IP update

Welcome to the latest of our IP updates for spring / summer 2007

We are delighted that in this issue our main feature is a guest article by Professor Paul Torremans entitled “The EPLA is dead. Long live the revised EPLA-Community Patent twins!”. Professor Torremans has been consultant to the IP team here at Browne Jacobson for just over a year now and, as an internationally renown expert on intellectual property in the UK and Europe, has some fascinating insights into current pressures on, the potential future directions of, European patent systems and litigation. We have therefore taken the opportunity to also present a small feature on his work and relationship with us.

Other features in this issue include an update in relation to domain names – a rapidly developing and ever more important area for clients, a feature on “novelty” and “obviousness” in relation to patentability, and an “out and about with the Browne Jacobson IP team” feature looking at key events in diaries over recent and coming months.

If you have any questions about any of the issues raised in this update, or any other developments in IP law, please do not hesitate to contact us.

Articles in this issue...

Out and about with our IP team

A round-up of the activities of the IP team over the last few months, together with their forthcoming event diary.

The EPLA is dead. Lond live the revised EPLA - Community Patent twins!

An article by Professor Paul Torremans

Obviousness

Extracts from an article by Peter Ellis and Nick McDonald on the UK Intellectual Property Office public consultation "The Inventive Step Requirement in United Kingdom Patent Law and Practice".

Domain name news

Cybersquatting is on the rise. The World Intellectual Property Organisation Annual Summary 2006 revealed a 25% increase in the number of domain name disputed since 2005.

Profile

A profile of Professor Paul Torremans, consultant to the Browne Jacobson IP team.

The content of this quarterly update is provided for the purposes of general interest and information. It contains only brief summaries of aspects of the subject matter and does not provide comprehensive statements of the law. It does not constitute legal advice and does not provide a substitute for it.