BLOG@IP::JUR

Patent Attorney Axel H Horns' Blog on Intellectual Property Law.

Disclaimer & About This Website

Visit the archives

Tuesday, March 01, 2005

Minutes of the UK Patent Practice Working Group Meeting January 12, 2005.

brief summary of the minutes of the Patent Practice Working Group Meeting held on Wednesday J January 12, 2005, at Harmsworth House, London, has been published on the

UK-PTO website. Topics have been:

The fate of the UK-PTO London Front Office;
Legal Expense Insurance for Patents;
Business Link IP Tree;
Reduction of time delays after issue of the EPC Rule 51(4) communication;
LFO 'B' specification provision;
E-forms provision;
Review of Outstanding Action Points; and
Any other business.

Of particular interest for a wider international audience might be the deliberations concerning a legal expense insurance for patents:

"[...] Sean advised that he had been in discussion with Lawrence Cullen in IPID, who is leading on this issue, (also known as the Patent Enforcement Project (PEP)). Richard Gallafent was a member of the PEP group that produced the final PEP report which proposed a partnership approach to take things forward. Some members of the PEP group felt that a proper Government funded feasibility study should be set-up, others that the Industry could do this. In June 2004, Lord Sainsbury received a submission advising him of the outcome of the PEP and the suggestion of a partnership approach. Paul Leonard, Director of the Intellectual Property Institute (IPI), had chaired a round table meeting in September 2004 and the conclusions drawn from it were that the IPI would organise a seminar to discuss patent litigation insurance including 'what is the risk of not having it' and 'what is needed to meet this risk'. The seminar will be held in March 2005. The Patent Office was looking at possible models such as a mutual insurance scheme with the involvement of the insurance industry and was keen to take the project forward.

Andrew commented that he would like to attend the March meeting and it was agreed that CIPA should be kept involved.

In reply to questions from Luc, Sean confirmed that the focus was on patent litigation insurance and not IP insurance generally. The insurance industry would be encouraged to recognise that there was business here but a model would not be imposed upon them. Sean thought that the focus was currently on a UK based scheme.

Richard commented that at the March seminar risk management was to be discussed which was a very well developed area within the insurance industry but it was not an area where the market was transparent. A seminar that concentrated on this may miss the point of the need for insurance to cover litigation costs. [...]"

So, I'm quite curious to learn how the British will go ahead with regard to this important project ...

[Permalink]