This content is from: Home

What’s in the July-August issue of Managing IP

The list of the 50 most influential people in IP is one of Managing IP’s most popular regular features. This year, we’ve taken a slightly different approach to it.

In 2003, when we first compiled a list of the most influential people in IP, the list included “politicians, judges, industry leaders, regulators, authors and campaigners”. It was dominated by important people, such as heads of IP offices, members of Congress and business executives.

In the decade since, the nature of influence has changed: today, a smart blogger, a passionate campaigner or an entrepreneur is as likely to shape the development of the law and business of IP.

This year’s top 50 list reflects that change. Ten of the 50 are included on the basis of their activity in social media – a concept that did not even exist in 2003. Another 10 are “advocates” – academics and policy-shapers influencing issues such as plain packaging, IP enforcement and internet governance.

The remaining 30 comprise the legal eagles (judges and legislators), policy makers (heads of IP offices) and business leaders. The people included span the full range of IP issues and perspectives, and come from all regions of the world.

Having said that, we recognise that certain areas are under-represented in the MIP 50. In particular, there are too few representatives from Latin America and Africa. To remedy that, we invite readers to suggest who they think should have been included and why. After all (and as our 50th inclusion indicates) in the new world of informal influence, everyone – without exception – has the opportunity to influence the development of IP law and policy.

Find out more about the MIP 50 (free access).

Read the top 10 lists of social media, legal, policy, business and advocacy figures (subscription or free trial required)

Join the debate on twitter (#MIP50) and LinkedIn.

Case study: Caterpillar

Among the other articles in this month’s issue (all of which are of course available online to subscribers):

A profile of Caterpillar’s European team by Managing IP’s magazine editor Simon Crompton

IP Clinic: three perspectives on “My company is rebranding. What are the priorities from an IP point-of-view?”

FRAND – analysis of the recent AIPPI report, including an interview with BlackBerry’s Michael Fröhlich

How to protect well-known marks in Russia – with case studies and statistics

Effective strategies for fee motions after Octane

China’s developing approach to Swiss-style claims

Understanding open source software

Trade mark damages in Europe – a guide

Latest trends in Bolar exemption rules in Europe

International briefings

The international briefings section in Managing IP is sponsored by the firms listed for each jurisdiction/region. All articles are free access. For more information, contact the authors/firms listed.

Argentina: Supreme Court considers search engine liability

Australia: Injunction granted to block second medical use

Austria: Descriptive use of a trade mark

Belgium: Google may forget what you did last summer

China patents: Excessive pricing and standard-essential patents

China trade marks: New measures to address online counterfeiting

EPO: An independent patent court at the EPO?

Europe: Black and white no longer covers all

Germany: CJEU addresses inactivity of trade mark owners

Greece: Court rules on abuse of process in trademark matters

India: Supreme Court rules on multiple patent revocation proceedings

Indonesia: Provisional decision on IP case

Japan: IP High Court confirms validity of essential patent for blue LED

Malaysia: Trade mark delimitation agreements and competition law

Mexico: Swiss-type and purpose-limited product claims

Netherlands: Failure to pay fee appreciated, patent right restored

New Zealand: Generic computer implementation not a cure for software patentability

Philippines: First-to-file rule clarified

Russia: Bulls clash without loss for either

Singapore: IP financing scheme launched

Switzerland: Venus rejected by Federal Administrative Court

Taiwan: IP Court rules on employees’ inventions

US Patents: Test for indefiniteness remains indefinite after Nautilus v Biosig

US Trade marks: Seventh Circuit rules on trade mark abandonment

Vietnam: Landmark win in Lafarge domain name dispute

The material on this site is for law firms, companies and other IP specialists. It is for information only. Please read our Terms and Conditions and Privacy Notice before using the site. All material subject to strictly enforced copyright laws.

© 2020 Euromoney Institutional Investor PLC. For help please see our FAQs.