Policy Papers

IP General : 56 Documents

This part of the site is up-to-date from 2004; relevant position papers prior to then are obtainable from the Secretariat.

Trade Secrets, Patents and Rio+20 Developments

Document No: PP 14/12 Posted: 20 June 2012

Letter to Liz Coleman at the IPO, in the context of negotiations for the Rio+20 sustainable development conference in Rio de Janeiro, asking the IPO to ensure that UK and EU negotiators enter the final stages of the negotiations well-prepared and with a very clear technology-related brief

IPReg Second Consultation on Litigators’ Rights

Document No: PP 7/12 Posted: 16 March 2012

Response to the IPReg Second Consultation on Replacement of the CIPA Higher Courts Qualification Regulations and the ITMA Trade Mark Litigator and Trade Mark Advocate Certificate Regulations, urging IPReg to reconsider its second round of proposals

IPReg Consultation on Litigation Rights for Patent and Trade Mark Attorneys

Document No: PP 16/11 Posted: 17 October 2011

Response to consultation on litigation rights supporting IPReg in its proposals to issue a revised qualification regime for patent attorney and trade mark attorney litigators to facilitate the grant of relevant rights to registered patent and trade mark attorneys

EU–India Free Trade Agreement

Document No: PP 13/11 Posted: 12 August 2011

Letter to the IPO advocating the provision of Regulatory Data Protection in India in the EU–India trade talks

Cabinet Office Procurement Policy – Use of Open Standards

Document No: PP 10/11 Posted: 18 May 2011

Response to Government proposals that open standards should be sought whenever it is procuring IT equipment, in Procurement Policy Note on Use of Open Standards when specifying ICT requirements dated 31 January 2011

Representation before the European and Community Patent Court

Document No: PP 5/11 Posted: 22 June 2011

The IP Federation is strongly supportive of the current version of Article 28 of the draft Agreement which will establish this Court. We believe that opening up representation to suitably certificated EPAs will not only be a progressive step in line with the general objective of improving the patent system in Europe but that specifically it will ensure wider choice and therefore better access to justice for all; especially for those high technology SMEs which will likely be the bedrock of the European Union’s future economic well-being.

Independent Review of IP and Growth – call for evidence

Document No: PP 4/11 Posted: 04 March 2011

Response to the Review of Intellectual Property and Growth: Call for Evidence with a deadline of 4 March 2011.

Contrary to the sceptical opinions held by some, the IP systems in the UK, in the rest of Europe, and elsewhere when in compliance with inter­national agreements, are generally sound. They are not broken and do not need major adjustment. The first need is to improve quality and efficiency within the existing systems.

1 2 3 4 5 6