0370 1500 100
Request a call back
Send us an email
Request a call back
Send us an email
Georgie advises on the protection, exploitation and infringement of IP rights worldwide. She helps clients develop their IP strategies, focusing on risk and reputation management.
She has significant experience in relation to the strategic management of global brands, including trade mark and domain name portfolio management and has advised many global corporates and household names on their worldwide trade mark matters.
Georgie is known for her expertise in dealing with international and cross border IP disputes. She advises on forum shopping, identifying favourable jurisdictions for rights owners to bring proceedings or to defend proceedings. Georgie is the author of Sweet & Maxwell’s The Trade Mark Handbook, 'Civil Court Procedures in Trade Mark Cases', and is a regular speaker at conferences in the UK and US on a range of IP issues.
She has been recognised for many years as a ‘leading individual’ in Chambers and Partners.
"Georgie Collins of Irwin Mitchell is rated highly by sources for her command of copyright, database right, domain name and trade mark law." - Chambers & Partners 2016
Georgie Collins is "practical and accessible" - Legal 500 2015
She is "lauded by clients for her 'sophisticated' handling of international trade mark and domain name matters and disputes." - Chambers & Partners 2015
Credited by sources as an "incredibly thorough" practitioner who has "endless patience." - Chambers & Partners 2014
If a business trades only in the UK, the issue is less clear as the UK Government may choose to include equivalent legislation anyway. It is generally accepted that the data protection laws are out-dated and I suspect that data protection will not stay the same for long, even though we are leaving the EU. In other words, there will be some reform. We just don’t know what it will look like.
"This decision will surprise many, as it was thought that due to widespread publication of the identities of ‘PJS’ and ‘YMA’ outside England and Wales, particularly on the internet meant, that the interim injunction was rendered effectively worthless. However, the Supreme Court has found that there is a difference between the identity of the celebrity being revealed on internet pages and social media and what the court called the 'media storm' that would follow, both in the newspapers and online, if the injunction were to be lifted.
"The Supreme Court criticised the Court of Appeal’s decision to lift the injunction commenting that it had given too much weight to the rights of freedom of expression and insufficient weight to PJS’s rights of privacy. The Supreme Court was keen to point out that these rights should always be balanced and neither has preference over the other; there was simply insufficient public interest in the sexual exploits of a celebrity to justify publication.
"Following the Ryan Giggs case it looked as though the age of celebrity injunctions was at an end, with the internet and social media effectively rendering the embargo on publication of Giggs and his activities pointless. Following today’s decision, that is not the case. Quite to contrary, the Supreme Court’s decision is likely to mean that far more celebrities will now have the confidence and fortitude in looking to the Courts for privacy injunctions to stop details of their private lives being published."
This is a stark wake-up call for businesses in relation to cyber-attacks. Crime of this nature is overtaking physical crime and businesses must not bury their heads in the sand and hope that the issue simply goes away or that it will not happen to them. As we have seen here, the reputational and financial impact can be very significant.
It is impossible to prevent a determined cyber-attack but a business can take steps to mitigate risks which includes taking appropriate technical and organisation measures to prevent unauthorised access or accidental loss of personal data.
What is appropriate for one business might not be suitable for another but where an organisation handles significant volumes of personal data then it surely has a higher burden to have technical measures such as firewalls, malware protection, encryption, passwords and constant monitoring so as to safeguard the personal data it holds.
“The UK has been forced to harmonise its laws in line with those of its European neighbours in relation to artistic designs that are industrially produced.
“Under section 52 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 ("CDPA"), any articles created from designs derived from an artistic work which were manufactured through an industrial process had a reduced period of copyright protection of 25 years.
“The rationale was that artistic works that were mass produced should not enjoy the same period of protection as more refined and rare works and to bring the period of copyright protection into line with the period of protection for design right.
“The Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act 2013 repealed section 52 and has extended the period of copyright protection to 70 years following the death of the artist. The change in law will affect those that produce replicas of artistic works but also those that create and use 2D and 3D images of works, such as museums, image libraries and photographers.
“For those businesses involved in the replica market or who have produced articles that are based on other designs, they will have until 28 October 2016 to deplete their stock before having to negotiate a licence fee with the rights owners. In the absence of a licence they risk being on the wrong end of litigation.
“A significant effect of this legislation is that it will apply to articles that had been legitimately manufactured post the old 25 year period of protection but are now afforded the usual period of copyright protection of 70 years from the death of the artist.”