The Retailer SUMMER 16_v7

retail news

Some commentators have called for the complete abolition of the threats regime. Whilst the underlying purpose of the threats regime, of protecting traders from abusive claims by IP holders which would cause damage to businesses, is a necessary check, there is a little doubt that the current regime has introduced uncertainty into this area, and an element of risk that could have the effect of preventing IP holders from properly asserting their rights at an early stage, which in turn may prevent the early resolution of disputes. The bill provides much needed further clarity to the area of unjustified threats; however, IP holders will still need to give very careful thought to the precise content of any letters to suspected infringers so as not to fall foul of the proposed amended legislation, particularly if the Courts continue to construe the exceptions very narrowly. Whether the Bill ever gets passed is unclear at the moment, but as is evident, the law relating to threats is complicated. However, even as matters stand, retailers should: • Carefully consider any communications from IP holders threat- ening further action • Take appropriate legal advice regarding a threats action • Don’t just roll-over – a simple notification of a potential threats action may resolve the issue

“The bill provides much needed further clarity to the area of unjustified threats”

Daniel Keating is a solicitor in the Commercial Litigation Team at Hill Dickinson LLP, specialising in IP disputes.

DANIEL KEATING // Daniel.keating@hilldickinson.com // www.hilldickinson.com

retailer | summer 2016 | 39