Intellectual property law 2nd edition

Law Express: Intellectual Property Law is designed to help you to relate all the reading and study throughout your course specifically to exam and assignment situations. Understand quickly what is required, organise your revision, and learn the key points with ease, to get the grades you need. Tested with examiners and students.

Intellectual property law

Law Express: Intellectual Property Law is designed to help you to relate all the reading and study throughout your course specifically to exam and assignment situations. Understand quickly what is required, organise your revision, and learn the key points with ease, to get the grades you need. Tested with examiners and students.

Intellectual property law 3rd edition

The Law Express series is designed to help you revise effectively. This book is your guide to understanding essential concepts, remembering and applying key legislation and making your answers stand out!

Visual modes of governmentality:traffic lights in a housing association

This study focuses on the use of traffic lights by a Registered Social Landlord (RSL) as a visual representation of self conduct that reflects a way of thinking, acting and constituting a 'well governed, well managed and viable' housing association. We show that the visible representation of traffic lights introduced by the regulator as indicators of performance has been used widely by the RSL to reflect two self-imposed principles of continuous improvement and self assessment. In this context the different accounts of governmentality within the RSLs board reports are studied and some significant insights suggested. © 2010 Elsevier Ltd.

Intellectual property law 4th edition

The Law Express series is designed to help you revise effectively. This book is your guide to understanding essential concepts, remembering and applying key legislation and making your answers stand out!

Intellectual property law 3rd edition

The Law Express series is designed to help you revise effectively. This book is your guide to understanding essential concepts, remembering and applying key legislation and making your answers stand out!

Trademarks with a reputation:bridging the 'logical lapse'

The article focuses on the Trade Marks Regulations 2004, which came into force on May 5, 2004. Regulation 7 repeals s 5(3)(b) and amends s 10(3) of the Trade Marks Act 1994, implementing the decision of the European Court of Justice in Davidoff & Cie SA and Zino Davidoff SA v Gofkid Ltd., which was then confirmed in Adidas-Salomon AG and Adidas Benelux BV v Fitnessworld Trading Ltd. The orthodox definition of the primary and proper function of a trademark is that it is to identify the origin or ownership of the goods to which the mark is affixed. As society has changed so too have the functions of the trademark. Due to increased affluence and the growth of the consumer society, some trademarks may now have achieved the status of being a symbol of desire in their own right.

Extra compensation for inventive employees:is our system equitable, unbiased and motivating?

There is a presumption that invention is good. It provides us with innovative goods, services and ways of doing things leading to greater employment, wealth and health. This article looks at the two recent UK cases regarding statutory extra compensation that may be awarded to employee inventors under the Patents Act 1977. Most universities worldwide and many companies have individual inventor reward schemes. Researchers now work in teams made up of both industry and academic researchers who are often based in different countries where different legal regimes apply. Is leaving the decision to award employees extra financial compensation up to individual companies unfair, unequal and de-motivating? Is having differing legislative systems in different European countries counter productive and a barrier to economic growth? There must be a balance between the inventor and the innovator. Do we have it right and if not what should it be? Legislation: Patents Act 1977 s.39 , s.40 , s.41 Cases: Kelly v GE Healthcare Ltd [2009] EWHC 181 (Pat); [2009] R.P.C. 12 (Ch D (Patents Ct)) Shanks v Unilever Plc [2010] EWCA Civ 1283; [2011] R.P.C. 12 (CA (Civ Div))

The Hargreaves Review : digital opportunity:a review of intellectual property and growth

In December 2010 the Hargreaves Review was asked to “develop proposals on how the UK's intellectual property framework can further promote entrepreneurialism, economic growth and social and commercial innovation”. It reported in May 2011. The Government published its response in August 2011. This is an overview of both the Review and the Government Response.

Trade marks, registered designs and the monopolisation of functional shapes:a consideration of Lego and Dyson

Legislation: Regulation 6/2002 on Community designs art.3(3)(e) Directive 98/71 on the legal protection of designs art.7(1) Cases: Dyson Ltd v Vax Ltd [2010] EWHC 1923 (Pat); [2011] Bus. L.R. 232 (Ch D (Patents Ct)) Lego Juris A/S v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (C-48/09 P) Unreported September 14, 2010 (ECJ) *E.I.P.R. 60 In Lego, the Court of Justice of the European Union denied registration for an exclusively functional shape mark despite the availability of other shapes capable of fulfilling the same function and in Dyson v Vax Mr Justice Arnold established that a design can not be registered for a purely functional shape even though another shape could fulfil the same required function.

O2 v Hutchison 3G comparative advertising:European trade mark law beyond compare?

Legislation: Directive 89/104 on trade marks art.5 Directive 84/450 on misleading advertising Directive 97/55 amending Directive 84/450 concerning misleading advertising so as to include comparative advertising Case: O2 Holdings Ltd v Hutchison 3G UK Ltd (C-533/06) [2008] E.C.R. I-4231 (ECJ (1st Chamber)) *Comms. L. 155 Long, long ago a trade mark allowed a craftsman to be identified and held accountable for shoddy goods. Today in the era of the ‘Lovemark,’1 due to extensive advertising hopes and aspirations a lifestyle can be purchased with a brand. For many products a trademark is no longer merely a badge of origin but has a commercial value of its own. Through advertising an emotional attachment is created in the heart of the consumer for particular brands. Brand owners are determined that the value of this attachment be preserved and protected against any encroachment into the aura that has been painstakingly created. Comparative advertising, the allusive use of a mark, is seen by the owners of such emotive brands as likely to jeopardise the character of the brand that they have so carefully nurtured. As they have invested so heavily in creating their concept these owners want to control its use by others. There is an issue however as to how far this control ought to extend when the image is used in the marketing of a rival's goods or services.

Formative variables and unreal variables:why the formative MIMIC model is invalid

In this rejoinder, we provide a response to the three commentaries written by Diamantopoulos, Howell, and Rigdon (all this issue) on our paper The MIMIC Model and Formative Variables: Problems and Solutions (also this issue). We contrast the approach taken in the latter paper (where we focus on clarifying the assumptions required to reject the formative MIMIC model) by spending time discussing what assumptions would be necessary to accept the use of the formative MIMIC model as a viable approach. Importantly, we clarify the implications of entity realism and show how it is entirely logical that some theoretical constructs can be considered to have real existence independent of their indicators, and some cannot. We show how the formative model only logically holds when considering these ‘unreal’ entities. In doing so, we provide important counter-arguments for much of the criticisms made in Diamantopoulos’ commentary, and the distinction also helps clarify a number of issues in the commentaries of Howell and Rigdon (both of which in general agree with our original paper). We draw together these various threads to provide a set of conceptual tools researchers can use when thinking about the entities in their theoretical models.