Comments on: aporia step 5/6

By: (un)echo 20081212-10

(un)echo 20081212-10 — Fri, 12 Dec 2008 16:17:21 +0000

[...] .. [...]

By: Ombudman's Office

Ombudman's Office — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 15:56:20 +0000

[...] 7 August 2008, 11.05am [...] Many thanks for your email with the comments on the draft Principles of Good Complaint Handling. We intend to publish the final Principles later this year and will send a copy to your organisation then [...]

By: Intellectual Property Office

Intellectual Property Office — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 10:33:13 +0000

[...] The Patent Research Exception: A Consultation [...] A patent gives the owner the right to prevent third parties from making, using, selling or importing their invention for up to 20 years. Subject to certain exceptions, if a third party does any of these without the consent of the patent owner it will be considered to be an infringement of the patent; the owner would be entitled to take legal action against the infringer. The rights granted by a patent encourage innovation by helping businesses to protect their investments in R&D.
A strong research base is vital to the competitiveness of our economy and to promoting the well being of our society. It is important that the right balance exists between the opportunity to conduct research and the framework of IP laws which can provide incentives for innovation and economic development.
Patent laws in most European countries include a “research exception” (or “research exemption”) which permits use of a patented invention for experimental purposes without infringing the rights of the holder. Additionally, there are further exceptions such as those in respect of private and non-commercial use [...]
We aim to make this a successful consultation by engaging with stakeholders in a variety of ways, for example through conducting workshops with major stakeholders. By taking this approach we hope to maximise the feedback from all parties who may be affected by the research exception [...]
We welcome comments from all interested parties on the issues raised in this document and to the specific questions. We are particularly interested in any evidence in support of your views which will help us to determine the scale of the problem, if it exists, and to decide the way forward [...]
Information provided in response to this consultation will be dealt with in accordance with the access to information regimes. These are primarily the Freedom of Information Act 2000 the Data Protection Act 1998 and the Environmental Information Regulations 2004. Please refer to the accompanying Guidance on the Code of Practice on Consultation http://www.berr.gov.uk/files/file44364.pdf for more information.
The Government will use the responses to assess whether the patent exception requires clarification. According to the requirements of the Freedom of Information Act 2000, all information contained in the responses including personal information may be subject to publication or disclosure. Where respondents request that information given in response to the consultation be kept confidential, this will only be possible if it is consistent with freedom of information obligations.
A request for confidentiality from a respondent will not be enough to guarantee confidentiality. Where respondents specifically request confidentiality, this can only be agreed if it is consistent with freedom of information obligations [...]

By: aporia step 1/6 « Blog Archive « WHiSPeRiNG GaLLeRY

aporia step 1/6 « Blog Archive « WHiSPeRiNG GaLLeRY — Sat, 11 Oct 2008 06:55:04 +0000

[...] open development ‹ › [...]

By: aporia pidgeon

aporia pidgeon — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 10:42:18 +0000

[...] COMMENTS on (w)hole page [...] Further to [...] workshop on “Building mature relationships with our stakeholders: how can we make it work”, just to confirm that we have now linked this page to our WHiSPeRiNG GaLLeRY by way of comment #271 at http://ap0riasofar.wordpress.com/2008/06/05/aporia-step-56/ (un)labeled “D*US ex machina” in good faith – hope this helps as sibling consultation(s) continue to unfold for the time being at least [...]

By: D*US ex machina

D*US ex machina — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 08:38:15 +0000

[...] Roles, responsibilities and actions [...] Do these areas and questions provide a suitable framework for addressing challenges we have identified? [...]

By: emergenomics (11 + 1) « Blog Archive « WHiSPeRiNG GaLLeRY

emergenomics (11 + 1) « Blog Archive « WHiSPeRiNG GaLLeRY — Wed, 08 Oct 2008 09:28:11 +0000

[...] bringing together emergent profile for phase I with emerging profile for phase II (+I) ‹ › [...]

By: Twilight Consultation

Twilight Consultation — Wed, 08 Oct 2008 09:08:19 +0000

[...] Code of Conduct and Policy on the Governance of Good Research Conduct [...] INTEGRITY, CLARITY, AND GOOD MANAGEMENT [...] This consultation document is complementary to the work of the UK Panel for Research Integrity in Health and Bio-Medical Sciences and that in the Department of Health / National Health Service but will in certain parts cover a wider range of issues because of [...]'s concern with all research, and with issues of good research practice as well as research integrity. Equally it will cover other aspects in less depth. Every effort has been made to ensure that there will be no conflict in the guidance from these different sources, and this will be reviewed further after the completion of the consultation [...]

By: echo 20080806

echo 20080806 — Tue, 07 Oct 2008 09:54:06 +0000

[...] We found the supporting text indispensable and critical to being able to flesh out the draft Principles in ways that allowed us to begin to draw distinctions between prevailing procedural-based approaches and this somewhat contrasting principle-based approach in light of current “norms”. The danger being that if the supporting text were to somehow become separated from the summary text, the summary text would then be open to reverting to procedural-based interpretation rather than being critically tied to principle-based interpretation. Nevertheless, for those unfamiliar with the distinction between procedural-based approaches and principle-based approaches per se, it may be helpful to link the final Principles to concrete presentations/performances of the Principles-in-use (for example, the WHiSPeRiNG GaLLeRY in the case of the academic sector so far) in order to facilitate “expertise sharing” across what may otherwise turn out to be possibly incommensurable conflicts of interests stemming from differing “world-views” with respect to “practically achievable” complaints-handling, if not “good” complaints-handling innovations”/”transformations in and of themselves [...]

By: Ombudsman's Office

Ombudsman's Office — Tue, 07 Oct 2008 09:52:14 +0000

Whether the supporting text is useful and whether you would find it helpful to have the final Principles presented in this way