Patent and Trademarks in the UK Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2250 words

Patent and Trademarks in the UK - Essay Example The first test is whether modifying the invention has a significant effect on the performance of the patented invention. The second test is whether an expert in that particular field of the invention would consider the language describing the patent as the strict essential for distinguishing the invention. Finally, there is a consideration whether it would not have have been obvious to an expert in a related field that the modification made on the invention would not have any effect on the patented invention. Later, these principles were affirmed in the case of Kirin-Amgen Inc and Others v. Hoechst Marion Roussel Limited and Others. 7 Crown, The Patents Rules and fees 2007 (as amended) Patents Legal Section, (2014). accessed 16th April 2015. 14 Thompson Reuters Legal Solution, Patents, trademarks, copyright and designs in the UK (England and Wales): overview Accessed 16th April 2015. 14 Ainurul R & Birgitte A, Are There "Institutional Failures" in Intellectual Property Marketplaces? Evidence from Information and Communication Technology Firms, (International Journal of Management, 2013) 723. 15 Mercer J, A mark of distinction: Branding and trademark law in the UK from the 1860s Business History 2010 52(1) 17. Accessed 16th April 2015. 16 The effects of globalization, technological advancement, and the ensuing business competition necessitate the need for individuals and businesses to protect their intellectual property against infringement.1 The legislation provides qualifications and procedure for registering patents and trademarks, as well as remedies for the proprietor in case of violation of right. This document focuses on the patent and trademark registration process. This study focuses on the situation in which the registrar may decline the registration of patents and trademarks if previous similar inventions or signs are available at the filing date.

Teams in organizations Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words

Teams in organizations - Essay Example Cross-functional teams include employees from different work areas who come together to complete a particular task. Such teams are usually effective in bringing people from various specialties and diverse areas together. Virtual teams rely on technology to bring together physically dispersed members to accomplish a task. The technologies allow members to collaborate online even when they are physically separated (Daria, 2015). Teams are important in organizations because they bring together member from diverse backgrounds and experiences hence wider points of view. The diversity in teams enhances decision-making, performance, and productivity. Teamwork ensures that tasks can be done faster and efficiently because many people are involved. However, there are some disadvantages of using teams in organizations. Conflicts may arise within teams because of individual difference and affect the organization. Communication may also be problematic due to diverse backgrounds and experiences of members hence lower productivity. Teams can also suppress individual creativity and thinking. The most effective teams within my organization are the cross-functional and self-managed teams. The diversity within cross-functional teams allows people from diverse specialties to exchange information, develop ideas and solve problems. Such teams are effective because early coordination among various specialties enhances innovation, speed, and quality. According to Kozlowski & Bell (2001), the ability of self-managed teams to work on their own without supervision increases their efficiency (p.

The Rights For Freedom Of Aboriginal Australians History Essay

The Rights For Freedom Of Aboriginal Australians History Essay This essay focuses on the rights for freedom for the Aboriginal Australians who have lived in Australia for at least 40,000 years. The arrival of the Europeans in 1788 resulted in the significant change to traditional Aboriginal customs and way of life. Up until 1901 colonial governments and communities formally and informally discriminated against Aboriginal people (Rights and freedoms, 1945- the present, n.d.). Three significant events that focus on this are the Day of Mourning, 1938, The Freedom Ride, 1965, and the Aboriginal Tent Embassy, 1972. The first of these events took place in 1938, which was the Day of Mourning. On this day of the 150th anniversary of the settlement of Australia by the British, an organised Aboriginal rights movement had been established. On this day the British celebrated. The Aboriginal group did not celebrate but organised a conference and protest in the Australian Hall, Sydney and planned a march from the Town Hall (Rights and freedoms, 1945- the present, n.d.). The second event was the 1965 Freedom Ride, which involved a group of students from the University of Sydney who began a journey by bus to several country towns in New South Wales. The purpose of this was to gather information, publicize the conditions and discrimination of the Aboriginal people living in these towns. This was lead by Charles Perkins (Rights and freedoms, 2011). The third event was the establishing in Canberra, 1972, of the Tent Embassy, to protest against a court decision over mining operations on Aboriginal land. Angered by the announcement, Aboriginal groups decided on Australia Day, 1972, that four representatives from Sydney would travel to Canberra to protest the decision (Korff, J., 2012). The Day of Mourning events began when William Cooper in 1933, who founded the Australian Aborigines League in Melbourne in 1932, organised a petition to be forwarded to King George V. He also sent a petition to the Australian government in a request that they take control of Aboriginal affairs. However, the requests of the Aboriginal community were ignored. This prompted Cooper to take on a different approach, one which would ensure that it could not be ignored. On 13 November 1937, he called for 26th January, 1938 to be commemorated as a Day of Mourning. The purpose was to make the non- Indigenous population more aware of how the Australian Aboriginals had been discriminated against throughout history and to encourage them to meet their requests for equal citizenship (The Day of Mourning, Background, 2012). While the government acknowledged receipt of the petition, they gave no indication that it would be forwarded to the King. So on November 12, 1937, Cooper called a meeting in Melbourne, at which Jack Patten, the President of the Aborigines Progressive Association and William Ferguson, also a member, described life in the Aboriginal communities. Doug Nicholls, the most senior Aboriginal leader in Australia, also spoke. The following day quotes from their speeches appeared in the Argus, a Melbourne newspaper. At that meeting Cooper called for a Day of Mourning and a protest in Sydney to be held on the following 26th of January. Plans for the observance of Aboriginals throughout Australia for a Day of Mourning simultaneously with the 150th anniversary celebrations in Sydney, were announced by the Australian Aborigines League (The Day of Mourning, Background, 2012). The Australian Aboriginal groups refused to participate in the re-enactment of the First Fleets landing at Farm Cove in Sydney, which was the focus of the British people celebrations. Little attention was paid to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples during the celebrations. All colonies except South Australia proclaimed Anniversary Day a public holiday and celebrated Australias 100th birthday, even if Australia as a nation did not exist at that stage. Australian Aboriginals boycotted celebrations, but very few noticed. They were excluded from public life and largely ignored in such considerations of national identity. When the sesquicentenary of British settlement took place in 1938, organised groups of Australians Aboriginals decided to make a point (Rights and freedoms, 1945 to present, n.d.). The Aboriginal groups planned a march from the Sydney Town Hall. When the groups were refused permission to meet at the Town Hall, they decided to march to the Australian Hall in Elizabeth Street. Even though this was to be a meeting of only Indigenous Australians, they were refused entry to the Australian Hall through the front door and were forced to enter through a rear door. The meeting was the first really effective all-Indigenous civil rights meeting in Australian history (Rights and freedoms, 1945- to present, n.d.). Five days after the Day of Mourning, William Ferguson and John Patten led an Aboriginal delegation to meet with the Prime Minister, Joseph Lyons.   This was the first time an Aboriginal delegation had been received by the Prime Minister. They presented Lyons with a ten-point program designed to establish equality for Aboriginal peoples. Some of the points that were put forward were, proposals for the takeover by the Federal Government of Aboriginal affairs,  aid for education, housing, improved working conditions and land purchases for Aboriginal peoples and also improved  social welfare issues (Day of Mourning, 2012). The ten-point program was unsuccessful but the Aboriginal protest groups continued their fight. In January 1939, William Cooper wrote to the National Missionary Council of Australia to ask for help in promoting a permanent Aborigines Day.   The Council agreed to help with the funding and promotion. The Sunday after Australia Day was chosen as the date. The first Aboriginal Sunday was celebrated on 28 January 1940.   This celebration only continued for 15 years. The Day of Mourning is often seen as the beginning of Aboriginal protests using European methods of seeking attention. Although they didnt get the results they were after, Aboriginal peoples were able to draw further attention to their plight, which resulted in additional support for their campaign to achieve equality (Day of Mourning, 2012). What we know today as the 1965 Freedom Ride had been inspired by the action of the same name by the civil rights movement in the USA earlier that decade. In much of rural Australia at that time, dispossessed, poverty stricken Aboriginal people were confronted with petty racism within these towns by local people and businesses (Gary Foley, 2012). In 1965, a young Aboriginal student called Charles Perkins, from the Northern Territory, who was a student at a Sydney University, became involved at the university with a group of students from an organization called Student Action for Aborigines, (SAFA). The group included Ann Curthoys, who would later write a history of these events, Jim Spigelman who would later become Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of New South Wales and Darce Cassidy, an arts student who was also a part-time reporter for the ABC. With these members of SAFA, Perkins would go on a bus tour into some of the most racist country towns in northern NSW and into history (Co llaborating for Indigenous Rights, 2008). In these towns Aboriginal people were routinely barred from clubs, swimming pools and cafes. They were frequently refused service in shops and refused drinks in hotels. The students demonstrated against racial discrimination practised at the Walgett Returned Services League, the Moree Baths, the Kempsey Baths and the Bowraville picture theatre. They not only challenged these practices, but they ensured that reports of their demonstrations and local towns peoples hostile responses were available for news broadcasts on radio and television. Outside of Walgett, Jim Spigelman trained his home movie camera on the convoy of cars which followed the bus out of town at night and ran it off the road. Darce Cassidy recorded the angry conversations and filed a report to the ABC (Collaborating for Indigenous Rights, 2008). Captured on tape was the vice-president of the Walgett Returned Service League Club who said he would never allow an Aboriginal to become a member. Such evidence was beamed into the living rooms of Australians with the evening news. It exposed an endemic racism. Film footage shocked city viewers, adding to the mounting pressure on the government. In Moree (northern New South Wales), which was known to be a town where segregation was practised, the students focused on the swimming pool. The pool became a scene of tension and aggression as they attempted to assist Aboriginal children from the reserve outside town to enter the pool while locals angrily defended the race-based ban (Collaborating for Indigenous Rights, 2008). Overseas newspapers such as the  New York Times  reported on the Freedom Riders and their reception in New South Wales country towns. Charles Perkins reported these events to a crowd of 200 attending the 1965 Federal Council for the Advancement of Aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders conference in Canberra. Conference goers heard that one positive result of the students activities was that the NSW Aborigines Welfare Board publicly announced that it would spend sixty-five thousand pounds on housing in Moree (Collaborating for Indigenous Rights, 2008). In the ensuing public debate, urban public knowledge of racial discrimination grew, some soul searching went on in the country towns, racial segregation was challenged and in some cases ended, and alternative ideas of inclusion, equality, and full citizenship rights were much debated. When the students returned to Sydney, they followed through by taking their research to the state authorities, contributing to inquiries and the campaign for the 1967 referendum that would grant Aboriginal people equal rights as citizens (Rights and freedoms, 2012). Furthermore, the outcome of the 1967 referendum stated that citizenship was granted and Aboriginal people had the right to vote, of which is not strictly true. This was granted in 1962, when the  Commonwealth Electoral Act  was amended so that all Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people could vote. Unlike the situation for other Australians, voting was not compulsory (Rights and freedoms, 1945- the present, n.d.). The lead up to the establishment of the Aboriginal Tent Embassy started in the 1970s, inspired by the Black Power movement in the United States. Aboriginal people were now politically very active. For example, in Sydney, Australias first Aboriginal legal and medical services were founded and Aboriginal people demanded  land rights  for the areas that they lived on. Land rights were considered the key to economic independence, and land the base to generate resources and employment. To many it came as a shock when in April 1971 the Northern Territory Supreme Court decided against Aboriginal people and in favour of a mining company to have access to Aboriginal land. Australian common law, the justice concluded, did not recognise Aboriginal land rights (Reconciliation Australia, 2012). Aboriginal people travelled to Canberra to ask the Prime Minister at the time, William McMahon, to give them title to their land, royalties from the mining operations, a right to consent to or reject further development on their land, and the land to be returned once mining operations finished (Korffs, J., 2012). The Prime Minister promised to look at ways to protect Aboriginal interests, but nine months later, on the eve of Australia Day 1972, announced that, instead of granting Aboriginal people title to their land, his government would ask Aboriginal people to apply for new fifty year general purpose leases over such land. They would also have to prove that they put that land to reasonable economic and social use. Aboriginal people had no title to mineral and forest rights (Reconciliation, Australia, 2012). Angered by this announcement, Aboriginal people gathered in Sydney and decided that on Australia Day 1972 four representatives would travel to Canberra to protest against this decision. They were Michael Anderson from Walgett, Billy Craigie from Moree, Bert Williams from Cowra, and Tony Coorey from Tweed Heads. The four erected a beach umbrella surrounded by placards in front of Parliament House proclaiming it an Aboriginal Embassy (Korffs, J. 2012). A policeman on duty at the time reportedly asked the activists how long the protest would last. When told the Embassy would stay until Aboriginal Australians had land rights, the police officer replied that could be forever (Korffs, J., 2012). Key figures of the embassy, including Roberta (Bobbi) Sykes, Gary Foley and Michael Anderson, also helped to establish the Tent Embassy in the middle of the night on Australia Day in 1972. As well as highlighting significant symbolic goals, the embassy leaders had a list of practical demands that they wanted to negotiate. The demands were rejected and the police removed the tents and arrested a number of activists (Rights and freedoms, 1945- the present, n.d.). When Parliament resumed in mid February 1972, there were 11 tents on the lawns opposite Parliament House. Leader of the Opposition, Gough Whitlam, accepted an invitation from Embassy organisers to visit the tents and speak with representatives. This gave it further recognition and legitimacy. Aboriginal journalist and activist John Newfong explained the purpose of the Embassy in an article in the Identity. Dr HC Coombs, chairman of the Council for Aboriginal Affairs, also accepted an invitation to speak with Embassy protestors (Collaborating for Indigenous Rights, 2008). In March 1972, Embassy leaders addressed 200 Australian National University students, asking for their support for the protest. Canberra university students billeted Aboriginal protestors, joined the crowd on the lawns, and opened a bank account for the Embassy through the Student Representative Council.  Ã‚  Law students were invited to examine the legal position of the Embassy. Overseas visitors to the national capital, such as members of the Canadian Indian Claims Commission, visited the Aboriginal Embassy, as did Soviet diplomats and an Irish Republican (Collaborating for Indigenous Rights, 2008). This year on January 26th, 2012, the Tent Embassy held its 40th anniversary, making it the longest site of political agitation. The Embassy helped in the struggle for land rights and to end racial discrimination, sadly this is still an ongoing struggle (Korffs, J., 2012). These three events all engaged in a fight for freedom, equality and human rights. These three events all protested for land rights, rights for freedom against discrimination and citizenship rights. Between 1900 and the 1960s there was some progress in the campaign for Aboriginal citizenship rights, but the gains were usually subject to strict conditions. In 1949 the Commonwealth granted voting rights to Aboriginal ex-servicemen and ex-servicewomen (Civics and Citizenship Education, 2012). At the time of Federation, Aboriginals were excluded from the rights of Australian citizenship, including the right to vote, the right to be counted in a  census  and the right to be counted as part of an  electorate. In addition, they were not subject to Commonwealth laws. This then brought together various groups of peoples who would be involved in numerous protests over the years within these three events, and be the voice of the Aboriginal people (Civics and Citizenship Education, 2012). These three events signify what the Australian Aboriginal peoples went through and are still going through. This theme of the struggle for full citizenship rights is a significant and continuing part of Australias history. Constitutional recognition of Australian Aboriginals is a significant step towards building a nation based on strong relations and mutual respect, which recognises the unique and special place of our first people (Towards Constitutional Recognition of Indigenous Australians, 2012). The recognition of Aboriginal people in the Constitution is another step in that journey, a step that is critical in our efforts to close the gap (Towards Constitutional Recognition of Indigenous Australians, 2012). Educating people will lead to the understanding of Australian Aboriginals history and the struggle they have been through and are still going through. Only then will reconciliation take place within Australia. Therefore, by incorporating Australian Aboriginal peoples true past history into the Australian Curriculum will be a positive start for young people to gain knowledge and understanding of our wonderful Australian Aboriginal people, and what they went through. The Australian Curriculum states that it will ensure that all young Australians will be given this opportunity. Therefore, by gaining deeper understanding and knowledge, they will begin to appreciate Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander histories and cultures, their significance for Australia, and the impact that these have had, and continue to have, on our world Cross-curriculum priorities (The Shape of the Australian Curriculum, 2012).

Speed Limit :: essays research papers

Should Highway Speed Limits Be Increased? Should highway speed limits be increased? Should we strike down every sign that the government posts and uses to regulate the speed limit on the thousands of highways around the country? Should we trust the driving ability of each and every person to drive within a reasonably safe speed? The response that most people lean toward is one of negativity. People automatically assume that the speeds presently posted on our highways are there only for our own protection. People do not believe that the government is knowingly implementing speed limits that are below a safe speed for a given roadway. It is true that the government claims to set speed limits that are for the public well being. As the United States Department of Transportation puts it, "Speed limits are appropriate speeds based on the traffic of an area, road conditions, weather, and the lighting" (The Star Ledger). But the fact of the matter is that their arguments have no factual basis. Suppose the government is really setting speed limits that are safe. If this were true, speed limits would change constantly. If the roadway were wet, if the traffic is thick, or the visibility is bad at a certain point in time then the speed limit would have to change continuously. But, the government can't be on the highway twenty-four hours of the day changing signs. If the government wants to set a safe speed standard then it must be much more realistic. A driver knows their ability as wel l as their vehicles ability under diverse conditions. If the government tries to tell society that the faster speeds they are traveling is harmful; people will not feel that the government is looking out for their safety. They will instead feel as if though they were being treated as children. Therefor the speed limit on highways should be increased, and individuals should be allowed to drive at a safe "high" speed without being held back by an unrealistic law. From first-hand experience, one should easily realize that the common man would feel negativity toward raising speed limits. People fall into this trap because the general public is often mislead into believing that abolishing speed limits on highways will only cause more harm than good. People often are the victims of misunderstanding and people rarely observe the advantages offered by increasing the speed limit to a safe level.

How Roles and Statuses Affect Behavior

How Roles and Statuses Affect Behavior There is a fine line between status and role. Status is the position or a rank in a group or social structure. An example of this would be the president, Barack H. Obama. The president is a status because it is a position in a social structure; in this case, Barack H. Obama would be the president of America. On the other hand, a role is an assumed or an expected way a person should behave. For example, a mother is an assumed position where as soon as a female gives birth, they are expected to take care of the child, and thus called â€Å"mother. In Philip G. Zimbardo’s article, â€Å"The Pathology Of Imprisonment,† (pg. 140, 2011) Zimbardo wanted to simulate a prison environment and see the psychological and how the roles of the guards and prisoners develop. Zimbardo did this by creating a advertisement in the newspaper and hired two dozen young men who were at first, all on the same playing field; all of them had no criminal reco rd, emotionally stable, normal, and were all intelligent and from middle class families.The important part about this is that the role of prisoner and the role of guard were chosen by the flip of a coin which meant that the roles were completely random and the prison environment would be the only factor in how it shaper the boys behaviors. Throughout the experiment, the boys were videotaped so that Zimbardo could observe the behavior. Very quickly Zimbardo noticed that the guards became more and more aggressive towards the prisoners, and the prisoners reacted exactly how a real prisoner would react.Zimbardo states that the guards came up with many creative ways to control the prisoners. In one case, a rebellious prisoner, who refused to eat, was in solitary, and the rest of the prisoners were given a choice, whether to let the prisoner out and give up their blankets, or keep the blankets and keep the rebellious prisoner in solitary for the night. In the end, it was every man for him self and the rest of the prisoners chose to have their blankets.The only incentive for the prisoners was the pay of fifteen dollars per day, but some had to be cut short because of their reactions to the prison environment, such as crying, depression, and insanity. It was clear that the boys who were supposed to play the role of prisoners and guards were now acting in the mindset as if their status was really the prisoner and the guard. In fact, the experiment got too realistic and Zimbardo’s two-week experiment had to be cut short to six days. In Harvey Molotch’s article, (pg. 66, 2011)â€Å"The Rest Room and Equal Opportunity,† the author argues that even if men and women have equal amount of space in the bathrooms, it does not guarantee equal opportunity in the bathrooms because of the different roles of women and men. Men can use urinals, which take up less space than toilets and women need their own private stalls because of their specific needs. The author also suggests how western culture shapes the way how women use the bathroom, such as doing make up and gossiping. Therefore the differences in roles of women and men cause unequal opportunities even if they are given the same opportunity.

LIMS (Laboratory Information Management System) Essay

The LIMS system allows laboratories and other industries, to insert information in the electronic format that is required in order for it to function for it to function and generate the working system. This allows other users and participants to insert relevant data in mandatory fields, this could be things such as name, date of birth, ethnicity, medical history etc. this is placed in the system for organisation. LIMS is also known to be an electronic filing cabinet, data input done according to the given organisation. It can also store graphical data such as photos, CT scans of patients in their medical history; also text an example of this is hospital patients, regarding their identity photo and medical history. This image shows an example of patients DNA testing samples, this can be used in hospitals for patients. Another example is that samples from patients can be taken, a pathology form is raised by the clinician under the patient records. These are then barcoded to keep each and every ones records individual. The LIMS system can use data to produce relevant information such as investigation results. This can vary from different organisation. â€Å"DNA analysis is one of the main tools used in forensic science to identify individuals. Crime laboratories undertaking DNA typing are typically concerned with comparing DNA evidence with known standards. The evidence is DNA samples collected from a crime scene and these are cross-matched against DNA swabs taken from anyone connected to that scene, be that victims, defendants or elimination ‘knowns’. The elimination known can come from the victims’ relatives, for example, or, if it’s a shared house, from tenants. The comparisons are made, not only to generate and compile evidence against suspects, but also to exclude people from the investigation.† It is also used to monitor good laboratory practice by monitoring sample collection of tests, testing, and quality assurance. ‘Good laboratory practice or GLP specifically refers to a quality system of management controls for research laboratories and organizations to try to ensure the uniformity, consistency, reliability, reproducibility, quality, and  integrity of chemical (including pharmaceuticals) non-clinical safety tests; from physio-chemical properties through acute to chronic toxicity tests.’ The LIMS system is easy and time efficient because it can automatically alert the system this can be for anything such as the next dentist appointment that is due for a patient or oncoming samples, this is a great advantage because they then can be bar coded. This allows systems and procedures to run through much quicker without a ny errors occurring. LIMS can also be used to monitor stock levels Reference & Bibliography http://www.scientific-computing.com/features/feature.php?feature_id=225 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_laboratory_practice