IP blogging: a couple of ethical issues
Information received from anonymous sources
The IPKat regularly receives correspondence from impeccable sources who wish to disseminate information without having their identity revealed. The IPKat is willing to respects such requests if he judges the information to be reliable and of interest to readers, and he is scrupulous to a fault in maintaining the confidentiality requested. Even Merpel, who is rarely discreet or sensitive, can be relied on to keep a secret when asked to do so.
Recently, a member of the blogging team received an anonymous communication suggesting that sweeping changes are being considered in relation to the organisation and marking of the EQE (that's the European Qualifying Examination taken by aspiring patent attorneys). Occasionally, information of this nature is received from anonymous correspondents, who hope that the IPKat will publish an unconfirmed and unverifiable story. If the IPKat does not know who the information has come from, no judgment can be made as to its authenticity.
If any readers are aware of specific plans to reorganise the EQE, or indeed of any other news that would be of interest to readers, but want to keep their identity concealed from the blog's readership, then please email the IPKat (theipkat@gmail.com), and simply let him know that you wish to remain anonymous.
Communications from anonymous correspondents will not be published no matter how tempting and juicy they might appear to be, unless the information can be verified against an authenticated source.
Information of a personal nature
Occasionally the IPKat receives information from correspondents (often but by no means always anonymous) and which relates to the private lives of public figures within the field of intellectual property. Whether such information is true or not, and whether it can be verified or not, such information lies within the sphere of privacy and is not the sort of information which he or Merpel should ever wish to post. If however the information is verified, becomes a matter of public knowledge and affects the ability of the person concerned to perform his IP duties, the IPKat -- in common with other publications -- may feel obliged to comment on it.
