IP Draughts has been playing a new drafting game. He was recently introduced to a website that hosts the BlaBlaMeter. You can paste any text into the BlaBlaMeter and it will give you a score. A low score is good.
This blog generally gets a score of 0.2, which is good but not perfect. IP Draughts tested some judges’ scores, using the patent case of Conor v Angiotech. The judgments of the House of Lords scored 0.19. The judgment of Jacob LJ in the Court of Appeal received a score of 0.16. No surprise there!
IP Draughts tested some of his contract drafting, as published in our book on biotech agreements. Precedent 8(c) is a detailed licence agreement. It receives a score of 0.22 – starting to get a bit windy! However, there is hope for the next generation. Last week, IP Draughts’ trainee, AnnMarie Humphries, prepared standard conditions of sale for a client. They came in at a very respectable 0.2.
Some readers will be familiar with the European Commission’s standard funding agreement for Framework 7 research projects. Annex II to the agreement contains the main contract terms. IP Draughts tested Annex II, and it scored 0.43. The BlaBlaMeter commented:
Can readers offer any text from the legal world that scores better than 0.16 or worse than 0.43?