We are proud to be featured in Chambers 2015 legal directory for intellectual property. And to have both our joint heads of Intellectual Property and Dispute Resolution, Piers Strickland and Matthew Harris included as notable practitioners.
The Chambers Guides – which have been ranking the best law firms since 1990 – described Waterfront as a “forward-looking boutique set up to cater for SMEs, in particular, software and technology companies providing services to blue-chip corporates.” As well as mentioning our work for larger companies on patent matters.
The guide includes positive comments from Waterfront clients, emphasising our, “friendly, helpful and efficient,” style. One client singled out our pragmatic approach for particular praise, “They very quickly grasped the commercial drivers in the issues referred to them and, without undermining the thoroughness of their work, they ensured that time and costs were focused on factors that would make a difference.”
Joint Head of Intellectual Property and Dispute Resolution Piers Strickland is recognised as a solicitor advocate specialising in disputes across all core IP rights, with a focus on trade marks and software. Chambers goes on to describe him as “unflappable” and praise his “excellent commercial judgement.” While Matthew Harris who advises on IP-related transactions, commercial agreements, rights management and disputes is appreciated for his, “clarity and straightforward manner”.
Finally, Chambers highlights Waterfront’s work for Dot London, a subsidiary of London & Partners, on the launch and operation of the new ‘.london’ top-level domain name registry and Web Services Integration in a software copyright and breach of contract dispute with Watertrace.
The current legal framework in the UK does not allow copying of copyright-protected material for training generative AI models, except where it is carried out with permission of the copyright owner or done in a research or study context and for purely non-commercial purposes.
This matter deals with the Claimant’s (‘TVIS’) allegation of infringement and misrepresentation in relation to its “VETSURE” trade mark by the Defendant (‘Howserv’s’) “PETSURE” trade mark, used for pet insurance. In the first instance decision, the claim was dismissed due to the marks being highly descriptive and “not…