* Issues arising from the need to dispose of infringing stock;As before, if you feel that you'd like the chance to write on one of these topics, please let me know by emailing me. Before you contact me, you may want to check out the guidance for authors here, so see what we expect.
* Roving injunctions and John Doe orders against unidentifiable defendants in IP infringement proceedings;
* Potential liability of landlords and lawful occupants of premises for infringements that take place on them -- how to establish it and how to avoid it;
* Good practice in dealing with client complaints arising from professional services in intellectual property -- can a firm be wise before the event?
* The balance between EU legislative and judicial powers -- who gets to decide what Europe's IP laws really are?
* Best strategy for an IP-backed business which is threatened by multiple small-scale infringers.
|Monkeying around with JIPLP submissions |
can lead to disappointment
From time to time this journal (in common with many others) receives submissions from two named authors, one of whom is a senior member of a law firm and the other of whom is a very junior lawyer, or sometimes even a trainee. When editing the article, the degree of contribution of each is often sorely apparent.
Can I say just this: it is in general preferable for the senior contributor to write the piece and for the junior one to proof and correct it, rather than for the junior to write it and the senior to put it right. This is because senior IP practitioners tend to know their subject better, while their junior assistants are generally more conscientious background researchers and proof-readers.