Article 53 Means of evidence

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andreas von Falck ◽  
Stephan Dorn
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
European Parliament ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
Legislative Procedure ◽  
The Creation ◽  
Ordinary Legislative Procedure ◽  
Unitary Patent

The Lisbon Treaty introduced a more specific legal basis for the creation of European intellectual property rights. According to Art 118(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), measures for the creation of European intellectual property rights are to be established by the European Parliament and the Council acting under the ordinary legislative procedure. Art 118(2) TFEU, however, sets out a specific legal basis for the language arrangements for European intellectual property rights, which are to be established under a special legislative procedure by the Council acting unanimously after consulting the European Parliament. Therefore, the translation arrangements for any unitary patent system in the EU must be established by a separate regulation.

Subject matter

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Winfried Tilmann
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
European Parliament ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
Legislative Procedure ◽  
The Creation ◽  
Ordinary Legislative Procedure ◽  
Unitary Patent

The Lisbon Treaty introduced a more specific legal basis for the creation of European intellectual property rights. According to Art 118(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), measures for the creation of European intellectual property rights are to be established by the European Parliament and the Council acting under the ordinary legislative procedure. Art 118(2) TFEU, however, sets out a specific legal basis for the language arrangements for European intellectual property rights, which are to be established under a special legislative procedure by the Council acting unanimously after consulting the European Parliament. Therefore, the translation arrangements for any unitary patent system in the EU must be established by a separate regulation.

Article 118 TFEU

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Manuel Kellerbauer
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
European Parliament ◽  
Internal Market ◽  
Legislative Procedure ◽  
The Creation ◽  
Ordinary Legislative Procedure

In the context of the establishment and functioning of the internal market, the European Parliament and the Council, acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure, shall establish measures for the creation of European intellectual property rights to provide uniform protection of intellectual property rights throughout the Union and for the setting up of centralised Union-wide authorisation, coordination and supervision arrangements.

Article 262 TFEU

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bernhard Schima
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
European Parliament ◽  
The Other ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Legislative Procedure

Article 229a EC Without prejudice to the other provisions of the Treaties, the Council, acting unanimously in accordance with a special legislative procedure and after consulting the European Parliament, may adopt provisions to confer jurisdiction, to the extent that it shall determine, on the Court of Justice of the European Union in disputes relating to the application of acts adopted on the basis of the Treaties which create European intellectual property rights. These provisions shall enter into force after their approval by the Member States in accordance with their respective constitutional requirements.

scholarly journals The features of the contractual form of protection of subjective intellectual property rights for a cinematographic work under the laws of Ukraine and the countries of the European Union

2020 ◽  
pp. 323-328
Author(s):  
Kateryna Poturai
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
General Concept ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Modern Development ◽  
The Creation ◽  
Civil Contract

The article reveals the features of the contractual form of subjective intellectual property rights to a cinematographic work underthe laws of Ukraine and the European Union as the main form of protection of cinematographic works.The author emphasizes that in modern development of copyright relations, civil law has abandoned the legislative consolidationof the concept of copyright agreement, yet only lists and discloses the sense of its types.Thus, at the legislative and theoretical level, the problem of classifying a copyright agreement on the creation of a cinematogra -phic work as an agreement on the alienation of exclusive rights or a license agreement still remains unresolved. At the present stage,the legal regulation of the creation and use of films is further complicated by the fact that many film studios instead of copyright agreementsenter into refit contracts on the creation of films.The author draws attention to the fact that the French legal doctrine does not see any difference between the subject of the contractand the content of the obligation and uses such concepts as synonyms. The French legislator does not give a general concept, whichwould reveal the main features of the copyright agreement. However, the provisions of the French Intellectual Property Code directlyindicate the possibility of assignment of the author’s property rights (succession in a certain part of copyright) on the basis of the cont -ract. In the French literature and in the practice of courts it is unanimously recognized that from the point of view of general civil lawthe assignment of exclusive property copyrights is in principle a civil contract of sale of property, in turn a license is a civil contract ofproperty lease.The author also emphasizes that there is a necessity to regulate the conclusion of copyright agreements with all subjects of a cinematographicwork, which may have intellectual property rights in connection with the creation of such a work.

scholarly journals Legal Regulation of the Protection of Intellectual Property Rights within the EU Digital Market

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Iryna Yavorska ◽  
Sofiya Boyarska
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
European Parliament ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Domain Name ◽  
Cross Border ◽  
Council Directive ◽  
The Eu

The active usage of the technologies, constant exchange of information and its use demanded a clear regulation of relations within the functioning of the digital market. In the context of the implementation of the Association Agreements between Ukraine and the EU, it seems necessary to study the positive experience of regulating relations and protecting intellectual property rights within the European Union digital market. The article explores such EU secondary law acts as directives and regulations that determine the foundations and features of the functioning of EU digital market actors. In particular, it examined Directive (EU) 2019/789 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 April 2019 laying down rules on the use of copyright and related rights applicable to certain online broadcasting and retransmission of broadcasting programs and amending Council Directive 93/83 EEC (2019), which regulates the principles governing the transboundary transmission of television and radio broadcasting via the satellite network; Directive (EU) 2019/790 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 April 2019 on copyright and related rights in the Digital Single Market and amending Directives 96/9/EC and 2001/29/2019, which amended and expended 7 existing Directives governing relevant issues, Regulation (EU) 2019/517 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 March 2019 on the implementation and operation of the .eu top-level domain name and amending and repealing Regulation (EU) No 733/2002, and repealing Commission Regulation (EC) No 874/2002 (2019), which provides a number of important innovations for the .eu top-level domain name and Regulation (EU) No 2017/1128 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 June 2017 on the cross-border movement of Internet content services in the internal market, which identifies legitimate access to portable internet-Content. Not only when they are in their own country, but also when moving within the EU. Key words: digital market; legal regulation of EU digital market functioning; .eu top-level domain name; portable internet content; cross-border transmission.

scholarly journals Peran Lembaga Manajemen Kolektif Sebagai Bentuk Perlindungan Hukum Pencipta Lagu Dan Pemilik Hak Terkait

2019 ◽  
Vol 22 (01) ◽  
pp. 37-54
Author(s):  
Elly Hernawati
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Copyright Protection ◽  
Copyright Holder ◽  
Business Climate ◽  
Management Agency ◽  
Collective Management ◽  
The Creation ◽  
The Right

Copyright is one of the Intellectual Property Rights components and should be paid attention to. Even more in technology era that developing, copyright protection needed to be enhanced, so that the right of creator, Copyright holder or owner of relevant rights can be protected and urge people to create. Indirectly, good and healthy business climate could be fostered.  Not all people have skill to create, that is why those people who have skill to create must be protected and even awarded, hoping that people urged to create. One of the creations that protected are song and music. In creating song or music, creator involve recording producer, music director or arranger. Regarding the creation, creator holds moral and economy rights, while parties involved hold the relevant rights to it. Collective Management Agency is an agency that help creator or relevant rights owner in managing and distributing the creation which is song or music that being commercialized. Yet the creator must be the member of the agency beforehand. Commercialization of a song or music by user can rise problem. Protection to the song or music is for the whole thing, including lyric, notation, arrangement and song title. The utilization of a song or music should be still protecting the parties that hold the copyright and the relevant right to it.

Time is of the essence: Explaining the duration of European Union lawmaking under the co-decision procedure

2021 ◽  
pp. 019251212110364
Author(s):  
Adam Kirpsza
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Decision Procedure ◽  
European Parliament ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Factors Affecting ◽  
Issue Linkage ◽  
Rational Choice Institutionalism ◽  
Legislative Procedure ◽  
Ordinary Legislative Procedure ◽  
European Parliament Elections

The article explores factors affecting the duration of the co-decision procedure (currently the ordinary legislative procedure), the main procedure for adopting legislation in the European Union. Drawing from rational choice institutionalism, it expects the speed of co-decision to be determined by three attributes: the impatience of legislators, issue linkage and the characteristics of Council and European Parliament negotiators ( relais actors). The hypotheses are tested using survival analysis on a dataset of 599 controversial legislative acts submitted and enacted under co-decision between 1999 and 2009. The results show that co-decision proposals are decided faster when they are urgent, negotiated prior to the European Parliament elections and concluded through single proposal logrolls. By contrast, multi-proposal packages and the ideological distance between relais actors prolong decision-making. Overall, the article contributes to the literature by showing that the impatience of legislators, package deals and the properties of negotiators are relevant drivers of co-decision duration.

Detecting and Prosecuting IP Infringement with AICan the AI Genie Repulse the Forty Counterfeit Thieves of Alibaba?

2021 ◽  
pp. 292-320
Author(s):  
Daniel Seng
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Qualitative Data ◽  
Single Market ◽  
Online Environment ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
Automated Systems ◽  
Driven Systems

Drawing from available quantitative and qualitative data, this chapter briefly identifies and describes the automated as well as the more sophisticated AI-driven systems deployed to detect and enforce intellectual property rights (IPR) infringement by trademark and copyright holders in the online environment. It studies the legal basis for the use of such automated systems in copyright and trademark laws, and examines how such automated systems have upended, refocused, and altered many of the issues of IPR infringement and their enforcement. This chapter will also look at the problems of non-compliant Digital Millennium Copyright Act takedown notices, opportunistic copyright trolls, and non-interventionist Internet intermediaries, review the relevant judicial and legislative treatments including those in the Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market, and propose possible solutions to these problems.

1. Introduction

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. Bently ◽  
B. Sherman ◽  
D. Gangjee ◽  
P. Johnson
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
European Economic Area ◽  
Property Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
Intellectual Property Law ◽  
The Uk

This introduction provides an overview of topics covered in this book which relate to all areas of intellectual property law, including the justifications that have been put forward for granting intellectual property rights. It also considers the key international and regional developments that have influenced intellectual property law in the UK, such as the creation of the World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO), the Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) negotiations, and European Union law. The chapter also discusses the ways in which the European Union is involved in intellectual property law, such as its involvement in negotiating and signing treaties. Finally, it looks at the European Economic Area and non-EU regional initiatives on intellectual property, as well as the implications of Brexit.

scholarly journals PERLINDUNGAN HUKUM PENCATATAN LOGO SEBAGAI CIPTAAN SETELAH BERLAKUNYA UNDANG-UNDANG NOMOR 28 TAHUN 2014 TENTANG HAK CIPTA

NOTARIUS ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 118
Author(s):  
Widowati Maria Teresa ◽  
Budi Santoso
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Creation ◽  
The Government ◽  
Legal Entities

With the enactment of Law Number 28, 2014 About Copyright the creation of art in the form of a logo or distinctive sign is used as a brand in the trade of goods/services or used as a symbol of the organization, entity, or legal entities can not be recorded. Logo that cannot be registered as creation may be registered as trademarks and obtain trademarks protection. Associated with the unregistered logo in the List of Works does not reduce the copyrights protection of the logo, because the protection of the logo as Creation appears declaratively. Consequences of the unlisted logo in the List of Works are logo will not get an official passage on Creation. The government needs to tighten substantive and material checks on all works listed in the field of Intellectual Property Rights and the government may take the initiative to carry out dissemination and counselling accessible to the public especially for business practitioner. Keywords : Logo, Legal Protection, Copyrights AbstrakDengan diberlakukannya Undang-undang Nomor 28 Tahun 2014 Tentang Hak Cipta, seni lukis yang berupa logo atau tanda pembeda yang digunakan sebagai merek dalam perdagangan barang/jasa atau digunakan sebagai lambang organisasi, badan usaha, atau badan hukum tidak dapat dicatatkan. Logo yang tidak dapat dicatatkan sebagai Ciptaan dapat didaftarkan sebagai Merek dan mendapatkan perlindungan Merek. Terkait dengan tidak dicatatkannya logo dalam Daftar Ciptaan tidak mengurangi perlindungan Hak Cipta atas logo, karena perlindungan logo sebagai Ciptaan muncul secara deklaratif. Konsekuensi dari tidak dapat dicatatkannya logo dalam Daftar Ciptaan adalah Ciptaan logo tidak akan mendapatkan petikan resmi atas Ciptaan. Pemerintah perlu untuk memperketat pemeriksaan substantif maupun materiil terhadap seluruh karya yang didaftarkan di seluruh bidang Hak Kekayaan Intelektual dan dapat mengambil inisiatif untuk melakukan diseminasi dan penyuluhan yang dapat diakses secara mudah bagi masyarakat pada umumnya dan pelaku bisnis pada khususnya. Kata kunci : Logo, Perlindungan Hukum, Hak Cipta 

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document