Our editorial objective is to contribute to conversations regarding Intellectual Property (IP) issues, with a bias for its intersection with other legal fields. If you want to have your thoughts aired on our platform, do send us a request at info@ipintersects.com and we’ll get back to you!
This body of text contains our Authorship guidelines. Expecting nothing short of strict compliance when preparing articles, when we accept an article, we act based on the “good-faith” presumption that:
Our editors reserve the discretion to accept or reject submissions for publication. After submission, they reserve the right to review (including but not limited to language & grammar corrections, factual adjustments, and formatting) and make adjustments that align with our editorial guidelines.
However, if an article falls short of our editorial standards to a level we consider to be incurable, such an article shall be reverted to the author for revision, or outright rejection.
In light of the above, the following forms the editorial policy of IP Intersects
In providing a platform for discourse on contemporary realities and/or issues in IP Law, we accept contributions from IP stakeholders from different backgrounds including IP valuation experts, IP lawyers (whether practising or not practising), enthusiasts, members of the academia, and authors in IP and IP-related fields.
We welcome blog articles (short-form and long-form), video content, industry podcasts, opinions, and case comments on IP issues related to Banking and Finance Law, Privacy & Data Protection law, Bankruptcy Law, Consumer Protection law, Human Rights, Corporate & Business law, Insurance law, International trade, Employment law, Tax law, Family law, Healthcare & Pharmaceutical law, Internet & Tech, AI & Robotics, Antitrust & Competition law, Public policy & Regulation and other cross-cutting areas.
We are a fully independent platform for interdisciplinary engagement, with a modern, inclusive, or balanced approach to IP discourse.
With there being no limitations as to countries allowed to submit publications, we promote themes of wider relevance and critical issues affecting the state of IP globally or locally. This is as opposed to sentimental analyses aimed at passing value judgements, which may not resonate with or hold informational value for readers.
In general, authors who incorporate elements from external sources are obligated to provide proper attribution. Hence, it would present a grave violation of our policy to infringe other’s copyright(s).
In fact, we consider it double the jeopardy when an author — one considered IP-literate — fails to attribute someone else’s work after using the same. Such a case would not only present a serious breach of ethical and professional standards but also chips away at the quantum of collective progress made in IP-centred spaces designed to promote the protection and respect of copyrights — of which we are no exception.
While the expectation is for submissions to be original, our editors may — from time to time, and as the circumstances may demand — relax the standards to allow instances where an external work inspires that of the author, either in terms of style or ideas.
This, of course, is without prejudice to common-sense principles. For example, the derived content should be recognizable as the author’s original composition. In other words, it must also be distinguishable from the source material.
If you have a complaint about a suspected case of infringement, reach out to us at info@ipintersects.com.
Authors are required to submit their publications in line with the following guidelines:
In line with our ambitions as a global platform, IP intersects follows a HYBRID model. Authors from countries with a British English background can stick to British English. Similarly, authors from American English-speaking countries can write in American English.
Short Titles Should Be Written In Title Case (←Read again to see an example) They must be compelling. By this, we mean it should naturally grab attention and spark curiosity for readers. Here are some options that tend to be effective.
Across the board, authors are encouraged to adhere to specific formatting guidelines to ensure consistency and readability. The guidelines are outlined hereunder.
At its core, IP Instersects is an IP blog. This means the more natural instinct for authors may lean towards a conversational, relaxed, or laid-back style on the page. However, we also recognize that others may prefer a formal, academic tone usually reserved for knowledgeable audiences.
Authors are advised to carefully review their submissions to ensure compliance with these formatting requirements.
We review all submissions within a timeframe of no later than 2 weeks. When submitting, we expect that all editorial guidelines have been followed. Submissions can be forwarded to a Google (Submission) Form we have created specifically for this purpose.
For easy access, all drafts should be submitted in MS Word (.doc/.docx) or as a Google Doc.
Authors should provide the requested details exclusively through the Google form to maintain confidentiality. We confirm receipt of all submissions within 48 hours. Should you fail to receive one, kindly reach out to us at ipintersects@gmail.com
We review prospective publications with a 14-day window, following which our editors revert to the contributor. In turn, the contributor is required to implement alterations from the said review within 7 days except where otherwise agreed. Contributors are not allowed to retract their submissions.
We recognize the rights of contributors to retract their submissions, in so far as the said retraction does not fall within the 14-day review period or immediately after we’ve accepted the submission.
Finally, any other submissions involving the same publication before or during review by our editors must be disclosed.
By virtue of your submissions as a contributor, you warrant that your work is original and properly attributed. Also, you represent that you have gotten the required permissions from your employer or any stakeholders or joint rightsholder(s) before looking to publish with us.
While the copyright in accepted submissions vests with our blog, we welcome reposting of our publications, to the extent that such reposts link to the original post to give due copyright credits.
You also agree to having the publications shared on our social media pages with due credit to you as the contributor.
We take great care in our publication process, ensuring that each article undergoes a thorough examination by our editorial board. This meticulous approach makes it less likely that we publish articles that fail to meet quality standards or violate ethical practices.
That being said, the human element allows for the possibility that despite our best efforts, occasional oversights may occur. In the (rare) event that an article of questionable quality or academic/ethical integrity gets published, we take action promptly after knowledge of the fact.
The next course of action may include retracting the published article and implementing any other necessary measures as we deem fit in the circumstances. We remain committed to upholding the highest standards of academic integrity and welcome feedback from our readers to help us maintain these standards.