Most Recent Publications  

Health, Safety and Environment Policy 2017

The Federation’s activities

The Brexit clock ticks – what are the implications for intellectual property?

European Patent Reform

EPO Update

The Shape of Things to Come?

Designs Update

The Trump Administration and International Policies on Intellectual Property

IP Federation biographies 2016–2017

Trends and Events 2017

IP Federation annual accounts 31 December 2016

Policy Advisors Policy

IP Federation Equal Opportunities Policy 2016

President and VPs Election Policy

IP Federation annual accounts 31 December 2015

Consultation by the Legal Services Board on regulation of in-house lawyers

Designs in the UK

EPO Update

EU Patent Reform

India National Intellectual Property Policy

IP Federation biographies

Patent Harmonisation – What is happening?

Patents and Standards

Progress on the EU Trade Secrets Directive

The Federation’s activities

UK implementation and ratification of the UPC Agreement

Why is diversity so important and why should it matter to you?

Trends and Events 2015

Travel Policy

Solicitor Associates Policy

IP Federation Anti-Bribery Policy 2015

IP Federation Subscription Payment Policy 2015

IP Federation annual accounts 31 December 2014

The Intellectual Property Act 2014

Federation Activities

Review of the Current Patent Harmonisation Initiatives

Progress on the EU Trade Secrets Directive

IP Federation Biographies

The Future Shape of Education and Training for the IP Profession

European Patent Office Update

EU Patent Reform

Trade Marks Update


Trends and Events 2014

IP Federation – Advancing industry’s view on intellectual property since 1920

Governance Committee Terms of Reference 2014

IP Federation annual accounts 31 December 2013

Claim format harmonisation

Copyright Update

EU Consultation on trade secrets

EU Patent Reform

Intellectual Property Bill 2013–14: Clause 13

IP Federation biographies

Patent Consultations

Patent-related incentives and impediments to transfer of technology

Patents, Trade Marks and Design Rights: Groundless Threats

Promoting clinical trials of pharmaceuticals in the UK

Draft proposal for a revised block exemption for technology transfer agreements and guidelines

The Federation’s activities

Unregistered Design Rights – Qualification


Trends and Events 2013

IP Federation annual accounts 31 December 2012

Trends and Events 2002-2003

Trends and Events 2001-2002

Trends and Events 2000-2001

Trends and Events 1999-2000

Trends and Events 1998-1999

Trends and Events 2006-2007

Trends and Events 2005-2006

Trends and Events 2004-2005

Trends and Events 2003-2004

Additional Employee Inventor Compensation – A right too far?

An Update on the America Invents Act (AIA) and Strategies to Consider

Proposal for Collaborative Search and Examination (CSE) in the PCT

Copyright & Levies

European Patent Office (EPO) Update

EU Patent Reform

IP Federation biographies

Patent Box – The Basics

Revision of the rules for the assessment of licensing agreements for the transfer of technology

Patent Marking

Update on “plain” (more accurately, “standardised”) packaging

Patent Enforcement – Portugal enacts law mandating arbitration for pharmaceutical patent disputes

Reform of the UK Designs Legal Framework

Role of Government in Protecting and promoting Intellectual Property

The Federation's activities

The UK Intellectual Property Office

Trade marks update

Trends and Events 2012

Presidents of the IP Federation

Resolutions of the IP Federation Council October 2012

Articles of Association 2012

Governance Committee Terms of Reference 2012

IP Federation annual report and accounts 31 December 2011

The Federation's achievements

Draft European Commission Block Exemption Regulation on R&D Agreements

Copyright Levies

Trade marks

Hargreaves Review – Call for Evidence in the Designs Sector

Unintentional Infringement of UK and Community Rights

Commission Consultation on the Enforcement Directive

The European Observatory on Counterfeiting and Piracy

EU Patent Reform

Innovative tools and processes at the European Patent Office

Practical issues – selecting an expert and getting the best out of them

Preliminary injunctions alive and well – a view from Europe

The Hargreaves Review

The UK Intellectual Property Office and Ipsum

The America Invents Act

Trends and Events 2011

IP Federation annual report and accounts 31 December 2010

Governance Committee Terms of Reference

Trends and Events 2010

The Federation's achievements

The Federation on the Web

Draft European Commission Block Exemption Regulation on Research and Development Agreements

Copyright Levies

Trade Marks

Future of Design Law in UK

Review of EU Customs Anti-Counterfeiting Regulation

EU Patent Reform

European Patent Office Single Patent Process (SPP) Programme

Patent Quality

New System for Regulation of UK Lawyers including Patent and Trade Mark Attorneys


The UK Intellectual Property Office

Strategic Advisory Board for Intellectual Property Policy (SABIP)

IP Federation biographies

Developments in the Patentability of Computer Software and Business Method Inventions

European Qualifying Examination (EQE)
Most Recent Publications

  EU Patent Reform

Document No: PUB 20D/13
Posted: 23/12/2013

In 2013, the Unitary Patent and Unified Patent Court (UPC) dossier has been among the Federation’s highest priorities, following the long-awaited agreement between the European Parliament and Council in late 2012. The agreement resulted in the Unitary patent and Language Regulations being adopted in December 2012, and signature of the UPC agreement on 19 February 2013. It will be recalled that all EU countries but Spain and Poland signed the agreement at this time (although Bulgaria signed a little late), and notably Italy was also among the signatories, despite its not participating in the Enhanced Cooperation arrangement which gave rise to the Unitary patent regulations. Indeed, in July 2013, Italy indicated informally an intention to join the Unitary patent regime as well as the UPC.


  Intellectual Property Bill 2013–14: Clause 13

Document No: PUB 20E/13
Posted: 23/12/2013

During the course of the IP Bill’s passage through first the Lords and then the Commons, the IP Federation has been pressing for the deletion of Clause 13 or, at the very least, significant amendments which would lessen the damaging impact Clause 13 would bring. Clause 13 introduces a new criminal offence for copying registered designs. Whilst we can understand that this may appear attractive in the fight against piracy and deliberate theft of designs, the wording of Clause 13 does not restrict the criminal offence only to the bad guys.


  IP Federation biographies

Document No: PUB 20F/13
Posted: 23/12/2013

Dr Bobby Mukherjee is a qualified UK and European Patent Attorney with over 16 years’ experience of IP work gained in private practice and at BAE Systems plc. He is currently the Chief Counsel – IP & Technology Law, BAE Systems. He has rep­resented his current employer on the Patents Committee and Council of the IP Federation for some of those years.


  Patent Consultations

Document No: PUB 20G/13
Posted: 23/12/2013

In 2013 the IP Federation, based on discussions in the Patent Committee and at Council, has responded to various consultations and discussion papers from the UK IPO and EPO.


  Patent-related incentives and impediments to transfer of technology

Document No: PUB 20H/13
Posted: 23/12/2013

The Standing Committee on the Law of Patents (SCP) comprises all Mem­ber States of WIPO (World Intellectual Property Organization) and/or of the Paris Union, and, as observers, certain Member States of the UN non-members of WIPO and/or Paris Union, as well as a num­ber of inter­govern­mental and non-governmental organisations.

At its nineteenth session held from 25 to 28 February 2013 in Geneva, the SCP decided that the Secretariat should revise the document on transfer of technology (document SCP/18/8) by adding further practical examples and ex­periences on patent-related incentives and im­pedi­ments to transfer of technology on the basis of input received from members and ob­servers of the SCP, taking into account the dimension of absorptive capacity in tech­nology transfer. Thus the IP Federation was invited, in its capacity as observer to the SCP, to submit such examples to the Inter­national Bureau on or before 30 June 2013.


  Patents, Trade Marks and Design Rights: Groundless Threats

Document No: PUB 20I/13
Posted: 23/12/2013

On 17 April 2013, the Law Commission published a consultation paper on groundless threats. This consultation relates to their Patents, Trade Marks and Design Rights: Ground­less Threats project. The Commission was consulting on two approaches to reform:

  • The first is to build on the reforms made to patent law in 2004 and to extend these to the other rights. We also propose that legal advisers should be protected from liability for groundless threats.
  • The second approach is to treat groundless threats as a form of unfair competition and to introduce a new and broader cause of action based on the Paris Convention. 


Document No: PUB 20J/13
Posted: 23/12/2013

If a client is involved in litigation in a common-law country, then discovery (disclosure) may be sought of his communications with IP advisers. Clients have encountered serious and often insuperable obstacles to asserting privilege against such discovery with respect both to local advisers and to foreign ones. These obstacles are essentially unique to IP cases because (a) internationalised IP activity is the norm, and (b) so-called “non-lawyer” patent and trade mark attorneys/agents[1] are trusted major providers of IP legal advice and draft­ing. Privilege in general is in the public interest, and the anomalies which have arisen are accordingly contrary to the public interest. In the UK, these anomalies have been rectified to a limited extent in CDPA s. 280 and TMA s. 87, but much remains to be done both in the UK and elsewhere. (An extended discussion, albeit to be read in the light of the recent developments reported below, can be found in Trends and Events, December 2010, pages 24–27.)


[1] “So-called” is a reference to the UK situation. The Legal Services Act 2007 treats barristers, solicitors, patent and trade mark attorneys, and other specified legal professionals all as “lawyers”. 


  Promoting clinical trials of pharmaceuticals in the UK

Document No: PUB 20K/13
Posted: 23/12/2013

It has for a long time been uncertain whether the conduct by the innovative pharmaceutical industry in the United Kingdom falls within the defences to the Patents Act.


  Draft proposal for a revised block exemption for technology transfer agreements and guidelines

Document No: PUB 20L/13
Posted: 23/12/2013

The European Commission launched on 20 February 2013 a public consultation on anti-trust rules on technology licensing. The objective of the consultation was stated as follows:

In the meaning of the EU competition rules, a technology transfer agree­ment is a licensing agree­ment where one party (the licensor) authorises another party or parties, the licen­see(s), to use its technology (patent, know-how, software license) for the production of goods and services.

The rules on how to assess technology transfer agreements are set out in two instruments, the technology transfer block exemption regulation (“TTBER”) and accompanying Guidelines. The TTBER exempts certain categor­ies of licens­ing agreements concluded be­tween companies that have limited market power and that respect certain conditions set out in the TTBER. Such agree­ments are deemed to have no anticompetitive effects or, if they do, the posi­tive effects outweigh the negative ones. The Guidelines provide guidance on the application of the TTBER as well as on the applica­tion of EU com­peti­tion law to tech­nology transfer agreements that fall out­side the safe harbour of the TTBER.

These instruments will expire on 30 April 2014. The Commission has now drafted a proposal for a revised TTBER and Guidelines. The current consultation is seeking stakeholders’ views on this proposal.


  The Federation’s activities

Document No: PUB 20M/13
Posted: 23/12/2013

One of the IP Federation’s chief lobbying tools is its policy papers. These are all available on the website at:

The policy papers on the website represent the views of the innovative and influen­tial com­panies which are members of the Federation. Members are con­sulted on their views and opinions and encouraged to debate and explore issues of practice and policy. Only after consensus is achieved are external bodies informed of the col­lective views of industry via the Federation.


  Prev    1    2    3    4    5    6    7    8    9    10   ...  14    Next