scholarly journals Ch.13 Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Correa Carlos Maria
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Effective Action ◽  
Trips Agreement ◽  
Specific Content ◽  
General Terms ◽  
General Obligation ◽  
Article 50

This chapter focuses on the enforcement of intellectual property rights (IPRs). Unlike pre-existing conventions on IPRs, the Trade-related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) Agreement contains a detailed set of provisions relating to the enforcement of such rights. The aim of Part III of the Agreement is to ensure that in addition to make available certain rights, Members adopt obligations to permit their effective exercise. Article 41 sets forth the general obligation regarding enforcement: to ensure that procedures as specified in this Part are available under the Member’s national law ‘so as to permit effective action against any act of infringement of intellectual property rights covered by this Agreement’. Article 41.1 requires the establishment of two types of remedies. These include expeditious remedies to prevent infringements, and remedies which constitute a deterrent to further infringements. Although the obligation to provide ‘expeditious remedies to prevent infringements’ is stipulated in general terms in Article 41.1, the specific content of such obligation is developed in Article 50 (provisional measures) and Article 51 (border measures) of the Agreement. Members may not be required to go beyond what is required under these provisions.

scholarly journals Understanding Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights Agreement: From Hard and Soft Law Perspective

2017 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 277
Author(s):  
Kholis Roisah
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Trips Agreement ◽  
The State ◽  
Soft Law ◽  
Full Compliance ◽  
Hard Law ◽  
General Obligation ◽  
Domestic Law

Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs) Agree-ment interesting to be understood in the perspective of hard law and soft law. TRIPs Agreement justified as hard or soft law by identifying the norms in the TRIPs agreement. Parameter obligation of TRIPs agreement visible implementation and enforcement of agreement norm with full compliance to fourth of the IPR Convention for the State parties is an indicator of unconditional obligation. Parameters precision TRIPS agreement showed formulation of general obligation setting up the implementation of treaty obligations is regulated in detail and the use of ”shall” term in any norm, describe the imperative norm character and shown indicator as substantial limited of interpretation with the parties might not interpreted. Parameter delegation looked explicitly provision of implementation and enforcement agreement that put an obligation on national authorities of state parties through domestic law and its courts. Parameter obligation, precision as well as delegation showed as high indicator that the TRIPs agreement characterized as hard law.

Intellectual Property: Theory, Privilege, and Pragmatism

2003 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 191-216 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adam D. Moore
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Trade Secret ◽  
Social Constructions ◽  
Property Theory ◽  
General Terms ◽  
Anglo American ◽  
Definition Of

In the most general terms, this article focuses on the tension between competing justifications of intellectual property. Section I examines the nature and definition of economic pragmatism and argues that, while economic pragmatism comes in many flavors, each is either unstable or self-defeating. Section II advances the view that Anglo-American systems of intellectual property have both theoretical and pragmatic features. In Section III a sketch of a theory is offered--a theory that may limit applications of economic pragmatism and provide the foundation for copyright, patent, and trade secret institutions. To be justified--to warrant coercion on a worldwide scale--systems of intellectual property should be grounded in theory. Intellectual property rights are, in essence, no different than our rights to life, liberty, and tangible property. Intellectual property rights are neither pure social constructions nor bargains without foundations.

scholarly journals Criminal Enforcement and International Intellectual Property Law

2014 ◽  
pp. 134-153
Author(s):  
Siddharth Partap Singh
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
Trips Agreement ◽  
Property Law ◽  
Intellectual Property Law ◽  
Global Consensus ◽  
Standard Set

There is a global consensus that domain of Intellectual Property should be subjected to criminal enforcement in order to secure the rights of owners of such Intellectual Property Rights. The TRIPS Agreement was, to some extent, successful in crystallizing the consensus as regards the criminal measures to be taken by States in the event of the infringement of Intellectual Property Rights through article 61. However, the standard set by the provision by minimal, to say the least. The advent of Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement has broader obligations, while also addressing some unsettled issues that have surfaced in disputes such as the China-IPRs case.

scholarly journals Pelindungan Hak Paten atas Pengetahuan Obat Tradisional Melalui Pasal 26 UU No. 13 Tahun 2016 tentang Paten (Protection of Patent Rights on Traditional Medicine Knowledge Through Article 26 of Law No. 13 of 2016 Concerning Patents)

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-65
Author(s):  
Trias Palupi Kurnianingrum
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Traditional Medicine ◽  
Traditional Knowledge ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Trips Agreement ◽  
Patent Law ◽  
Benefit Sharing ◽  
Traditional Medicines ◽  
Patent Rights

Patent as a branch of Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) serves to protect inventions on the field of technology, one of them being medicine. The rise on the number of cases on the theft of genetic resources and traditional knowledge on the field of medicine for commercialization purposes shows that the protection of patent rights on traditional medicine knowledge is still not optimal. This article is the result of a normative juridical research which is supported by an empirical data, examines the protection of patent rights on traditional medicine knowledge and the implementation of Article 26 of Law No. 13 of 2016 on Patents (Patent Law year 2016). In the research results, it was mentioned that even though the TRIPs Agreement did not accommodate the traditional knowledge, the presence of Patent Law year 2016 complemented the Indonesian government's efforts to save the knowledge of traditional medicines from biopiracy and misappropriation. It is necessary to regulate the disclosure obligation in TRIPs agreement and further mechanism regarding benefit sharing and granting access to traditional medicines knowledge. AbstrakPaten merupakan salah satu cabang Hak Kekayaan Intelektual yang berfungsi untuk melindungi invensi di bidang teknologi, salah satunya obat-obatan. Maraknya kasus pencurian sumber daya genetik dan pengetahuan tradisional di bidang obat-obatan untuk tujuan komersialisasi menunjukkan bahwa pelindungan hak paten atas pengetahuan obat tradisional masih belum maksimal. Artikel ini merupakan hasil penelitian yuridis normatif yang didukung dengan data empiris, membahas mengenai pelindungan hak paten atas pengetahuan obat tradisional dan implementasi Pasal 26 Undang-Undang Nomor 13 Tahun 2016 tentang Paten (UU Paten 2016). Di dalam hasil penelitian, disebutkan meskipun Perjanjian Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs) belum mengakomodasi pengetahuan tradisional namun hadirnya UU Paten 2016 melengkapi usaha pemerintah Indonesia dalam menyelamatkan pengetahuan obat tradisional dari biopiracy dan misappropriation. Perlu pengaturan kewajiban disclosure di dalam Perjanjian TRIPs dan mekanisme lebih lanjut mengenai benefit sharing dan pemberian akses atas pengetahuan obat tradisional.

Ch.3 International Exhaustion of Rights

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Correa Carlos Maria
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Subject Matter ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Foreign Market ◽  
Trips Agreement ◽  
Parallel Imports ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Domestic Law

This chapter focuses on the issue of exhaustion of rights. Article 6 disclaims any intent in the Trade-related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) Agreement to limit the Members’ freedom to regulate the issue of exhaustion of rights with regard to all types of intellectual property rights (IPRs). It declares the admissibility of the international exhaustion of rights, that is, the possibility of legally importing into a country a product protected by intellectual property rights, after the product has been legitimately put on the market in a foreign market. These imports—made by a party without the authorization of the title-holder but equally legal—are generally known as ‘parallel imports’. Moreover, Article 6 of the TRIPS Agreement has left Member countries freedom to incorporate the principle of exhaustion of rights into their domestic law with a national, regional, or international reach. The issue as such cannot be the subject matter of a dispute settlement under the Agreement.

IV. Intellectual Property

2001 ◽  
Vol 50 (3) ◽  
pp. 714-724
Author(s):  
Joe McMahon ◽  
Catherine Seville
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
World Trade Organization ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
World Trade ◽  
Trips Agreement ◽  
Global System ◽  
The World

This Journal's previous piece on current developments in EC intellectual property noted that this area of law is dominated by the drive towards harmonisation.1 This drive continues, and its success has been such that it can now begin to be seen in an overarching context of globalisation. The idea of a unified global system for the protection of intellectual property now seems at least conceivable, even if not immediately achievable. It is even possible to state that some stages have been achieved on the journey, most notably the TRIPs Agreement. Since adherence to this is a requirement of World Trade Organization (WTO) membership, the arguments in its favour have suddenly become “persuasive”. It represents a tremendous achievement in terms of the protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights throughout the world. The World Intellectual Property Organisation's contribution here and elsewhere has been immense.

scholarly journals PENGECUALIAN PERJANJIAN HAK KEKAYAAN INTELEKTUAL DALAM HUKUM PERSAINGAN USAHA

FIAT JUSTISIA ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Dani Amran Hakim
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Integrated Circuit ◽  
Business Environment ◽  
License Agreement ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Article 50 ◽  
The Right

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

scholarly journals Perlindungan Hukum Terhadap Produk Indikasi Geografis dari Tindakan Peniruan

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 49
Author(s):  
Anak Agung Ngurah Tresna Adnyana
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Research Method ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Trips Agreement ◽  
Geographical Indications ◽  
Geographical Indication ◽  
Legal Certainty ◽  
Empirical Law

Legal protection of Geographical Indications is necessary to determine whether there are communal or collective people. The communal community character means to belong to the community in the registered Geographical Indication area. This study aims to analyze legal certainty as well as the legal protection of product geographical indications of imitation actions. This research uses empirical law research method. In this case, the authors find that the TRIPs Agreement (Trade-related aspects of Intellectual Property Rights) and the act no 20 of 2016 concerning Trademarks and Geographical Indications are terms used to register. Perlindungan hukum terhadap Indikasi Geografis sangat perlu di perhatikan karena karakter kepemilikannya yang kolektif atau komunal. Karakter kepemilikan yang komunal memiliki arti menjadi milik bersama semua masyarakat dalam wilayah Indikasi Geografis yang telah didaftarkan. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis kepastian hukum serta perlindungan hukum produk indikasi geografis dari tindakan peniruan. Dalam penelitian ini metode yang digunakan adalah metode penelitian hukum empiris dengan menggunakan pendekatan perundang-undangan. Dalam penelitian ini penulis menemukan bahwa TRIPs Agreement (Trade Related aspects of Intellectual Property Rights) dan Undang-Undang 20 Tahun 2016 Tentang Merek Dan Indikasi Geografis mengatur secara khusus perlindungan bagi produk indikasi geografis yang telah didaftarkan.

Ch.14 Acquisition and Maintenance of Intellectual Property Rights, Dispute Prevention and Settlement, Transitional and Institutional Arrangements, and Final Provisions

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Correa Carlos Maria
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Institutional Arrangements ◽  
Trips Agreement ◽  
Intellectual Property Protection ◽  
Developed Country ◽  
National Legislation ◽  
One Year

This concluding chapter looks at the acquisition and maintenance of intellectual property rights (IPRs), dispute prevention and settlement, transitional and institutional arrangements, and final provisions in the Trade-related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) Agreement. Different aspects relating to the procedures for the acquisition and maintenance of intellectual property rights are regulated in Article 62 of the TRIPS Agreement. Its main purpose is to ensure that the application of national legislation on this matter does not unjustifiably impair the access to and exercise of such rights. Meanwhile, Articles 63 and 64 contain rules aimed at preventing and settling disputes concerning the implementation of the TRIPS Agreement. Prevention of disputes is basically sought under the TRIPS Agreement through the rules on ‘transparency’ contained in Article 63. All WTO Members could avail themselves of one year after the date of entry into force of the WTO Agreement to comply with the obligations relating to intellectual property protection. The reason for this is quite obvious: most or all Members, including developed country Members, needed to introduce changes into their legislation in order to comply with the standards set out by the TRIPS Agreement, especially with those contained in Part II. A Council to specifically deal with TRIPS matters is established by Article 68.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document