scholarly journals The Over-Protection of Intellectual Property Rights in Sport in the United States and Elsewhere*

2011 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 43-73
Author(s):  
J. Gordon Hylton
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
The United States

scholarly journals Comparative characteristics of intellectual property judges: Ukraine, United Kingdom, USA

2020 ◽  
pp. 107-111
Author(s):  
M.I. Logvynenko ◽  
M.G. Shunko
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Great Britain ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
United States Of America ◽  
The United States ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Specialized Courts

The article deals with the comparative characterization of specialized courts for the protection of intellectual property rights in Ukraine and developed foreign countries, such as Great Britain and the USA. The article deals with the historical background of the creation of a specialized court on intellectual property in Ukraine, as well as the legal systems in the field of protection of intellectual property rights of Great Britain and the USA, the analysis and consideration of the current judicial systems – in the consideration of civil and criminal cases in the field of intellectual property. property, litigation of the patent authorities of England and Wales, types of specialized courts and their unique procedural features. The nuances and practice of law enforcement activities of judges in the United States, the types and levels of penalties in civil and criminal cases, as well as the divergence of lawsuits and pre-trial procedural arrangements are outlined. The article reveals the similarity of the UK and US legal systems with those currently in force in Ukraine in dealing with intellectual property cases. The identified deficiencies relate to territorial inaccessibility, instances of inconsistency, and imperfection of the judicial system, as well as the defects of the national intellectual property and legal frameworks in place in comparison with the United Kingdom and the United States of America in the field of intellectual property. After researching and analyzing the intellectual property rights protection systems of leading countries in the world, such as England and the United States of America, the conclusions were clearly drawn as to the advisability of setting up a specialized court on intellectual property in Ukraine and the risks involved.

The Intersection Between Intellectual Property and Antitrust Law

2021 ◽  
pp. 121-134
Author(s):  
Mariateresa Maggiolino ◽  
Laura Zoboli
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
European Union ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
The United States ◽  
Antitrust Law ◽  
Policy Decisions ◽  
Alternative Scenarios

The interface between intellectual property rights (IPR) and the rules to protect the correct functioning of the market can be canvassed by looking at when these two sets of provisions converge and collide. This chapter analyses four alternative scenarios, by stressing that policy decisions become crucial to solve the cases of conflict and, in particular, the case where antitrust law forbids practices that intellectual property (IP) laws allow. Moreover, the chapter illustrates that it is in relation to these policy decisions that scholars and practitioners can appreciate how different jurisdictions, as in the United States (US) and European Union (EU), conceptualize the role that property rights and competition are called to play in spurring innovation.

Paying for services: experiences at the Smithonsonian Institute

1997 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 20-23
Author(s):  
Cecilia H. Chin ◽  
lldiko P. DeAngelis
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Art History ◽  
Smithsonian Institution ◽  
The United States ◽  
Great Care ◽  
The World ◽  
Research Complex

The Smithsonian Institution, a trust instrumentality of the United States, and the largest museum and research complex in the world, receives many outside permission requests to reproduce images in the Smithsonian Collections. Charging fees for photographic usage is a common practice in the United States, especially in art history and general museums. Beginning in 1992, the Smithonian established internal guidelines for changing such fees and for handling permission requests from outside sources. The procedures ensure that the Smithsonian recognises and respects the intellectual property rights associated with images in the collections and the terms of any pre-existing agreements. Great care is also taken to protect the Smithsonian’s name from use in any commercial context, to avoid the implication that the Institution endorses a product (or one product rather than another).

scholarly journals Free Trade Agreements With The United States: 8 Lessons For Prospective Parties From Australia’s Experience

2016 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 395-418 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen R. Tully
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Free Trade Agreements ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreements ◽  
The United States

Abstract This article identifies 8 key lessons for those States contemplating a free trade agreement with the United States (U.S.) arising from Australia’s experience. The standards of intellectual property protection under the Australia-U.S. Free Trade Agreement and their impact on pharmaceutical prices in Australia are a particular focus. Prospective parties must first conduct a national interest self-assessment which reviews the desired strength of intellectual property protection under national law and their preference for using flexibilities available to them under the existing international intellectual property rights framework. The United States negotiates free trade agreements in light of previous ones, negotiating outcomes obtained in other fora and the decisions of international trade tribunals. Negotiations typically occur behind closed doors, which is a process having adverse implications for transparent decision-making, public consultation periods and contributions from interested non-governmental actors. A concluded agreement will build on prior treaties and influence the course of future international arrangements. But the impact of a United States free trade agreement is not always clear, including because of a lack of reliable data, and the extent of national legal change is a contested issue given existing reform agendas and external influences. The United States seek to redesign national health care systems in its own image and had little success in Australia’s case. National legal systems need not be harmonised: although there can be some convergence in intellectual property rights regimes, significant differences may also remain. Negotiators must reconcile competing cultures, philosophies and perspectives between States for a free trade agreement to be worthwhile.

scholarly journals Provisions on establishing rights to scent trademark of the US and European Union law - Experience for Vietnam

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 1392-1397
Author(s):  
Tín Minh Ngô ◽  
Thảo Thị Thu Trần
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
European Union ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
The United States ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
Legal Provisions ◽  
The Us

Based on the perspective of analyzing the provisions of the laws of the United States and the laws of the European Union, as well as the practice of protecting non-traditional trademarks in the United States and the European Union, in particular intellectual property rights to the Scent trademark, proposals are made for Vietnam in the process of completing legal provisions, processes, methods of assessment and establishing the rights of Scent trademark rights to meet the global trend and domestic law requirements under the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership's commitments. Accordingly, in the negotiation rounds of the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (the precursor of the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership), the parties participating in the negotiation often disagree on the scope of protection of intellectual property rights, and non-traditional trademarks, sound trademarks, scent trademarks in particular. This is also one of the important reasons for the failure of negotiations and the withdrawal from the US Agreement. Besides, in the future, intellectual property rights and trademark rights, non-traditional trademarks in particular, will continue to be important negotiating topics that determine the success of the new generation of the free trade agreement. Therefore, the early improvement of the legal system in the establishment and protection of the rights to this object contributes to helping Vietnam be more active in negotiation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document