Archive for October, 2009

A declaration of war between Nokia and Apple

Friday, October 23rd, 2009

This appears to be nothing short of a declaration of war between Nokia and Apple which potentially paves the way for extensive and prolonged litigation.

The action filed in Delaware, USA, seeks compensation for infringement of 10 “essential” patents that it argues are “fundamental to making devices which are compatible with one or more of the GSM, UMTS and wireless LAN standards”. This has parallels with previous legal disputes, in particular between Nokia and Qualcomm. That litigation focussed principally upon the extent to which certain patents were in fact essential. Here, the battle ground may be more upon whether Nokia’s patents are infringed and of course whether they are valid.

Nokia’s press release suggests that the litigation was preceded by a period of negotiation between the companies. Its decision to get heavy may therefore be an attempt to put commercial pressure on Apple in those negotiations.

The more interesting long-term issue is whether other holders of essential patents will follow suit and bring claims against Apple.

Nick McDonald

Posted by Nick McDonald
0115 976 6198
nmcdonald@brownejacobson.com

VN:F [1.9.11_1134]
Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)

Schools delay of hammer attack inquiry was unacceptable, say the courts – what knock on effect will this have?

Friday, October 23rd, 2009

Insurers advised the Ridgeway School in Wroughton against co-operating with Swindon Local Safeguarding Children Board in carrying out a serious case review into the attack on student Henry Webster in 2007.  Their reasoning? They thought it would effect their liability.

The judge said the purpose of statutory case reviews was to learn serious lessons to prevent similar incidents – the review was eventually completed but some months after the attack and was found to be unsatisfactory.  The judge has today ordered it be carried out again.

Schools have to weigh up their obligations to both insurers and the safeguarding board because they must balance any potential liability in a negligence claim against their pervasive safeguarding obligations.  It begs the question, how should schools react when their insurers start ‘advising’ how and when investigations should be carried out?

Mark Blois

Posted by Mark Blois
0115 976 6087
mblois@brownejacobson.com

VN:F [1.9.11_1134]
Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)

Formal lessons to start at 6 – progress or counter-productive?

Friday, October 16th, 2009

A review of primary education announced today that there is no evidence that children who start formal education before the age of 5 gain any advantage over their peers. The study suggested it can actually do some harm.

The Cambridge Primary Review proposes extending the Early Years Foundation Stage past the age of 5 bringing English children in line with many European countries, where standards are often higher. The review stops short of stating compulsory schooling should start at 6, but does open up the debate on the subject.

Vernon Coaker said the government is already reforming primary education and so feels that delaying the starting age would be counter-productive.

Mark Blois

Posted by Mark Blois
0115 976 6087
mblois@brownejacobson.com

VN:F [1.9.11_1134]
Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)

Actimel no longer 'scientifically proven'

Thursday, October 15th, 2009

On Wednesday, the ASA upheld a complaint against a claim made in an advert for the product Actimel – that it was ”scientifically proven to help support your kids’ defences”. The ASA has ordered that the advert be withdrawn.

Danone said they had referred to Actimel as being “scientifically proven” in their ads since November 2007, and that the basis for that claim was a significant body of published scientific evidence that showed that Actimel supported the natural defences of different age groups, including children. They argued that each individual study did not need to demonstrate multiple health benefits, as long as they pointed towards a positive effect for Actimel overall. Indeed, Clearcast had approved an earlier claim made in 2006 that stated “Every morning I like to give my kids Actimel to help support their bodies’ natural defences”. Clearcast’s nutritional consultant was satisfied that the evidence showed that Actimel could support the body’s defences in that particular age group.

The ASA said that the claim in the advert clearly related to healthy children of school age. The ASA said that Danone’s evidence either related to children of other ages, children already in ill health, or did not relate directly to children’s health, or the sample sizes were too small, or the results were not statistically significant. The ASA were concerned that the evidence did not show that all children would see a benefit from consuming Actimel

Who is the victim?
Is it the public who have been misled for (it seems) years – or is it the Brand Owner who is simply trying to sell a “healthy option”?

Fiona Carter

Posted by Fiona Carter
0115 976 6224
fcarter@brownejacobson.com

VN:F [1.9.11_1134]
Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)

Failing schools 'to be Academies'

Friday, October 9th, 2009

Mr Gove, Shadow Schools Secretary, stated yesterday he does not wish ‘another generation of our poorest children to have their future blighted by failing schools’. Interestingly, the Tories believe their plan of focusing on less failing schools is the way the next generation will benefit.

By concentrating on the worst performing schools – a mere 56 as opposed to Labour’s National Challenge Scheme which currently includes 270 schools – Mr Gove plans to draft in heads who are familiar with turning schools round. Further to this, he wants the most outstanding institutions to be exempt from Ofsted inspection in order that underperforming schools can be targeted.

The question, with which we are left, is what will happen to those schools that are neither failing nor excelling?

Mark Blois

Posted by Mark Blois
0115 976 6087
mblois@brownejacobson.com

VN:F [1.9.11_1134]
Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)

The "Pitchers" case settles

Friday, October 9th, 2009

We reported on this page on 2 September that Diageo was suing Sainsbury’s over the supermarket’s alleged copying of its “Pimms” branded product with its own “Pitchers” branded product.

High profile brand owners have traditionally been reluctant to take on supermarkets, who of course provide the major retail outlets with many of their products. We said that brand owners would be watching this case very closely indeed, as if Diageo were successful then it could encourage others to come forward with claims.

However, it would appear that Sainsbury’s and Diageo have amicably settled their differences out of court, with an agreement to rebrand (but not rename) the “Pitchers” product. The settlement will avoid further publicity for the case, and perhaps enable Sainsbury’s and Diageo to do business without the wedge of ongoing litigation between them. More significantly, the settlement avoids the risk of setting a dangerous legal precedent. Nevertheless, there is a chance that such a precedent will still be set by the Tesco and Next case, reported on 22 September.

Look at the new label on our link with the higher profile sainsbury logo and  orange segment  .
Is that enough to prevent consumers being confused between the Diago original and Sainsbury new product?-

Looking at the new label above (on the right) with the higher profile sainsbury logo and  orange segment; Is this enough to prevent consumers being confused between the Diageo original and Sainsbury’s new product?

Fiona Carter

Posted by Fiona Carter
0115 976 6224
fcarter@brownejacobson.com

VN:F [1.9.11_1134]
Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)

BNP teacher ban 'to be examined'

Thursday, October 1st, 2009

Ed Balls has asked Maurice Smith, the former chief inspector of schools, to review provisions designed to prevent racism in schools.

Mr Smith’s report will examine existing safeguards and, controversially, consider whether association with organisations that promote racism should be grounds for barring someone from teaching. Teacher’s union NASUWT backed the commitment “to keep racism and BNP activity out of schools”. Whilst many people will support a zero tolerance approach to racism, is there not a risk of promoting sympathy for BNP members?

It will be interesting to see whether the report’s recommendations are radical enough to suggest an automatic bar.

Mark Blois

Posted by Mark Blois
0115 976 6087
mblois@brownejacobson.com

VN:F [1.9.11_1134]
Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)