PCT Regulations get a spring-clean. By
PCT Notification No. 206: Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT), the IPKat's friends in the World Intellectual Property Organization let him know that the PCT Regulations have been brushed up a bit. The notification reads as follows:
 |
| A spring-clean for the PCT |
The Director General of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) presents his compliments to the Minister for Foreign Affairs and, pursuant to Article 68(4) of the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) ... has the honor to transmit herewith certified copies, in English and in French, of the amendments to the Regulations under the PCT, with effect from July 1, 2015, adopted on September 30, 2014, by the Assembly of the International Patent Cooperation Union (PCT Union), at its Forty-Sixth (27th Extraordinary) session, held in Geneva from September 22 to 30, 2014.
So now you know. Please be ready to amend your PCT Regulations accordingly when the moment comes.
 |
| And this is just for starters ... |
The Union of Intellectual Property Practitioners in Europe, a.k.a.
Union, has already fattened the geese and laid the table for dinner on
12 March -- a dinner which is now open to receive reservations for those intent on attending. Don’t miss IPO Deputy Director of Patents Andy Bartlett holding forth on Patent Harmonisation and Globalization, as well as a genuinely enjoyable evening out. To secure an evening of unparalleled stimulation in the company of like-minded IP practitioners and enthusiasts, email
dinners@union-gb.com. If you'd rather not have to deal with a human, you can book online by clicking
here.
 |
| ... but not for vegetarians and herbivores |
Around the weblogs. Staying on the subject of food for a bit, SOLO IP has a blogpost from Michael Factor on the
problems faced by IP firms that try to offer hospitality to associates but find themselves getting tangled up by religious dietary requirements and cultural preferences. Ben Challis's
CopyKat round-up on the 1709 Blog features a spliffing new case for
Cariou litigant Richard Prince, while the IP Finance blog looks at two recent UK tax rulings, on the
supply of commercial research and the
acquisition and sublicensing of film rights. Class 46's Laetitia Lagarde picked up another no-hope Community trade mark application:
GLISTEN for cleaning preparations, while Christian Tenkhoff
takes a critical look at a General Court finding that two figurative marks, each of which contained the dominant words "solid floor", were likely to be confused with one another notwithstanding their substantially different appearances. Finally, Art & Artifice asks whether
changing a building's use might be regarded as an infringement of the architect's moral rights.
