Joshua D. Sarnoff Answers to Questions for the Record of Senator Mazie K. Hirono, Submitted to Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman, Hon. Lindsay O. Graham June 4, 2019 Subcommittee on Intellectual Property Hearing on 'The State of Patent Eligibility in America: Part I'

The article is devoted to the analysis of the changes in economic and legal context for commercial application of intellectual property created under federal budgetary financing. Special attention is given to the role of the state and to comparison of key elements of mechanisms for commercial application of intellectual property that are currently under implementation in Russia and in the West. A number of practical suggestions are presented aimed at improving government stimuli to commercialization of intellectual property created at budgetary expense.

THE STATE AND PROBLEMS OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF TAXATION OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY OPERATIONS

Theory and Practice of Intellectual Property ◽

10.33731/52019.186330 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 0 (5) ◽

Author(s):

Олександр Бутнік-Сіверський

Keyword(s):

Intellectual Property ◽

The State

Comment of the Global Antitrust Institute, George Mason University School of Law, on the State Administration for Industry and Commerce Anti-Monopoly Guidelines on the Abuse of Intellectual Property Rights

SSRN Electronic Journal ◽

10.2139/ssrn.2713763 ◽

2016 ◽

Author(s):

Joshua D. Wright ◽

Koren W. Wong-Ervin ◽

Douglas H. Ginsburg ◽

Bruce H. Kobayashi

Keyword(s):

Intellectual Property ◽

Property Rights ◽

Intellectual Property Rights ◽

The State ◽

State Administration ◽

George Mason University ◽

Industry And Commerce

Comment of the Global Antitrust Institute, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University, on the Anti-Monopoly Commission of the State Council's Anti-Monopoly Guidelines against Abuse of Intellectual Property Rights

SSRN Electronic Journal ◽

10.2139/ssrn.2952414 ◽

2017 ◽

Author(s):

Joshua D. Wright ◽

Koren W. Wong-Ervin ◽

Douglas H. Ginsburg ◽

Bruce H. Kobayashi

Keyword(s):

Intellectual Property ◽

Property Rights ◽

Intellectual Property Rights ◽

The State ◽

Law School ◽

George Mason University

Testimony of Joshua D. Sarnoff Senate Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on Intellectual Property Hearing: The State of Patent Eligibility in America: Part I

SSRN Electronic Journal ◽

10.2139/ssrn.3572387 ◽

2019 ◽

Author(s):

Joshua D. Sarnoff

Keyword(s):

Intellectual Property ◽

The State ◽

Senate Committee

Significant choice-of-law interests and its impact on the formation of choice-of-law regulation in the field of intellectual property

Gosudarstvo i pravo ◽

10.31857/s102694520017272-0 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 186

Author(s):

Svetlana I. Krupko

Keyword(s):

Intellectual Property ◽

Property Rights ◽

Intellectual Property Rights ◽

The State ◽

Close Connection ◽

Choice Of Law ◽

Applicable Law ◽

Advantages And Disadvantages ◽

Special Rules

This article analyzes the choice-of-law interests of specific and potential participants in the relations of intellectual property rights and the state in order to establish the closest connection of the above type of relation with the state, whose law should be applied. Taking into account the directionality of significant choice-of-law interests, advantages and disadvantages of territorial and universal approaches, a theoretically based solution is proposed for the formation of a general choice-of-law rule on the law to be applied to the relation of intellectual property rights. It was revealed in the study that the diversity of the relations of intellectual property rights (their obligatory and non-obligatory, property and personal non-property nature, other differences in legal features) does not automatically generate a multidirectionality of significant choice-of-law interests that should be taken into account when establishing a close connection of the above type of the relation with the state for determination of applicable law, does not prevent the formation of a general choice-of-law rule for the relations of intellectual property rights in general and does not unequivocally testify in favor of the specialization of its binding. However, the diversity of the relations of intellectual property rights should be examined and evaluated for the feasibility and limits of exceptions from the general choice-of-law rule and the development of special rules for resolving certain private of the relations of intellectual property rights.