The response to the poll on IP Draughts’ last posting has been modest, but several people on Twitter have made positive comments about his idea of an online, social get-together.
So, we will try it out, and see whether the experiment works. This coming Friday, 27th March, at 2 pm (UK time), we will hold a virtual meeting using the Zoom app.
IP Draughts is in two minds as to whether to make it invitation only. He doesn’t want to discourage people who think the faff of registering takes some of the spontaneity from it, or who think this is a malign plot to harvest your data (it really isn’t!). On the other hand, giving out a general invitation on the internet could result in some people from outside the intended communities getting involved. I know, the chances of some random weirdos reading this blog are low.
So, as a compromise, and in the tradition of raves from the 1990s (or so he has read in the Times), IP Draughts will post log-in details on this blog about an hour before the experiment is due to start.
If you were one of the 10 people who declared on the poll that you would actively participate in the meeting, IP Draughts would particularly encourage you to do so for this first outing. If it is a success, we will hold some more.
Seeing the impressive Sir Patrick Vallance (the UK government’s Chief Scientific Adviser) on TV this morning talking about Coronavirus (IP Draughts’ excuse for watching Breakfast TV: he is in a hotel room) reminded him that Sir Patrick featured in a very early article on this blog, from 2011. Sit back and enjoy…!
We bring you a report (but not an exclusive report) of last night’s proceedings at the Institute of Brand and Innovation Law‘s debate: Do Patents Incentivise or Inhibit Innovation?
The chairman, legal broadcaster Joshua Rozenberg, started by pointing out how distinguished a group of people had been assembled – in the audience. He was right: High Court judges and Fellows of the Royal Society were ten-a-penny in what was billed as a “scientific and legal panel discussion”. This blogger can also vouch from personal experience that there were two members present from the Westel Canoe Club, at least one of whom recently achieved his British Canoe Union Strand Touring Award (Silver).
If such a thing were possible, the panel of speakers was even more distinguished than the audience. As Mr Rozenberg asked each of the five panel members for his views (and yes, they were all men)…
View original post 1,019 more words
This blog posting was cited today in a LinkedIn article, so IP Draughts thought he would give it another airing…
Apparently, commercial law firms want their junior lawyers to demonstrate ‘commercial awareness’. IP Draughts has seen several articles and social media discussions on this subject recently. But commercial awareness can mean many different things, as was discussed in a Guardian article.
It could mean understanding the overall objectives and priorities of a firm’s commercial clients. IP Draughts has always found slightly fatuous the advice given to law students to read the Financial Times to gain these insights. But perhaps his commerciality runs on different lines.
It could mean understanding the people who work for the firm’s clients, what motivates them, and what they want from their lawyers. This could vary enormously between types of client and job roles within a client organisation, as well as individual personalities. The entrepreneur who starts a high-tech business may have very different expectations and priorities from a professor, IT salesman, finance director or…
View original post 450 more words
Reblogging this post, which is the most-viewed article in the history of IP Draughts, at over 72,000 viewings. Not entirely sure why this subject is so popular – perhaps it is the prevalence of NDAs that include a clause about injunctions.
There is a clause in many confidentiality agreements that sticks out like a sore thumb. The clause worries clients, because they don’t understand it. It looks so different from most of the clauses in the agreement. Some lawyers gloss over it, recognising it as a standard piece of legal verbiage. Other lawyers, particularly in the UK, are uneasy about it, and sometimes seek to water it down. Yet the clause persists in thousands, if not millions, of confidentiality agreements across the globe.
Some typical manifestations of the clause follow. The first is from a UK template found on the internet that appears to be based on a PLC document…
The Recipient acknowledges that damages alone would not be an adequate remedy for the breach of any of the provisions of this agreement. Accordingly, without prejudice to any other rights and remedies it may have, the Disclosing Party shall be entitled…
View original post 834 more words