Here is a taster of what is on offer:

• Facing up to the Facebook phenomenon – an employer’s guide to managing the risks
• Information security – how safe is your business?
• Structural reforms to the UK banking sector
• Electronic money
• Protecting the brand – trade mark registration and enforcement

If you would like to find out more or book a place, then please visit our events page. For details on the full seminar programme, please visit the seminars section on the Brodies website.

We hope to see you there!

Assuming the answer is “yes” then there are two options. You could move to Hong Kong, or you could investigate the new “patent box” tax proposal from the UK Government.

Before you get too excited the patent box proposal is only at consultation stage, and is unlikely to become law before 1 April 2013.

However, if it becomes law then it will provide significant tax breaks for businesses that have patent based income. Here is a link to the consultation paper. http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/consult_patent_box_stage2.htm

From my perspective here are the key points:

• It applies to patent protection and plant breeders’ rights (a fairly obscure IPR), but not to other forms of IP protection such as copyright.
• The 10% tax doesn’t apply to turnover, or profit, but rather is restricted to profit that is derived from the relevant patent.
• Profit derived from the patent means any profit over and above the “standard margin” of 15% (!!!!).
• The proposed regime is separate from, and will be in addition to, the R&D tax credit scheme (which is already fairly widely used, and which is being expanded).

I think the proposals are good news for UK business, and are absolutely excellent news if you are a patent attorney or a tax accountant.

I know from talking to SMEs that many doubt the value of patent protection.  The theory is that a patent gives you a monopoly over your invention for about 20 years. However, they are becoming increasingly the domain of huge corporations because it can be hard (expensive) to enforce your patent, and conversely quite easy for somebody who is throwing enough money at the litigation to burst your patent. Hopefully the patent box will make patents a more obviously worthwhile investment for SMEs.

So what do you do now?

The consultation document is a fairly difficult read, and unless you are a in technology heavy industry, or an accountant, I suggest you don’t wade in right now.

Brodies (meaning me) is responding on a few of its questions.

So the short answer is “Watch this space”. We will write updates on the patent box when the proposals are more mature.

In the meantime dream of 10% tax.

First on Thursday 5th May John McGonagle and Iain Rutherford are presenting a seminar called “Contract clauses guaranteed to get you into trouble…and how to fix them”, The seminar is in Brodies’ offices in Glasgow, with breakfast from 0830 and the seminar properly kicking off at 0900. 

There are still places available.

You can use this link to register for this seminar, and the others seminars mentioned below.

All the seminars are free to attend.

John and Iain are re-running the seminar in Edinburgh on Thursday 12th May (same times).

Finally Iain is doing a separate seminar with Cambell Newall, Trade Mark Agent of Marks and Clerk and Robin Gribbon, Forensic Accountant, HW Forensic.  This seminar in called ” Protecting the brand – Trademark registration and enforcement”. It’s in Edinburgh on Wednesday 11th May starting at 1730 and running to 1900.

Hope to see you there.

Here is a link to an mp3 recording of the piece – its about 10 minutes long.

Douglas on Radio Scotland re iPods

Some Key Points (that weren’t fully made in the interview):-

1. When you “buy” a music download you are actually buying a contractual right (licence right) to do certain specified things with that dowload. 

2, The contract (licence) will set out what you can do, e.g. listen to it in private, burn it to up to 5 devices etc.

3. If what you are doing is not expressley permitted under the contract (licence) then you are infringing copyright. 

4. So for example using your iPod to run a karoke event at your place of work would likely be a copyright infringement.

5. This is not a new model, the same rules applied to LPs. (Remember those? – I still listen to mine.) 

6. The iTunes contract is subject to California law, California Courts, and allows Apple to unilaterally change your rights to use the download.  Nice for them, not so good for you.  (To be fair the other on-line music stores are not much better).

7. Format shifting is not legal in the UK (it’s copyright infringement), but it’s low risk.

Happy listening.

Apple, iTunes and iPod are all registered trade marks of Apple Inc. “iPayTooMuch” is a lifestyle choice by our Martin.

This declaration isn’t just because I’m an embarrassing sycophantic crawler. No, it’s also to remind myself that going online and insulting my employer is rarely a good move.

In November last year Sarah Baskerville, a Department for Transport employee, posted on her Twitter account that a course leader was “mental”, and posted links to tweets attacking government “spin” and Whitehall waste.

The Daily Mail discovered the tweets and ran with a headline “Oh please, stop this twit from Tweeting, someone” and was critical of Baskerville because she worked as a civil servant at the Department of Transport and used Twitter to describe some aspects of her job and her feelings towards her work. The Independent on Sunday also carried a similar story.

You’d think that Baskerville would have tried to let the whole thing blow over, in the hope that her employer didn’t decide to investigate whether she was in breach of her contract of employment. Instead, and quite bizarrely, Baskerville complained to the Press Complaints Commission (“PCC”), arguing that she could have a “reasonable expectation” of privacy in the tweets published on the micro-blogging site, and that the reporting was misleading.

The Daily Mail and Independent on Sunday argued that the messages were public and could be read by anyone.

The PCC cleared the Daily Mail and the Independent on Sunday of breaching privacy by publishing the tweets, and my own reaction is that it’s difficult to see how the PCC could have reached any other decision. Baskerville was tweeting to over 700 followers, and Twitter’s own Terms of Service state: “The Content you submit, post, or display will be able to be viewed by other users of the Services and through third party services and websites (go to the account settings page to control who sees your Content.)”

On Friday Baskerville published her own version of events.  While I feel sorry that she has undergone stress, I get the feeling she still hasn’t quite grasped the point that the social media revolution has fundamentally changed what is meant by “private”.  Separating your personal and private life online is becomingly increasingly difficult.

If you publicly insult your employer you can expect repercussions.

Did I tell you how much I love Brodies?

Here is an mp3 extract of “my” bit of the show.

Douglas on Radio Scotland 14 December 2010 (extract)

If you think you have been the victim of idenity theft then go to the CIFAS web site at: http://www.cifas.org.uk/ for some practical advice and in order to put your accounts on to “high alert”.

The U.S. Government is claiming that Assange will be indicted and face trial for disseminating confidential information, possibly in contravention of the U.S. Espionage Act, or under “conspiracy or trafficking in stolen property”. However, sabre-rattling aside, federal prosecutors may find it difficult to actually identify a legal basis upon which to pursue Assange. Charges of violation of the Espionage Act aren’t always successful in these circumstances – see for example the famous “Pentagon Papers” case of 1972 involving the New York Times.

From a UK law perspective, the most immdiately relevant aspect of the Wikileaks saga is the Direct Denial of Service (“DDoS”) attacks. As I briefly mentioned last week, while the means, motives, and targets of a DDoS attack vary, they generally consist of concerted efforts by a person or persons to prevent an internet site or service from functioning efficiently, temporarily or indefinitely. The Wikileaks websites are experiencing very high levels of DDoS attacks from unknown sources, and supporters of Wikileaks have retaliated by attacking sites such as mastercard.com, and today, the Swedish Prosecution Authority’s site. Governments and corporations across the world are now preparing for what the tabloids are referring to as “cyber war”!

Beyond the sensational soundbites, DDoS attacks are clearly illegal in a lot of jurisdictions. In the UK, the Police And Justice Act 2006 updated the Computer Misuse Act 1990, in order to make it a criminal offence to carry out “any unauthorised act in relation to a computer” where the person “has the requisite intent and the requisite knowledge” to carry out the act. The requisite intent is to carry out the act by: i) impairing the operation of any computer; (ii) preventing or hindering access to any program or data held in any computer; or (iii) impairing the operation of any program or the readability of any data. The intent need not be directed at any particular computer or any particular program or data, and the wording is wide enough that paying someone else to launch an attack will still be a crime, with a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison. The U.S has similar laws in place, and a man was jailed last year for instigating DDoS attacks against Scientology websites . What will happen next is anybody’s guess.

Sweden’s move to have Assange detained in the United Kingdom for now, on whatever charge, provides time for a case to be fashioned against him. In light of the Wikileaks affair, and the likely high-profile casualties of the “cyber war” in the weeks to come, the pressure to charge Assange is only going to become more intense. Watch this (cyber)space!

Earlier this year we commissioned a major survey of local authority Chief Executives and Chief Finance Officers which provides a fascinating insight into how Scottish Councils might respond to budget constraints by embracing new models for service delivery.

The results of the survey will feed into the central themes of what promises to be a lively discussion:

1. To what extent can shared services (in their various formats), outsourcing and even off-shoring reduce the cost of public sector services in Scotland?
2. Is it time for a radical shake up? Can Scotland learn from models used elsewhere in the UK?

Our panel of speakers includes:

• Jonathan Pryce, Director for Improving Public Services, Scottish Government
• George Black, Chief Executive, Glasgow City Council
• Dave Watson LLB, Unison
• Brian Devlin, Business Director, AMEY
• Douglas Mathie, Partner, Transformation & Shared Services Group, Brodies LLP

Following the presentations there will be a debate chaired by Jackie McGuire Head of our Transformation and Shared Services Group.

The event starts at 0830 with breakfast and finishes at 1300 with a buffet lunch.

The event is at the Barcelo hotel in Stirling (near the railway station).

http://www.barcelo.com/BarceloHotels/en-GB/Hotels/UnitedKingdom/Scotland/Stirling-Highland/Home.htm 

If you want to attend then click the Accept button below.

Accept

Victoria is a returning Scot.

You can read more about her, and see her photo, here.

Once she gets over the culture shock of the move back Victoria will start blogging here.

Will is a corporate lawyer : dealing with murders and acquisitions etc.  However,  he has a background in technology.  In paticular in relation to funding technology companies, setting up technology parks/institutes and university spin-out work. 

He was also named as ”Corporate Lawyer of the Year” at the Law Awards of Scotland 2009/2010

You can read more about Will, and see his photo,  here. 

I have persuaded Will to become one of our bloggers – so hopefully you can read some of his stuff fairly soon.

p.s. – I know it should be “Mergers and Acquisitions.” My typo is a homage to American Psycho 

p.p.s – Will is not a Psycho.