masters, can be found here.
|Not fat, so not|