Wednesday 25 April 2012

Watch your name and protect your brand

Research conducted in 2010 showed that American technology giants were responsible for a quarter of all applications to The Company Names Tribunal. A couple of years on, the Intel Corporation in particular has had a run of orders in its favour. However, a recent decision that went against it gave very useful guidance on the matters that might sway a CNT adjudicator. Consideration of the emerging body of decisions highlights the importance to brand protection of a combination of a company name watch service and a readiness to deal with any abusive registration by a speedy, and appropriate, application for an order.

Thursday 12 April 2012

Law Awards of Scotland 2012

We've been contacted by the organisers of the Law Awards of Scotland 2012 and asked to enter this year's awards. The invitation was made after they'd carried out extensive research, speaking to clients and other lawyers, so as to identify the highest rated Scottish law firms and invite them to submit an entry for consideration by the judges. The organisers explain:

"Not just any law firm or individual can enter the awards, only those who are ‘recommended’ by their clients and peers are invited to take part....we get in touch with client companies from all over Scotland and ask them to rate the law firms that they use. Once we have this information from clients, we then invite the law firms which have been rated highly by clients to enter the awards. We also ask the law sector to rate their peers and tell us who they feel are the best in their industry. Those who rate highly are also invited to enter the Law Awards of Scotland."
This is the second year running that we've been rated highly enough to be approached and asked to enter, which of course is great. Who knows. One of these days we might actually win. 

Friday 6 April 2012

Computer misuse: hacking, interception and the meaning of "transmission"

There’s been a lot of confusion in the reports concerning the hacking by a Sky News reporter of “Canoe Man” John Darwin’s email account. It’s said that intercepting email is an offence under the Computer Misuse Act 1990. That’s not quite right. Sky's John Ryley pleads “public interest” and it’s said that there is no such defence under the Act. That is right but misses the point.