header-logo header-logo

Beating the bullies

27 June 2013 / David Hertzell
Issue: 7566 / Categories: Opinion , Intellectual property
printer mail-detail
157580470

David Hertzell & Julia Jarzabkowski aim to fend off groundless IP threats

Intellectual property rights are valuable and support economic growth by encouraging and rewarding innovation. For many businesses, patents, trade marks and design rights can be among their most important assets. Their worth, however, is undermined through unauthorised use and so a robust response to infringement makes good business sense. But threats to sue can be misused. A threat may be made, not with the intention of protecting an IP right, but as a means to damage a competitor.

Threats of infringement proceedings have a pernicious effect because IP litigation can be complex, disruptive and expensive, as the global battle between Apple and Samsung confirms. If a threat is made to the trade source of an infringement, such as a manufacturer or importer, they may be more likely to stand their ground as they may have more invested in the product or process. That isn’t the case with retailers or customers. If threatened, the mere prospect of litigation can be enough to change their

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Real estate dispute resolution team welcomes newly qualified solicitor

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

International private client team appoints expert in Spanish law

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

Stefan Borson, football finance expert head of sport at McCarthy Denning, discusses returning to the law digging into the stories behind the scenes

NEWS
Paper cyber-incident plans are useless once ransomware strikes, argues Jack Morris of Epiq in NLJ this week
In this week's NLJ, Robert Hargreaves and Lily Johnston of York St John University examine the Employment Rights Bill 2024–25, which abolishes the two-year qualifying period for unfair-dismissal claims
Writing in NLJ this week, Manvir Kaur Grewal of Corker Binning analyses the collapse of R v Óg Ó hAnnaidh, where a terrorism charge failed because prosecutors lacked statutory consent. The case, she argues, highlights how procedural safeguards—time limits, consent requirements and institutional checks—define lawful state power
Michael Zander KC, emeritus professor at LSE, revisits his long-forgotten Crown Court Study (1993), which surveyed 22,000 participants across 3,000 cases, in the first of a two-part series for NLJ
Getty Images v Stability AI Ltd [2025] EWHC 2863 (Ch) was a landmark test of how UK law applies to AI training—but does it leave key questions unanswered, asks Emma Kennaugh-Gallagher of Mewburn Ellis in NLJ this week
back-to-top-scroll