JIPLP: October 2016

About this weblog

The principal contents of this weblog are drawn from the Current Intelligence features which are published monthly in JIPLP.

Current Intelligence articles are designed to analyse recent key cases, legislation and topical matters. Normally they are of between 500 and 1,500 words (though in exceptional cases a greater word length may be agreed with the Editors).

The selected Current Intelligence articles are now posted on this weblog to enable readers to engage with them, posting comments if they so choose. All comments are moderated, which means that they will not appear immediately upon their being posted.

About the Journal

JIPLP is a peer-reviewed journal dedicated to intellectual property law and practice. Published monthly, coverage includes the full range of substantive IP topics, practice-related matters such as litigation, enforcement, drafting and transactions, plus relevant aspects of related subjects such as competition and world trade law.

The journal is specifically designed for IP lawyers, patent attorneys and trade mark attorneys both in private practice and working in industry. It also aims to be an essential source of reference for academics specialising in IP, members of the judiciary, officials in IP registries and regulatory bodies, and institutional libraries. Subject-matter covered is chosen for its practical relevance and international interest.

Instructions for authors here
Free sample issue here
Subscription details here

... and authors in search of an article

JIPLP is often approached by prospective authors who would like to write something, but who would appreciate guidance regarding subject-matter, style and so forth. Here are a few pointers:

* Ask yourself what is it that you'd like to read in the journal, since that is handy rule of thumb which probably reflects the interests of your colleagues and your competitors;

* IP law and practice is very much a 'here and now' activity for JIPLP subscribers. The history of a right may be inherently interesting, or even sometimes relevant to the resolution of a specific issue, but would you expect a reader to look for it in JIPLP?

* Recycled Masters' dissertations and university essays make poor articles and are often difficult to convert from a piece that is designed to display erudition and research ability into an article that addresses lawyers, businesses and decision-makers. It's usually easier to start afresh by working out who your readers are and what you want to tell them.

* Please comply with the authors' instructions and note the journal's preferred length for articles. Most authors like to publish long ones, but subscribers tend to prefer reading shorter ones.

JIPLP

Latest JIPLP issue now out: what's in it?

Table of Contents

Editorial

The Trade Secrets Directive – consistency of approach required, with or without Brexit

Current Intelligence

Pfizer gets some pain relief—interim injunction granted against both Sandoz and Lloyds

More pain for Pfizer—second medical use claims not infringed

KIKO: the EU IPO rejects an EU trade mark application for the layout of cosmetics retail stores

General Court dismisses Fútbol Club Barcelona’s application for registration of the outline of its crest

Estoppel is not a valid defence for trade mark infringement

Jack Wills fails to recover substantial profits and loses on costs

Cadbury’s registered purple trade mark open for an invalidity claim

New Tobacco Products Directive: the CJEU says it is compatible with EU law

A delicate balance: ‘emotional retaliation’ protected as freedom of expression under the German Constitution

The (new?) dangers of opting for an account of profits

Articles

Trunki—How did things go so wrong?

‘Self-collision’ of European patent applications under the European Patent Convention: what about partial priority?

The scope of protection of patent claims in Europe and the UPC

Ceilings for trade mark protection: some thoughts on s 92 TMA 1994

From GRUR Int.

Post priority year transfer of priority rights

IP in Review

The transplanting of IP laws