Guidance on Birmingham Commonwealth Games Association Right

Birmingham National Indoor Arena in 2007

Author Cls14 Licence CC BY-SA 3.0 Source Wikimedia Commons

 

Jane Lambert

An "association right" is a monopoly of the commercial exploitation of a major sporting event. It is usually conferred by statute on the body responsible for delivering the event.  Governments promise to enact such legislation when one of their cities bids to host the event.  An example of the obligation undertaken recently by the Japanese government is to be found in Part VII of the Host City Contract for the 23rd Olympiad dated 7 Sept 2013 between The International Olympic Committee, the City of Tokyo and the Japanese Olympic Committee,  I first discussed association rights in Olympics Association Right and London Olympics Association Right in NIPC Law on 31 July 2012.

Parliament has conferred a similar monopoly upon the “Birmingham Organising Committee for the 2022 Commonwealth Games Ltd” ("the Organizing Committee") by s.3 (1) of the Birmingham Commonwealth Games Act 2020.  I discussed that legislation during its passage through Parliament in Birmingham Commonwealth Games Association Right on 12 Jan 2020.   It is to be noted that no similar monopoly was conferred upon Glasgow 2014 Limited which delivered the Commonwealth Games in Glasgow by the Glasgow Commonwealth Games Act 2014.

S.9 (1) of the Birmingham Commonwealth Games Act 2020 required the Organizing Committee to publish guidance about the operation of the legislation conferring association right within 31 days of the passing of the Act.   In accordance with that requirement, the Organizing Committee has published a 14 page booklet entitled Guidance on the Birminghm Commonwealth Games Act Association with the Games.  In its Introduction the booklet explained:

"The Commonwealth Games Federation (www.cgf.com) owns the rights to the Commonwealth Games and grants the rights to host the Commonwealth Games to cities based in the Commonwealth, such as Birmingham. When Birmingham was awarded the right to host the 2022 Commonwealth Games (the “Games”), the UK Government, as part of its hosting commitments, was required to put legislation in place to protect the intellectual property of the Games and the indicia relating to the Games against any unauthorised use, thereby managing public investment in the Games."

It should be made clear at this point that International Olympic Committee  owns the intellectual property rights in the Olympic Treaty by virtue of the Nairobi Treaty on the Protection of the Olympic Symbol and national legislation such as the Olympic Symbol etc. (Protection) Act 1995. There is no equivalent to the Nairobi Treaty or the 1995 Act in favour of the Commonwealth Games Federation.   In my previous article I referred to the Commonwealth Games Federation Constitution of 2019.   It has been updated by the Federation's constitution of 2019.   It has now been updated to October 2020.

 The introduction continues:

"!The Act is intended to be proportionate and not unnecessarily restrictive. It will be enforced reasonably with a view to being positive, to enhance the operation and delivery of the Games in Birmingham in 2022, and, not to overly restrict the operation of legitimate local and/or national businesses in the area."

The steps likely to be taken by the Organizaing Committee if it suspects an infringement are set out on page 8 of the guidance.   It would try to resolve disputes amicably wherever possible while reserving the right to apply for injunctions, delivery up of infringing materials, damages or an account of profits and costs where necessary.  Infringement proceedings could be issued out of the Birmingham District Registry as well as London and applications for interim injunctions could be sought from the judges sitting in Birmingham or other Chancery hearing centres (see CPR 63.13 and para 16 (1) (6)  and (2) of the Part 63 Practice Direction).

Page 4 of the guidance explains the effect of the Act in everyday terms.   Page 5 identifies the signs that are protected by the legislation.   Page 6 explains what is likely to be regarded as representing a connection and also what is not.   That is supplemented by a useful appendix of examples of permitted and prohibited usage on pages 12, 13 and 14.   Page 10 explains how to obtain authorization to represent a connection with the games.   Further information is supplied in the No Marketing Rights Protocol.

Anyone wishing to discuss this article or association rights in general may call me on 020 7404 5252 or send me a message through this form.

Birmingham Commonwealth Games Association Right

Birmingham Commonwealth Games Flag

Author Eliot Bowen Licence CC BY-SA 2.0 Source Wikipedia 2022  Commonwealth Games

Jane Lambert

One of the bills currently before Parliament is the Birmingham Commonwealth Games Bill. It was introduced into the House of Lords by Baroness Barran, Parliamentary-Under Secretary of State for Civil Society and Loneliness and received its first reading on 7 Jan 2020.  Part 2 of the Bill would create a new intellectual property right which I shall refer to as "Birmingham Commonwealth Games association right".

The new right is defined by clause 3 (4) of the Bill as "an exclusive right of the Organising Committee to use any representation (of any kind) in the manner described [in clause 3 (1)]".  Clause 3 (1) prohibits any the use of any representation (of any kind) in a manner likely to suggest to the public that there is an association between the Birmingham Commonwealth Games and goods or services, or a person providing goods or services.   In that regard, it is similar to the exclusive rights created by the London Olympic Games and Paralympic Games Act 2006, London Olympic Games and Paralympic Games (Amendment) Act 2011, and the Sunday Trading (London Olympic Games and Paralympic Games) Act 2012 for the Olympic and Paralympic Games of 2012. I discussed those rights in Olympics Association Right and London Olympic Association Right in NIPC Law on 31 July 2012.

There are, of course, some obvious differences between Birmingham Commonwealth Games association right and the Olympics and London Olympics association rights.  The Olympic Games is open to participation by athletes from across the world whereas participation in the Commonwealth Games is restricted to citizens or residents of Commonwealth countries.  These are current and former possessions of the United Kingdom with a number of important exceptions such as the USA and the Republic of Ireland plus the former Belgian territory of Rwanda and the former Portuguese territory of Mozambique.  Consequently, the commercial importance (and hence the incentive for ambush marketing) of the Commonwealth Games is significantly less than in the Olympics.  Secondly, the Olympic symbol is protected by the Nairobi Treaty whereas there is no similar international agreement for the protection of the Commonwealth Games symbol.  Thirdly, the International Olympic Committee has sufficient authority to compel host cities and national Olympic committees to accept terms like those contained in the draft agreement for the 2012 XXX Olympiad.

The Commonwealth Games Federation does have some intellectual property.   Paragraph 4 of Byelaw 18 to the Commonwealth Games Federation Constitution provides:

"The 'Commonwealth Games Intellectual Property' consists of the intellectual property rights in the term "COMMONWEALTH GAMES", the initials 'CGF', the Official Emblem ("The Bar"), the Official Flag, the Official Symbol or Symbols, event specific names, symbols and logos, intellectual property relating to the organisation, exploitation, broadcasting and/or reproduction of the Commonwealth Games by any means whatsoever and any other materials, products or works that a reasonable person would assume are related to or connected with the Commonwealth Games."

These rights are protected by trade mark registration and by the laws of passing off in the individual member states.

Returning to the Bill, clause 3 (2) sets out "examples  of an association between the Games and a person providing goods or services—
(a) a contractual relationship;
(b) a commercial relationship;
(c) a corporate or structural connection;
(d) the provision of financial or other assistance."

The "use" that is restricted to the Organising Committee by virtue of clause 3 (3) includes:

"(a) applying a representation to goods or documents;
(b) selling, offering, or exposing for sale goods that bear a representation;
(c) importing or exporting goods that bear a representation;
(d) providing or offering services by reference to a representation;
(e) promoting goods or services by reference to a representation."

Any infringement of those rights is actionable in the civil courts at the suit of the Organising Committee by virtue of clause 3 (4).  Tn England and Wales infringement proceedings could be brought in the Chancery Division including the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court and any County Court hearing centre with a Chancery District Registry (see CPR 63.13 and paragraph 16.1 (6) of Part 63 Practice Direction). Clause 4 of the Bill provides for the "authorization" or licensing of association rights.  Clause 5 and Sched 1 provides for exceptions.   Clause 8 requires the Organising Committee to publish guidance about the operation of Part 2 of the Bill.

As I practised primarily from Manchester at the time of the last Commonwealth Games in England in 2002 I have some experience of the intellectual property issues that can arise from these games. Since my chambers now have an annexe at 2 Snow Hill, I shall be pleased to chair and speak at a seminar on Birmingham Commonwealth Games association rights and other IP issues relating to the Games for local businesses and their professional advisors hould there be sufficient interest in the topic.  In that regard, I should be interested to hear from such businesses by phone, email, Linkedin, Facebook or Twitter.

Anyone wishing to discuss this article or any of the matters mentioned may call me on 020 7404 5252 or send me a message through my contact page.

Birmingham Tech Week

Jane Lambert

Birmingham Tech Week is taking place right now. The Tech Wek's website described it as a collaborative series of events across the city and city region between 7 and 13 Oct to highlight Birmingham’s tech scene and focus on a number of innovative topics. The events taking place this week are listed here.

The topics to be discussed include;

• artificial intelligence
• autonomous vehicles
• 5G (mobile communications technology)
• FinTech (financial services technology)
• health tech, 
• IOT (internet of things)
• VR (virtual reality), and
• women in technology. 

Speakers are from The Alan Turing Institute, Amazon, Barclays, BBC, Deliveroo, IBM Watson, National Express, NatWest, PWC, Salesforce and Uber.   Readers can listen to some of the presentations on YouTube,

My chambers have recently opened an annexe at 2 Snow Hill which hosts some of the leading law firms in Birmingham.  One of them held a reception earlier today which I attended with several of my London colleagues, our Chief Executive and one of our clerks.  One of the topics we discussed was Birmingham Tech Week as well as the tech sector in the West Midlands in general, its needs and how we could assist its businesses and investors.  I see a lot of opportunities there.

Anyone wishing to discuss this article or any of the topics mentioned in it is welcome to call me on 020 7404 5252 during office hours or send me a message through my contact page.

Small Claims IP Litigation in Birmingham

Author Highways Agency Licence CC BY 2.0 Source Wikipedia Birmingham

Jane Lambert

One of the most interesting announcements of the new Intellectual Property Enterprise Court Guide is the decision to appoint from October 2019 district judges to hear small intellectual property claims in Birmingham (see The New IPEC Guide 4 July 2019 NIPC News).

The cases that those district judges will be entitled to hear pursuant to CPR 63.27 will be claims for £10,000 or less for the infringement of intellectual property rights other than patents, registered and registered Community designs, semiconductor topographies and plant varieties. In Small IP Claims, I gave examples of cases that might be suitable for the small claims track and of others that would not.  The claimant must ask for the claim to be allocated to the small claims track in its particulars of claim and no objection should be raised by the defendant.   However, even if a case falls within the jurisdiction of the small claims track and the parties want it to stay there, the court may transfer it to the multitrack if it is likely to take more than a day to try or there is a difficult point of law or factual issue to decide.

Proceedings in the small claims track are governed by CPR Part 27 and the Part 27 Practice Direction as modified by CPR 63.27 and CPR 63.28 and paragraph 63.32 of the Part 63 Practice Direction.  Though successful claimants can obtain final injunctions and orders for delivery up of infringing materials as well as damages or accountable profits they cannot claim interim injunctions.  Liability and the amount of any damages or other pecuniary relief to be awarded are decided at the same time.  Directions are given automatically in accordance with Appendix B or C of the Part 27 Practice Direction after statements of case are exchanged and although the court has power under CPR 27.6 to hold preliminary hearings these are the exception rather than the rule. There is no provision for disclosure and the costs that may be recovered from an unsuccessful party are limited to court fees, £260 if an injunction is sought and a lawyer has been instructed, travelling expenses and loss of earnings up to £95 per witness and up to £750 in experts' fees.

The new IPEC guide indicates that those wishing to bring an IP case in the small claims track in Birmingham should use the electronic filing system.

Anyone wishing to discuss this article or small claims track IP litigation generally should call me on 020 7404 5252 or send me a message through my contact page.

"Confidence to Innovate: know your intellectual property" - Free Seminar in Birmingham, 14 March 2018

Jane Lambert

The Intellectual Property Office will hold a free seminar on intellectual property at the iCentrum in Birmingham between 08:30 and 12:00 on Wednesday 14 March 2018. The full name of the seminar is
Confidence to Innovate: know your intellectual property and you can register through Eventbrite.

According to the Eventbrite page, the seminar will show "how intellectual property underpins innovation and why strategic management of intellectual property assets is vital for business growth." The event is intended to inform business owners and their professional advisers.   

There will be speakers from the Department for International Trade which has an office in Birmingham, the law firm Browne Jacobson, patent agents Barker Brettell, Midlands Innovation which represents 8 local universities and the Intellectual Property Office itself.

The full address of the venue is

iCentrum
Innovation Birmingham Campus
Faraday Wharf Holt Street
Birmingham
B7 4BB

For further information call Emma Richards at the Intellectual Property Office on 0300 300 2000.

The Business and Property Courts in Birmingham

Birmingham City Centre

Author GavinWarrins
Reproduced with kind permission of the author
Source Wikipedia

Jane Lambert

For several years, the specialist judges of the Chancery and Queen's Bench Divisions in London, including those who sit in the Patents Court and Intellectual Property Enterprise Court ("IPEC") or hear other cases in the Intellectual Property List, have worked together in the Rolls Building. Since 2 Oct 2017, those judges together with the specialist judges in Birmingham and other major cities have been known collectively as "The Business and Property Courts". I wrote about the development in Launch of a Judicial Superhighway? 12 July 2017 IP Northwest, The Leeds Business and Property Courts 12 July 2017 IP Yorkshire and "Better than the M4 - The Judicial Superhighway" 2 Oct 2017 NIPC Severn.

According to Ed Pepperall QC, the national network of Business and Property Courts was a Birmingham idea.  He discussed its conception and development in The significance of the new Business and Property Courts – a view from the Bar.  His article is a contribution to a new introduction to the Business and Property Courts in Birmingham which was compiled by the Midlands Chancery and Commercial Bar Association and published by LexisNexis.

The introduction states that one of the advantages of the project will be the integration of the courts sitting in Birmingham with those in London:

"The B&PCs will be a single umbrella for business specialist courts across England and Wales. There will be a super-highway between the B&PCs at the Rolls Building and those in the regions to ensure that international businesses and domestic enterprises are equally supported in the resolution of their disputes."

It adds:

"Lord Justice Briggs’ reports have consistently recommended, and the Judicial Executive Board has accepted, that no case should be too big to be tried outside London. We should be able to provide an integrated Business & Property Courts structure across England & Wales. The aim is to achieve a critical mass of specialist judges sitting in each of the Business & Property regional centres so that all classes of case can be managed and tried in those regions. At the moment, many such cases migrate to the Rolls Building for a multitude of inadequate reasons. Once there, they are often tried by a section 9 circuit judge from the region whence the case originated. It should become easier to transfer regional cases back to the regions for management and trial.

Waiting times are considerably less in the regional centres than they are at the Rolls Building. In all the Business & Property Courts and Lists, a High Court judge can be provided to try an appropriate case outside London."

If specialist cases are tried regularly in Birmingham and the other major regional court centres more local practitioners will develop expertise in patents, registered and registered Community designs, semiconductor topographies and plant breeders' rights which are reserved by CPR 63.2 to the Patents Court and IPEC in London.  Although the Patents Court and IPEC Guides have always stated that the Assigned and Enterprise judges are ready and willing to sit outside London for the convenience of the parties and to save time and costs, a patents trial outside London does not happen very often. I can think of only one case, Hadley Industries Plc v Metal Sections Ltd and another [1998] EWHC Patents 284 where that happened and that was nearly 20 years ago. In that case, the claimant's solicitors were in Birmingham and the defendant's in Nottingham but the counsel (one of whom is now an assigned judge) came from London.

In addition to an overview and chapter by Mr Pepperall, the introduction contains profiles of the judges who sit regularly in the Birmingham Business and Property Courts and lists useful email addresses and phone numbers and useful practice notes such as "Where to start a claim" and other guidance.

Should anyone wish to discuss this article or the Business and Property Courts generally, he or she should call me on 020 7404 5252 during office hours or send me a message through my contact form.

Intellectual Property and Birmingham's Commonwealth Grounds Bid

The National Indoor Arena, Birmingham

Author Cls14 at English Wikipedia
Licence Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 unported

Jane Lambert

On Friday 29 Sept 2017 Karen Bradley MP, Secretary of State for Culture Media and Sport, announced that Birmingham would be the UK's candidate city to host the 2022 Commonwealth Games (see Press release Government confirms Birmingham bid for the Commonwealth Games 2022 29 Sept 2017).

The Commonwealth Games Federation ("the Federation"), the body that organizes the Commonwealth Games, describes them as " a unique, friendly, world class, multi-sports Games, which is held once every four years" (see Commonwealth Games FAQ).  The Games are open to athletes who are citizens of the 52 member states of the Commonwealth or the dependent territories of those member states. Over 5,000 athletes from 70 teams are expected to compete at the next Commonwealth Games in more than 15 different sports and over 250 events.

Cities that have hosted the Games report tangible and lasting benefits.  In the Commonwealth Games Manchester 2002 A Prize Worth Winning? the Manchester Commonwealth Games legacy report noted:

"The area which was once known as the workshop of the world had been in steady decline for the last 30 years. Large-scale de-industrialisation had a huge and devastating effect on employment Plans had been in place since the early nineties for the regeneration of this area. However, the hosting of the Games and the decision to site the stadium in this area was the catalyst needed. This was the focus which attracted a range of other initiatives to New East Manchester.
Is it working? This is a long-term regeneration strategy but one year after the Games how many of these lofty ambitions are now starting to be realised.
Will there be A New Town In The City?

• Over the next 15 years New East Manchester is expected to secure over £2 billion in public and private funding. 

• The momentum gained from the investment in world class sporting facilities at SportCity presents a new image to the commercial world. There has been a quantum shift in perceptions of the area from current and prospective residents and investors.

• The New Business Park development is expected to create over 6000 jobs. The development of a new retail centre, four star hotel and the new housing developments are expected to create 3,800 jobs for the people of East Manchester.

• Manchester City Football club as the new resident in the City of Manchester stadium is drawing nearly 40,000 people to the streets of East Manchester for each of its� home games.

• There is a renewed sense of pride in the area. New canalside homes are being built and the metro link lines lay to provide a rapid transport link to the city centre.

Without the impetus provided by the Games investment on this scale could not have been secured."

Like other major international sporting events, the Commonwealth Games will be funded:

"Through the sale of international broadcasting rights; corporate sponsorship programmes; ticket sales; licensing and merchandising sales; and contributions from Central and Local Government" (see Commonwealth Games FAQ).

I have not yet found any statistics as to how much each of those revenue  streams contribute to the Commonwealth Games but Professor John T Gourville of Harvard and Professor Marco Bertini of the London Business School estimated that of the US$2.8 billion revenues generated by the Sydney Olympics some $1.3 billion came from broadcasting, $892 million from domestic and international sponsorship and only $551 million from ticket sales (see Jane Lambert Olympics Association Right and London Olympics Association Right 31 July 2017 NIPC Law).

In order to protect those revenues, the Nairobi Treaty provides special protection for Olympic symbols. The International Olympic Committee requires the government of every host city to create new intellectual property rights known as "association rights" to prevent ambush marketing and other unauthorized exploitation of the Olympics (see Olympics Association Right and London Olympics Association Right supra). To implement the Nairobi Treaty, Parliament enacted the Olympic Symbol etc. (Protection) Act 1995. After the 2012 Games were awarded to London, Parliament passed the London Olympic Games and Paralympic Games Act 2006, London Olympic Games and Paralympic Games (Amendment) Act 2011 and Sunday Trading (London Olympic Games and Paralympic Games) Act 2012.

There is no similar treaty or legislation in the UK to protect the Commonwealth Games symbols but the Federation has registered the initials "CGF",  the words "COMMONWEALTH GAMES" and a device known as "The Bar" as UK trade marks for goods and services in classes 14, 16, 25, 38 and 41 with effect from the 9 Nov 2000 under registration numbers UK00002252153, UK00002252159 and UK00002252160. Clause 18.1 of the Federation's Bylaws requires it to establish and maintain The Bar" as an official emblem. All rights relating to that emblem shall belong exclusively to the Federation. It is also required by 18.2 to establish and maintain an official flag which will consist of The Bar set on a white background featuring "CGF" above "The Bar". All rights related to the flag shall also belong exclusively to the Federation. The Federation is permitted by clause 18.3 to establish a symbol or symbols of the Commonwealth Games. All rights related to such official symbol or symbols shall belong exclusively to the Federation.  The "Commonwealth Games Intellectual Property" is defined by clause 18.4 as:

"the intellectual property rights in the term "COMMONWEALTH GAMES", the initials "CGF", the Official Emblem ("The Bar"), the Official Flag, the Official Symbol or Symbols, event specific names, symbols and logos, intellectual property relating to the organisation, exploitation, broadcasting and/or reproduction of the Commonwealth Games by any means whatsoever and any other materials, products or works that a reasonable person would assume are related to or connected with the Commonwealth Games."

Clause 19.1.1 provides:

"The Commonwealth Games Intellectual Property is the exclusive property of the Federation and the Federation owns all rights concerning its use, organisation, exploitation, broadcasting and/or reproduction by any means whatsoever."

Subject to its Constitution, Bylaws and regulations, the Federation has the exclusive right to exploit the Commonwealth Games Intellectual Property in any way that it sees fit.  No other entity has any right in respect of the Commonwealth Games Intellectual Property or any representation of it without the express written approval of the Federation. However, the Executive Board of the Federation is authorized to assign or otherwise deal with the right to exploit commercially part or all of the Commonwealth Games Intellectual Property to one or more affiliated Commonwealth Games associations ("CGA") and/or the organizing committee ("OC") of a host city on such terms and conditions as it sees fit. The decision to assign or otherwise deal with the Commonwealth Games Intellectual Property is at the sole discretion of the Executive Board. Affiliated CGAs and OCs must vest in the Federation any intellectual property to which the Federation is entitled pursuant to the Federation's Constitution, Bylaws and regulations.

The Federation reserves the right under clause 19.2 "to exploit commercially all broadcast and/or narrowcast and/or any other form of communication rights relating to the transmission of the Commonwealth Games to the public, including those related to television, radio, internet and television and radio archives, on a worldwide basis."  It also reserves the right to exploit commercially sponsorship rights in relation to the Commonwealth Games and Commonwealth Games Intellectual Property on a worldwide basis though the Executive Board is authorized to assign any or all of those sponsorship rights to the Host CGA and/or the Organizing Committee on such terms and conditions as it sees fit. Sponsors of the Games or of the Queen's Baton relay may be named as official sponsors of those events.

Clause 19 B.1 of the Bylaws provides that a Commonwealth Games team is the exclusive property of the affiliated CGA in its territory and that the affiliated CGA owns all rights concerning its organization and exploitation by any means whatsoever. Commonwealth Games England has registered the image of a rampant lion above the words "We are ENGLAND" in colour and monochrome as a UK trade mark for a range of goods and services in classes 6, 9, 16, 18, 25, 28 and 41 with effect from 18 Sep 2009. That mark appears in the top left-hand corner of the home page of Commonwealth Games England. That same CGA has also registered "ENGLAND COMMONWEALTH GAMES DELHI 2010 OFFICIAL FRIEND" as a trade mark for the Delhi Games. A number of earlier marks have expired.

Subject to the written approval of the Federation, clause 19 B.3 of the Bylaws requires each affiliated CGA to incorporate The Bar along with a design of its own choosing to make its own emblem. Subject to the CGF Documents and the directions from time to time of the Executive Board, clause 19 B.4 assigns to all affiliated CGAs the right to exploit commercially the official emblem as incorporated into the emblem of the affiliated CGA within their own territories but not outside them.

Clause 19.C.1 of the Bylaws requires each OC to incorporate the Bar along with a design of its own choosing to make its own emblem.  The emblem of the Glashow Games consisted of the letter "G" in a number of circles above the words "GLASGOW 2014" and "XX Commonwealth Games" above The Bar against a green background.  The emblem is reproduced in the top left-hand corner of the home page of the Glasgow Games website. If the Federation chooses Birmingham to host the 2022 Commonwealth Games the emblem of those Games will be a heart surrounded by a burst of colours above the words "BIRMINGHAM 2022" and "XX COMMONWEALTH GAMES" over The Bar and the slogan "HEART OF THE UK, SOUL OF THE COMMONWEALTH". Birmingham City Council applied to register that emblem as a UK trade mark for goods and services in classes 6, 14, 16, 18, 25, 28 and 41 on 31 Aug 2017 under number UK00003253631. That mark appears in the centre of the home page of the Birmingham 2022 website.

When the Games came to Manchester in 2002 a number of intellectual property, contractual and commercial issues arose and I was asked to advise on some of them. I expect similar issues to arise in 2022. Anyone who wishes to discuss this post or any other issue relating to IP and sport should call me on 020 7404 5252 during office hours or send me a message through my contact form.

Innovate 2017 Conference

Jane Lambert

Innovate UK, the UK's innovation agency,  will hold its Innovate 2017 conference at the National Exhibition Centre in Birmingham on the 7 and 8 Nov 2017. This is billed as "an event creators, investors and entrepreneurs from all over the world", a "place to be inspired and network with future-focussed thought leaders" and a "chance to hear captivating speakers and see game-changing innovations for the first time."

The themes of the conference will be:

• Creating new worlds;
• Automating the wold;
• Securing the cyber world;
• Building the cities in a future world;
• Feeding the world;
• Creating an equal world;
• Curing the world; and
• Powering the world.

These themes will be explored according to this agenda.  

There will also be an innovation showcase - no details are provided but there is always an exhibition and competition by that name at the regional Venturefests, a support zone at which Digital Birmingham, Greater Birmingham and Solihull Local Enterprise Partnership and the University of Birmingham and other agencies will be present and an exhibition.

Surprisingly, the IPO is not yet listed in the support zone and the IPO has not yet included Innovate 2017 in the IPO Events Calendar. Specialist advice will be required on the optimal legal protection of any intellectual assets that may result from any collaboration between creators, investors and entrepreneurs, inspiration by thought-leaders and game-changing innovation and any agreements that they may negotiate among themselves.

Should anyone wish to discuss this article, intellectual asset protection, joint ventures and licensing or any other legal topic relating to innovation, he or she should call me on 020 7404 5252 during office hours or send me a message through my contact form.

Brexit and Batteries: Business Secretary's Visit to Birmingham

View of Birmingham

Author Jimmy Guano
Copyright released by author

Jane Lambert

The Rt Hon Greg Clark MP, the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, visited the University of Birmingham on 24 July 2017 with Andy Street, the Mayor of the West Midlands Combined Authority and his ministers, Claire Perry MP, Margo James MP and Lord Prior.

In a wide ranging speech (a transcript of which is here) he discussed

• Brexit, 
• the responses his department had received to the green paper Building our Industrial Strategy which the Prime Minister launched from Sci-Tech Daresbury on 22 Jan 2017 and I discussed in "Harnessing the Potential of the UK's Home Grown Inventors" - The Government's Proposed Industrial Strategy in my Inventors Club blog on 24 Jan 2017 and in Implementing the Industrial Strategy: IPO seeks new Business Support Policy Adviser on 25 Jan 2017 in IP North West;
• a strategy of investing in skills and infrastructure, and
• two new initiatives that lie in Dr Clark's energy portfolio: the Faraday Challenge to establish a "Battery Institute" in the UK and Upgrading OurEnergy SystemSmart Systemsand Flexibility Plan.

His remarks on Brexit were probably intended to be anodyne and they almost certainly were at the time he made them.  Among the things he said was: 

"People who voted for Brexit did not vote to be less prosperous." 

Since then we have had the results of a YouGov poll in which 61% of the sample who had voted to leave the EU thought that "significant damage to the British economy" was a price worth paying for bringing Britain out of EU. Some 39% of them believed that "causing you or members of your family to lose their job to be a price worth paying" (see Matthew Smith "The 'extremists' on both sides of the Brexit debate" 1 Aug 2017). An extraordinary statistic that one of Mr Clark's predecessor picked up in his article in the Mail Online on Sunday 6 Aug 2017).

Dr Clark also denied that "the vote for Brexit was part of a global move towards protectionism – for trading less, for retreating from the world." He emphasized the Prime Minister's approach "to be a global champion of free trade, is to want to increase the complex exchange of products and services between countries, not to aim for a sort of national self-sufficiency." I share that aspiration though it seems inconsistent with an insistence on controlling immigration thereby restricting the labour supply which is a crucial factor of production. Much will depend on the terms of any withdrawal agreement that we may reach with the remaining member states but crashing out of the Union without any kind of trade deal or even making one with our biggest and nearest trading partner on terms less favourable than those we enjoy now will make that objective harder to achieve, not easier.

Much less controversial was Dr Clark's announcement of the Faraday Challenge with an investment of £246 million into research, innovation and scale-up of battery technology. The project is explained in Simon Edmonds and Annie Wise's article The Faraday Challenge – part of the Industrial Strategy Challenge Fund.  The Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council ("EPSRC") has already invited proposals from UK university consortia to establish an internationally recognised virtual institute to lead in research, education and knowledge transfer.  The objective of the institute is to ensure that the UK remains at the forefront of novel battery technologies which will underpin its ability to lead in the area of energy storage. The institute is intended to provide a national hub to promote research and its application to automotive and other technologies. The EPSRC's request for proposals is here together with an FAQ on the invitation. Only universities that attended a preliminary meeting on 12 July 2017 (a list of which is here) can lead a consortium but other universities can join the consortium at any time.

As is usually the case with projects of this kind, there are likely to be all sorts of legal issues such as the terms of the contract between the consortium members, the ownership of any inventions that may be produced, the terms of any licences, the disclosure of know-how and show-how and the resolution of any future disputes that may arise between consortium members and third parties.  Anyone wishing to discuss those issues should call me on 020 7404 5252 or send me a message through my contact form.