scholarly journals Islands of Effective International Adjudication: Constructing an Intellectual Property Rule of Law in the Andean Community

2009 ◽  
Vol 103 ◽  
pp. 483-484
Author(s):  
Laurence R. Heifer ◽  
Karen J. Alter ◽  
M. Florencia Guerzovich
2009 ◽  
Vol 103 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-47 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laurence R. Helfer ◽  
Karen J. Alter ◽  
M. Florencia Guerzovich

Forty years ago, the small and underdeveloped nations on the mountainous western edge of South America formed a regional integration pact to promote economic growth, regulate foreign investment, and harmonize national laws. Overall, their enterprise has not turned out well. Riven by political schisms, economic shocks, and weak domestic legal and judicial systems, the five principal countries of the Andean Community—Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador,Peru, and Venezuela— have failed to live up to their potential as South America's second largest trading bloc. The member states have relaunched the Andean integration project and revised its policies on multiple occasions, with at best only mixed results. Not surprisingly, most commentators have ignored the Andean Community or dismissed it as a failure.


2018 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 275-293 ◽  
Author(s):  
Salvatore Caserta ◽  
Pola Cebulak

AbstractThe paper compares the involvement of four regional economic courts in legal disputes mirroring constitutional, political and social crises at national or regional levels. These four judicial bodies of the EU, the Andean Community, the East African Community and the Central American Integration System have all faced varied forms of resistance to their involvement and their general authority. By comparing these four case-studies from across the globe, the paper identifies institutional and contextual factors that explain the uneven resistance. While the regional economic courts in Central America and East Africa were subject to backlash from the Member States, their counterparts in Europe and Latin America avoided backlash but at the price of achieving only a narrow authority.


1982 ◽  
Vol 76 (4) ◽  
pp. 737-753 ◽  
Author(s):  
W. Michael Reisman ◽  
Eric E. Freedman

A suit cannot be pressed, whether on the domestic or international level, without supporting evidence. The processes of gathering such evidence are carefully regulated in many developed legal systems, in part because experience has shown that too zealous a pursuit of evidence can easily transform institutions designed to resolve conflict into a rationalization and a setting for possibly even more rancorous conflict. When some part of the state apparatus is prosecuting a case, liberal democracies have often imposed more stringent regulations as part of what we may call, in a nondocumentary sense, the “constitutional” or “rule of law” tradition, that continuing compact between governors and governed about restraint in the use of official power.


Author(s):  
Karen J. Alter ◽  
Laurence R. Helfer

This chapter considers the geopolitical factors now threatening the Andean Community and explains how the Andean Tribunal of Justice (ATJ) has responded to this crisis. It also explains why the ATJ's intellectual property (IP) island continues to thrive even as threats to the larger integration project loom larger. It then returns to the Ecuador noncompliance dispute, introduced in Chapter 6, and considers how developments in the Andean integration process may affect the influence and power of the ATJ going forward. Divisions in the Andean Community, together with the pull of competing regional projects such as Mercosur and UNASUR — a merger of the Andean Community and Mercosur — have impeded the longstanding goal of creating an Andean common market and led to significantly reduced government support for the Andean integration project as a whole. This chapter thus attempts to understand what happened to the ATJ's authority during this crisis.


FIAT JUSTISIA ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Dani Amran Hakim

Law business competition in the country Indonesia know the exceptions  to assert that a the rule of law expressed does not apply for those kind certain agents or behavior particular activity. Law competition business environment in general grant an exemption on the basis of agreement , for example agreement intellectual property rights (IPR). IPR is incentives and reason was given the right monopolizes and protection because IPR need resources and time in an effort to get it, based on article 50 alphabet b Law on Business Competition. An exemption based on article 50 alphabet b Law on Business Competition the elaborated competition supervisory commission by issuing commission rules business competition supervisory Law Number 2 of 2009 on Exceptions The Application of the Law Number 5 of 1999 on Prohibition of Monopoly and Unfair Business Competition of a Pertaining to Intellectual Property Rights Scope arrangement based on Commission Rules Business Competition Supervisory Number 2 of 2009 is: (1) the license agreement that is in scope patent, the right brand, copyright, the right industrial design, the right design the layout integrated circuit and the right trade. (2) Trademark and brand services. (3) the design layout integrated circuit. Keywords: Exeptions, Intellectal Property Rights, Business Competition Law


2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ariel Katz

This Article explores the rule of law aspects of the intersection between intellectual property and antitrust law. Contemporary discussions and debates on intellectual property (IP), antitrust, and the intersection between them are typically framed in economically oriented terms. This Article, however, shows that there is more law in law than just economics. It demonstrates how the rule of law has influenced the development of several IP doctrines, and the interface between IP and antitrust, in important, albeit not always acknowledged, ways. In particular, it argues that some limitations on IP rights, such as exhaustion and limitations on tying arrangements, are grounded in rule of law principles restricting the arbitrary exercise of legal power, rather than solely in considerations of economic efficiency.The historical development of IP law has reflected several tensions, both economic and political, that lie at the heart of the constitutional order of the modern state: the tension between the benefits of free competition and the recognition that some restraints on competition may be beneficial and justified; the concern that power, even when conferred in the public interest, can often be abused and arbitrarily applied to advance private interests; and the tension between freedom of contract and property and freedom of trade. This Article explores how rule of law considerations have allowed courts to mediate these tensions, both in their familiar public law aspects but also in their less conspicuous private law dimensions, and how, in particular, they have shaped the development of IP doctrine and its intersection with antitrust law and the common law.


Author(s):  
Myriam Gicquello

This chapter assesses the introduction of artificial intelligence in international arbitration. The contention is that it would not only reinstate confidence in the arbitral system—from the perspective of the parties and the general public—and participate in the development of the rule of law, but also engage with broader systemic considerations in enhancing its legitimacy, fairness, and efficiency. Yet, before addressing the why, what, and how of this proposition, a definition of artificial intelligence is warranted. It should be noted at the outset that this concept has a variety of meanings. Despite the lack of consensus on its meaning, the chapter will thus treat artificial intelligence as encompassing both semi-autonomous and autonomous computer systems dedicated to assisting or replacing human beings in decision-making tasks. It presents the conclusions of two extensive research programs respectively dealing with the performance of statistical models and naturalistic decision-making. From that behavioural analysis, the introduction of artificial intelligence in international arbitration be discussed against the general considerations of international adjudication and the specific goals pertaining to international arbitration.


2016 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ariel Katz

AbstractThis Article explores the rule of law aspects of the intersection between intellectual property and antitrust law. Contemporary discussions and debates on intellectual property (IP), antitrust, and the intersection between them are typically framed in economically oriented terms. This Article, however, shows that there is more law in law than just economics. It demonstrates how the rule of law has influenced the development of several IP doctrines, and the interface between IP and antitrust, in important, albeit not always acknowledged, ways. In particular, it argues that some limitations on IP rights, such as exhaustion and limitations on tying arrangements, are grounded in rule of law principles restricting the arbitrary exercise of legal power, rather than solely in considerations of economic efficiency. The historical development of IP law has reflected several tensions, both economic and political, that lie at the heart of the constitutional order of the modern state: the tension between the benefits of free competition and the recognition that some restraints on competition may be beneficial and justified; the concern that power, even when conferred in the public interest, can often be abused and arbitrarily


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document