James Heald j.heald@ucl.ac.uk writes:
There's a useful summary of criminal provisions in current (2002) Irish Law for prosecuting IP-related offences at:
http://www.aippi.org/reports/q169/q169_ireland_e.html
It may also be useful to compare AIPPI's cross-country summary, and the corresponding reports from other EU countries:
http://www.aippi.org/reports/q169/q169_Summary_e.html http://www.aippi.org/reports/q169/gr_q169_index.htm
Thanks for these. I haven't gotten to read them yet, but these links are appreciated.
While we're on the subject, this book ("Knockoff") looks quite a powerful presentation of why strong sanctions against the worst forms of IP offences /are/ very necessary. http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/2005/10/conference-reminder-fake-book-review.ht...
Be sure that this very emotive stuff that will be played on again and again at MPs and MEPs to try to stampede them into maximal sanctions.
I think IFSO would be straying from it's mission if we commented on the types of crime that this book looks like it will justify strong sanctions for - namely copyright violation that funds organised crime, and trademark violation that funds organised crime or causes a public health or safety risk.
So books like this aren't a direct threat to our position, but they will make it difficult to get the directive thrown out, and they will cause a problem with politicians that don't understand that there are differences between patents, copyright, and trademarks, and with politicians that don't understand the need for strong definitions for "commercial scale", "organised crime", etc.
I think we should do our best to get the "IP" term out of the date. (Trying to get it out of the Directive is a seperate matter.)