Last week the House of Lords discussed the key principles and main purpose of the Intellectual Property Bill during its second reading, which offered peers the opportunity to flag up any concerns or specific areas where they think amendments are needed.
The three main aims of the Bill were identified as being to simplify and improve design and patent protection, to clarify the intellectual property (IP) framework and to ensure that the international IP system supports UK business and contributes to UK economic growth.
During the debate concerns were raised over whether the Bill does enough to deal with IP problems, which it was felt go deeper than the measures outlined in the bill. The peers also asked the Government whether planned penalties for copying a registered design, which could carry a sentence of up to 10 years’ imprisonment, were appropriate.
Meanwhile, the Law Society have published its briefing on the second reading and said that in general, it supports the introduction of the Bill, specifically with regards to an amended definition of the word ‘design’ under UK law, which it feels should be refined in the Bill.
The Society added that it supports the proposed amendments to the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 in relation to the ownership of designs and is in favour of criminal penalties for deliberate copying of UK registered designs.
It also welcomed the cost saving implications of the Bill, including allowing the UK to join the Hague system, and the introduction of a duty on the part of the Secretary of State to report on the economic contribution made to the UK economy by the Patent Office and also to assess the economic effect of IP legislation in the UK.