04/23/2011
Kevin OuttersonDoes anyone see a conflict of interest when the world’s richest patent owners fly judges from all over the world to a 3-day conference in Brussels? Here’s the lede:
Bringing nearly 100 judges from more than 30 countries to Europe. Sharing experiences among patent-experienced judges from many countries and between the patent bench and bar.
This gathering won’t hear from patent skeptics. The Platinum sponsors are Akin Gump, Du Pont, ExxonMobil, Finnegan, P&G and Johnson & Johnson. The program committee is unabashedly pro-IP. No voice for the public domain; MSF, Oxfam, Jamie Love, Sean Flynn and other public interest voices aren’t on the program.
I’m fine with IP maximalists holding conferences; I’m worried when judges from around the planet are wined and dined while hearing only a pro-IP point of view.
Interested in attending? It will set you back US$1,475 plus travel, hotel and food. But you are promised access to the judges:
Conference attendees will have an opportunity to share experiences with nearly one hundred judges from around the world. Beginning with a welcome reception on Monday, judges will attend sessions and social events with intellectual property law attorneys and other interested parties.
Sounds like buying social access to IP judges to me.
h/t to patent docs
by Mark Spohr on April 24th, 2011 at 10:47
It is discouraging for many large companies who have invested large sums of money in buying legislators to pass the laws they need to generate large profits to have these laws upended by some random judge.
It is easy enough to buy the executive and legislative branches of government but the judicial branch is more difficult. This looks like a creative way of bridging this gap and preserving profits.
Stieglitz: “Government of the 1%, by the 1% and for the 1%”
http://www.vanityfair.com/society/features/2011/05/top-one-percent-201105?currentPage=all&wpisrc=nl_wonk