1.
Bently, L., Sherman, B., Gangjee, D., Johnson, P.: Intellectual property law. Oxford University Press, Oxford, United Kingdom (2018).
2.
Aplin, T.F., Davis, J.: Intellectual property law: text, cases, and materials. Oxford University Press, Oxford, United Kingdom (2017).
3.
Cornish, W.R., Llewelyn, D., Aplin, T.F.: Intellectual property: patents, copyright, trade marks and allied rights. Sweet & Maxwell, Thomson Reuters, London (2013).
4.
Bainbridge, D.I.: Intellectual property. Pearson, Harlow, England (2018).
5.
Torremans, P.: Holyoak and Torremans intellectual property law. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2016).
6.
Waelde, C., Brown, A.E.L., Kheria, S., Cornwell, J.: Contemporary intellectual property: law and policy. Oxford University Press, Oxford, United Kingdom (2016).
7.
Christie, A., Gare, S. eds: Blackstone’s statutes on intellectual property. Oxford University Press, Oxford, United Kingdom (2018).
8.
European Patents Handbook (CIPA), https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/Browse/Home/Books/CIPAEuropeanPatents?transitionType=Default&contextData=(sc.Default)&firstPage=true&comp=pluk&bhcp=1.
9.
Chartered Institute of Patent Attorneys: European Patents Sourcefinder. Sweet & Maxwell.
10.
Jones, C., Chartered Institute of Patent Attorneys: Patent Co-Operation Treaty Handbook. Sweet & Maxwell.
11.
Fox, N.: A guide to the EPC 2000: a practitioner’s guide to the new law. Chartered Institute of Patent Attorneys, London (2010).
12.
Jewess, M.: Inside intellectual property: best practice in intellectual property law, management, and strategy. The Chartered Institute of Patent Attorneys, London (2013).
13.
Ealey, D., Chartered Institute of Patent Agents (London, England): Study guide to the Patents Acts. CIPA, London (2014).
14.
Visser, D.: The annotated European patent convention. Wolters Kluwer, Alphen aan den Rijn, The Netherlands (15)AD.
15.
Guidelines for Examination in the European Patent Office, https://www.epo.org/law-practice/legal-texts/guidelines.html, (2017).
16.
National law relating to the EPC, https://www.epo.org/law-practice/legal-texts/national-law.html, (2015).
17.
Intellectual Property Office: Patents: Manual of Patent Practice - GOV.UK, https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/patents-manual-of-patent-practice.
18.
Intellectual Property Office: Examining patent applications for biotechnological inventions - GOV.UK, https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/examining-patent-applications-for-biotechnological-inventions.
19.
Intellectual Property Office: Examining patent applications for medical inventions - GOV.UK, https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/examining-patent-applications-for-medical-inventions, (2016).
20.
Intellectual Property Office: Examining patent applications relating to chemical inventions, https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/examining-patent-applications-relating-to-chemical-inventions.
21.
The PCT Applicant’s Guide, http://www.wipo.int/pct/en/appguide/, (2017).
22.
Adelman, M.J.: Global issues in patent law. West, St. Paul, MN (2011).
23.
Cornish, W.R.: Intellectual property: omnipresent, distracting, irrelevant? Oxford University Press, Oxford (2004).
24.
Dinwoodie, G.B., Janis, M.D.: Trade dress and design law. Aspen Publishers, New York (2010).
25.
Drahos, P., Braithwaite, J.: Information feudalism: who owns the knowledge economy? Earthscan, London (2003).
26.
Fisher, M.: Fundamentals of patent law: interpretation and scope of protection. Hart Publishing, Oxford (2007).
27.
Gosseries, A., Marciano, A., Strowel, A.: Intellectual property and theories of justice. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke [England] (2008).
28.
Helfer, L.R. ed: Intellectual property and human rights. Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, Cheltenham (2013).
29.
Jaffe, A.B., Lerner, J.: Innovation and its discontents: how our broken patent system is endangering innovation and progress, and what to do about it. Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J. (2007).
30.
Landes, W.M., Posner, R.A.: The economic structure of intellectual property law. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass (2003).
31.
Luginbühl, S., Molengraaff Instituut voor Privaatrecht. Centrum voor Intellectueel Eigendomsrecht: European patent law: towards a uniform interpretation. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK (2011).
32.
Terrell, T.: Terrell on the law of patents. Sweet & Maxwell, London (2016).
33.
Musker, D.C.: Community design law: principles and practice. Sweet & Maxwell, London (2002).
34.
Norman, H.E.: Intellectual property law. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2014).
35.
Ohly, A., Pila, J. eds: The Europeanization of intellectual property law: towards a European legal methodology. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2013).
36.
Pila, J.: The requirement for invention in patent law. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2010).
37.
Seville, C.: EU intellectual property law and policy. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, UK (2016).
38.
Stone, D.: European Union design law: a practitioners’ guide. Oxford University Press, Oxford, United Kingdom (2016).
39.
Suthersanen, U.: Design law: European Union and United States of America. Sweet & Maxwell, London (2010).
40.
European Copyright and Design Reports.
41.
European Trade Mark Reports.
42.
Entertainment and Media Law Reports.
43.
European Patent Office Reports.
44.
Fleet Street patent law reports.
45.
Reports of Patent, Design and Trade Mark Cases.
46.
European intellectual property review.
47.
Intellectual Property Institute: Intellectual property quarterly.
48.
Journal of Intellectual Property Law and Practice.
49.
The journal of world intellectual property.
50.
IIC - International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law.
51.
Entertainment Law Review.
52.
The UK Intellectual Property Office (IPO), https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/intellectual-property-office.
53.
European Patent Office (EPO), https://www.epo.org/index.html.
54.
European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO), https://euipo.europa.eu/ohimportal/en/.
55.
HM Courts & Tribunals Service - GOV.UK, https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/hm-courts-and-tribunals-service.
56.
British and Irish Legal Information Institute, http://www.bailii.org/.
57.
EU law - EUROPA | European Union, https://europa.eu/european-union/law_en.
58.
Court of Justice of the European Union, https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/jcms/Jo2_6999.
59.
World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), http://www.wipo.int/portal/en/index.html.
60.
World Trade Organization (WTO), https://www.wto.org/.
61.
The IPKat, http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/.
62.
The 1709 Blog, http://the1709blog.blogspot.com/.
63.
Bently, L., Sherman, B., Gangjee, D., Johnson, P.: Intellectual property law. Oxford University Press, Oxford, United Kingdom (2018).
64.
Aplin, T.F., Davis, J.: Intellectual property law: text, cases, and materials. Oxford University Press, Oxford, United Kingdom (2017).
65.
Aplin, T.F., Davis, J.: Intellectual property law: text, cases, and materials. In: Intellectual property law: text, cases, and materials. pp. 603–721. Oxford University Press, Oxford, United Kingdom (2017).
66.
Cornish, W.R., Llewelyn, D., Aplin, T.F.: Intellectual property: patents, copyright, trade marks and allied rights. In: Intellectual property: patents, copyright, trade marks and allied rights. pp. 1–51. Sweet & Maxwell, Thomson Reuters, London (2013).
67.
Cornish, W.R., Llewelyn, D., Aplin, T.F.: Intellectual property: patents, copyright, trade marks and allied rights. Sweet & Maxwell, Thomson Reuters, London (2013).
68.
Fisher, M.: Classical economics and philosophy of the patent system. Intellectual Property Quarterly. (2005).
69.
Geiger, C.: Intellectual property shall be protected!? Article 17(2) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union: a mysterious provision with an unclear scope. European Intellectual Property Review. 31, (2009).
70.
Hughes, J.: The Philosophy of Intellectual Property. Georgetown Law Journal. (1988).
71.
Kitch, E.W.: The Nature and Function of the Patent System. The Journal of Law & Economics. 20, (1977).
72.
Landes, W.M., Posner, R.A.: The economic structure of intellectual property law. In: The economic structure of intellectual property law. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass (2003).
73.
Machlup, F., Penrose, E.: The Patent Controversy in the Nineteenth Century. The Journal of Economic History. 10, (1950).
74.
Merges, R.P., Nelson, R.R.: On the Complex Economics of Patent Scope. Columbia Law Review. 90, (1990). https://doi.org/10.2307/1122920.
75.
Prizes, Not Patents by Joseph E. Stiglitz - Project Syndicate, https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/prizes--not-patents?barrier=accesspaylog.
76.
Commission on Intellectual Property Rights: Integrating Intellectual Property Rights and Development Policy, http://www.cipr.org.uk/graphic/documents/final_report.htm.
77.
Arthur, C.A.: Should Apple finally call time on smartphone patent wars? Guardian. (2014).
78.
Gillmor, D.: America’s dysfunctional patent system is stifling innovation. Guardian. (2012).
79.
Difference Engine: The PC all over again? The Economist. (2012).
80.
Bowcott, O.: Unified Patent Court split between Paris, London and Munich. Guardian. (2012).
81.
Plomer, A.: EU ban on stem cell patents is a threat both to science and the rule of law | Aurora Plomer. Guardian. (2011).
82.
McVeigh, K.: US supreme court rules human genes cannot be patented. Guardian. (2013).
83.
BBC Radio 4 - In Business, Gene Patenting, https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b037vb4d.
84.
Southgate, T.: Can you patent an experience? The Guardian. (2013).
85.
Smedley, T.: Patent wars: has India taken on Big Pharma and won? Guardian. (2013).
86.
Harris, P.: Monsanto sued small famers to protect seed patents, report says. Guardian. (2013).
87.
Patently Absurd! - Weird & wacky patents, http://www.patentlyabsurd.org.uk/.
88.
Bently, L., Sherman, B., Gangjee, D., Johnson, P.: Intellectual property law. Oxford University Press, Oxford, United Kingdom (2018).
89.
Aplin, T.F., Davis, J.: Intellectual property law: text, cases, and materials. In: Intellectual property law: text, cases, and materials. pp. 603–721. Oxford University Press, Oxford, United Kingdom (2017).
90.
Cornish, W.R., Llewelyn, D., Aplin, T.F.: Intellectual property: patents, copyright, trade marks and allied rights. Sweet & Maxwell, Thomson Reuters, London (2013).
91.
Integrating Intellectual Property Rights and Development Policy: Report of the Commission on Intellectual Property Rights, http://www.iprcommission.org/papers/pdfs/final_report/ciprfullfinal.pdf.
92.
Cullet, P.: Patents and medicines: the relationship between TRIPS and the human right to health, http://www.ielrc.org/content/a0301.pdf.
93.
Dinwoodie, G.B.: *The International Intellectual Property Law System: New Actors, New Institutions, New Sources. Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review. (2006).
94.
Evans, G.E.: Intellectual Property as a Trade Issue: The Making of the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights.
95.
Keeling, D.T.: Intellectual property rights in EU law: Vol.1: Free movement and competition law. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2003).
96.
Kur, A., Dreier, T.: European intellectual property law: texts, cases and materials. In: European intellectual property law: texts, cases and materials. pp. 39–83. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham (2013).
97.
Bently, L., Sherman, B., Gangjee, D., Johnson, P.: Intellectual property law. Oxford University Press, Oxford, United Kingdom (2018).
98.
Aplin, T.F., Davis, J.: Intellectual property law: text, cases, and materials. In: Intellectual property law: text, cases, and materials. pp. 603–721. Oxford University Press, Oxford, United Kingdom (2017).
99.
Cornish, W.R., Llewelyn, D., Aplin, T.F.: Intellectual property: patents, copyright, trade marks and allied rights. Sweet & Maxwell, Thomson Reuters, London (2013).
100.
Struve, F. W.: Ending Unnecessary Novelty Destruction: Why Europe Should Adopt the Safety-Net Grace Period as an International Best Practice. William Mitchell Law Review. (2013).
101.
Bently, L., Sherman, B., Gangjee, D., Johnson, P.: Intellectual property law. Oxford University Press, Oxford, United Kingdom (2018).
102.
Aplin, T.F., Davis, J.: Intellectual property law: text, cases, and materials. In: Intellectual property law: text, cases, and materials. pp. 603–721. Oxford University Press, Oxford, United Kingdom (2017).
103.
Cornish, W.R., Llewelyn, D., Aplin, T.F.: Intellectual property: patents, copyright, trade marks and allied rights. Sweet & Maxwell, Thomson Reuters, London (2013).
104.
Bonadio, E.: Biotech patents and morality after Brussels, http://openaccess.city.ac.uk/4097/1/Biotech%20patents%20and%20morality%20after%20Brussels.pdf, (2012).
105.
’Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the patentability of computer-implemented inventions’ (COM(2002) 92 final — 2002/0047(COD)), https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2003:061:0154:0163:EN:PDF.
106.
The Ethics of Patenting DNA - Nuffield Bioethics, http://nuffieldbioethics.org/project/patenting-dna, (2002).
107.
Harmon, S.H.E., Laurie, G., Courtney, A.: Dignity, plurality and patentability: the unfinished story of Brustle v Greenpeace. European Law Review. 38, (2013).
108.
Heller, M.A., Eisenberg, R.S.: Can Patents Deter Innovation? The Anticommons in Biomedical Research. Science. 280, (1998).
109.
Pila, J.: Dispute over the meaning of ‘invention’ in Art.52(2) EPC - the patentability of computer-implemented inventions in Europe. International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law. 36, (2005).
110.
Bently, L., Sherman, B., Gangjee, D., Johnson, P.: Intellectual property law. Oxford University Press, Oxford, United Kingdom (2018).
111.
Aplin, T.F., Davis, J.: Intellectual property law: text, cases, and materials. Oxford University Press, Oxford, United Kingdom (2017).
112.
Cornish, W.R., Llewelyn, D., Aplin, T.F.: Intellectual property: patents, copyright, trade marks and allied rights. Sweet & Maxwell, Thomson Reuters, London (2013).
113.
Cockbain, J., Sterckx, S.: Is the Enlarged Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office authorised to extend the bounds of the patentable? The G5/83 Second Medical Indication/EISAI and G2/08 Dosage Regime/ABBOTT RESPIRATORY cases. International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law. 42, (2011).
114.
Floyd, C.: Novelty under the Patents Act 1977: the state of the art after Merrell Dow. European Intellectual Property Review. 18, (1996).
115.
Sharples, A., Curley, D.: Experimental novelty: Synthon v SmithKline Beecham. European Intellectual Property Review. 28, (2006).
116.
Bently, L., Sherman, B., Gangjee, D., Johnson, P.: Intellectual property law. Oxford University Press, Oxford, United Kingdom (2018).
117.
Aplin, T.F., Davis, J.: Intellectual property law: text, cases, and materials. Oxford University Press, Oxford, United Kingdom (2017).
118.
Cornish, W.R., Llewelyn, D., Aplin, T.F.: Intellectual property: patents, copyright, trade marks and allied rights. Sweet & Maxwell, Thomson Reuters, London (2013).
119.
England, P., Parker, S.: Obviousness in the new European order. Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice. 7, 805–815 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1093/jiplp/jps162.
120.
Franzosi, M.: Non-Obviousness. The Journal of World Intellectual Property. 6, 233–250 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-1796.2003.tb00200.x.
121.
Bently, L., Sherman, B., Gangjee, D., Johnson, P.: Intellectual property law. Oxford University Press, Oxford, United Kingdom (2018).
122.
Aplin, T.F., Davis, J.: Intellectual property law: text, cases, and materials. Oxford University Press, Oxford, United Kingdom (2017).
123.
Cornish, W.R., Llewelyn, D., Aplin, T.F.: Intellectual property: patents, copyright, trade marks and allied rights. Sweet & Maxwell, Thomson Reuters, London (2013).
124.
Giles, J.: The Brustle and Eli Lilly cases: Creation--God or humankind? Oxford Journal of Law and Religion. 1, 518–523 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1093/ojlr/rws009.
125.
Sharples, A.: Industrial applicability, patents and the Supreme Court: Human Genome Sciences Inc v Eli Lilly and Co. European Intellectual Property Review. 34, (2012).
126.
Bently, L., Sherman, B., Gangjee, D., Johnson, P.: Intellectual property law. Oxford University Press, Oxford, United Kingdom (2018).
127.
Aplin, T.F., Davis, J.: Intellectual property law: text, cases, and materials. Oxford University Press, Oxford, United Kingdom (2017).
128.
Cornish, W.R., Llewelyn, D., Aplin, T.F.: Intellectual property: patents, copyright, trade marks and allied rights. Sweet & Maxwell, Thomson Reuters, London (2013).
129.
Brennan, D.J.: Biogen sufficiency reconsidered. Intellectual Property Quarterly. (2009).
130.
Fisher, M.: Extracting the price of a patent: enablement and written description. Intellectual Property Quarterly. (2012).
131.
Pila, J.: Chemical Products and Proportionate Patents Before and After. King’s Law Journal. 20, 489–526 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1080/09615768.2009.11423685.
132.
Bently, L., Sherman, B., Gangjee, D., Johnson, P.: Intellectual property law. Oxford University Press, Oxford, United Kingdom (2018).
133.
Aplin, T.F., Davis, J.: Intellectual property law: text, cases, and materials. Oxford University Press, Oxford, United Kingdom (2017).
134.
Cornish, W.R., Llewelyn, D., Aplin, T.F.: Intellectual property: patents, copyright, trade marks and allied rights. Sweet & Maxwell, Thomson Reuters, London (2013).
135.
Laddie, H.: *Kirin Amgen — The End of Equivalents in England?1. International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law. 40,.
136.
Pumfrey, N.: The Doctrine of Equivalents in Various Patent Regimes: Does Anybody Have It Right?
137.
Whitehead, B.: Patent construction after Amgen: are patent claims construed more widely or narrowly than previously? Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice. 1, 332–337 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1093/jiplp/jpl019.
138.
Bently, L., Sherman, B., Gangjee, D., Johnson, P.: Intellectual property law. Oxford University Press, Oxford, United Kingdom (2018).
139.
Aplin, T.F., Davis, J.: Intellectual property law: text, cases, and materials. Oxford University Press, Oxford, United Kingdom (2017).
140.
Cornish, W.R., Llewelyn, D., Aplin, T.F.: Intellectual property: patents, copyright, trade marks and allied rights. Sweet & Maxwell, Thomson Reuters, London (2013).
141.
Floyd, C.: Infringement by Repair and the Troublesome Definition of ‘Making’ the Invention: A critique of Schütz v Werit, http://fordhamipconference.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Floyd_InfringementByRepair.pdf, (2010).
142.
Bently, L., Sherman, B., Gangjee, D., Johnson, P.: Intellectual property law. Oxford University Press, Oxford, United Kingdom (2018).
143.
Aplin, T.F., Davis, J.: Intellectual property law: text, cases, and materials. Oxford University Press, Oxford, United Kingdom (2017).
144.
Cornish, W.R., Llewelyn, D., Aplin, T.F.: Intellectual property: patents, copyright, trade marks and allied rights. Sweet & Maxwell, Thomson Reuters, London (2013).
145.
Bently, L., Sherman, B., Gangjee, D., Johnson, P.: Intellectual property law. Oxford University Press, Oxford, United Kingdom (2018).
146.
Aplin, T.F., Davis, J.: Intellectual property law: text, cases, and materials. Oxford University Press, Oxford, United Kingdom (2017).
147.
Cornish, W.R., Llewelyn, D., Aplin, T.F.: Intellectual property: patents, copyright, trade marks and allied rights. Sweet & Maxwell, Thomson Reuters, London (2013).
148.
Hobson, A., Shafran, T.: Kelly and Chiu v GE Healthcare Limited: pharmaceutical companies at risk of successful employee inventor compensation claim following landmark ruling. European Intellectual Property Review. 31, (2009).
149.
Howell, C.: Extra compensation for inventive employees: is our system equitable, unbiased and motivating? Intellectual Property Quarterly. (2011).
150.
Merges, R.P.: The Law and Economics of Employee Inventions. Harvard Journal of Law and Technology. (1999).
151.
Pila, J.: ‘Sewing the Fly Buttons on the Statute’: Employee Inventions and the Employment Context. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies. 32, (2012).
152.
Bently, L., Sherman, B., Gangjee, D., Johnson, P.: Intellectual property law. Oxford University Press, Oxford, United Kingdom (2018).
153.
Aplin, T.F., Davis, J.: Intellectual property law: text, cases, and materials. In: Intellectual property law: text, cases, and materials. pp. 603–721. Oxford University Press, Oxford, United Kingdom (2017).
154.
Cornish, W.R., Llewelyn, D., Aplin, T.F.: Intellectual property: patents, copyright, trade marks and allied rights. Sweet & Maxwell, Thomson Reuters, London (2013).
155.
Unitary patent – ratification progress, http://unitarypatent.com/ratification-process/.
156.
Pehlivan, C.N.: The creation of a single European patent system: from dream to (almost) reality. European Intellectual Property Review. 34, (2012).
157.
Pila, J.: *THE EUROPEAN PATENT: AN OLD AND VEXING PROBLEM. International and Comparative Law Quarterly. 62, 917–940 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020589313000304.
158.
Hilty, R., Jaeger, T., Lamping, M., Ullrich, H.: The Unitary Patent Package: Twelve Reasons for Concern. SSRN Electronic Journal. (2012). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2169254.
159.
Kitchin, L.J.: Transcript of Lord Justice Kitchin’s Speech on the Unitary Patent (2012), http://www.cipa.org.uk/pages/Congres-Dinner-2012-Lord-Justice-Kitchin.
160.
Ohly, A., Pila, J. eds: The Europeanization of intellectual property law: towards a European legal methodology. In: The Europeanization of intellectual property law: towards a European legal methodology. pp. 199–216. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2013).
