scholarly journals The Economics of Improvement in Intellectual Property Law

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark Lemley
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Patent Law ◽  
Property Right ◽  
Property Law ◽  
Intellectual Property Law ◽  
Basic Work ◽  
Freedom Of Action

A number of doctrines in modern copyright and patent law attempt to strikesome balance between the rights of original developers and the rights ofsubsequent improvers. Both patents and copyrights are limited in durationand in scope. Each of these limitations provides some freedom of action tosubsequent improvers. Improvers are free to use material that is in thepublic domain because the copyright or patent has expired. They are free toskirt the edges of existing intellectual property rights, for example bytaking the ideas but not the expression from a copyrighted work or"designing around" the claims of a patent. However, improvers cannot alwaysavoid the intellectual property rights of the basic work on which they wishto improve. Some improvements fall within the scope of the preexistingintellectual property right, either because of an expansive definition ofthat right or because economic or technical necessity requires that theimprover hew closely to the work of the original creator in some basicrespect. Here, the improver is at the mercy of the original intellectualproperty owner, unless there is some separate right that expressly allowscopying for the sake of improvement.

Actions for Infringement of a Foreign Intellectual Property Right in an English Court

1997 ◽  
Vol 46 (4) ◽  
pp. 918-925
Author(s):  
Stuart Dutson
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Property Right ◽  
Intellectual Property Right ◽  
Property Law ◽  
English Court ◽  
Intellectual Property Law ◽  
Forum Non Conveniens ◽  
The Way

Recent English decisions have paved the way for English courts to apply foreign intellectual property law to the infringement of foreign intellectual property (‘IP’) rights in cases in which the court is seised of jurisdiction pursuant to the 1968 Brussels and 1989 Lugano Conventions. If one defendant can be sued pursuant to the Conventions' rules, the potential exists to consolidate in one English action claims against different defendants for the infringement of intellectual property rights from different jurisdictions. This ability to consolidate infringement actions is subject to Article 16(4) of the Conventions, the requirements of Article 6(1) and RSC Order 11, rule 1(1)(c), and the doctrine of forum non conveniens. However, it appears that in cases in which the court is seised of jurisdiction pursuant to the non-Convention rules, English courts will not be entitled to apply foreign intellectual property laws.

Beyond Unbridled Optimism and Fear: Indigenous Peoples, Intellectual Property, Human Rights and the Globalisation of Traditional Knowledge and Expressions of Folklore: Part I

2013 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 319-339 ◽  
Author(s):  
Caroline Joan S. Picart ◽  
Caroline Joan S. Picart ◽  
Marlowe Fox
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Traditional Knowledge ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Property Law ◽  
Cultural Expression ◽  
Intellectual Property Law ◽  
Traditional Cultural Expressions

Abstract This article is the first part of a two-part piece, which considers the intellectual property rights of indigenous peoples. After establishing pragmatic working definitions of who “indigenous peoples” are and what folklore (or “traditional cultural expression”) is, as compared with, but dialectically related to, “traditional knowledge,” this article does the following: 1) explains why western assumptions built into intellectual property law make this area of law a problematic tool for protecting traditional knowledge (TK) and expressions of folklore (EoF) or traditional cultural expressions (TCE) of indigenous peoples; and 2) creates a general sketch of human rights related legal instruments that could be and have been harnessed, with varying degrees of success, in the protection of the intellectual property of indigenous peoples.

scholarly journals Intellectual property law in the field of sports: specifics of manifestations and features of legal regulation

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (69) ◽  
pp. 530-546
Author(s):  
Evgen Kharytonov ◽  
Olena Kharytonova ◽  
Maxym Tkalych ◽  
Inna Bolokan ◽  
Hanna Samilo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Public Relations ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Property Law ◽  
Sports Law ◽  
Intellectual Property Law ◽  
Legal Method ◽  
Wide Range

The article aims to explore the relationships that arise with respect to intellectual property rights in sports. The objectives of the article are to establish points of contact between intellectual property law and sports, as well as a detailed analysis of relevant public relations in terms of intellectual property law and sports law. To achieve the objectives of the article, the authors used a number of scientific methods, among which the main methods are analysis, synthesis and comparative-legal method. The authors of the study concluded that modern sport is developing in close intertwining with intellectual property rights, because only in this way can a sports spectacle be conveyed to a wide range of spectators and consumers in a broad sense. In addition, the range of points of contact between intellectual property and sports law is constantly growing and such can now be called not only patents and trademarks in sports, but also copyright, "image" rights, know-how in sports and the like.

scholarly journals Artificial Intelligence and Intellectual Property Law

2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 83-98
Author(s):  
Swapnil Tripathi ◽  
Chandni Ghatak
Keyword(s):  
Artificial Intelligence ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Property Law ◽  
Human Intervention ◽  
Intellectual Property Law ◽  
Insight Into ◽  
Artificial Intelligence Systems

Artificial intelligence systems have been gaining widespread momentum in today’s progressing tech-savvy world. With sophisticated technologies being incorporated in the same, it is only a matter of time these systems start to produce marvelous inventions without human intervention of any kind. This brings forth pertinent questions concerning Intellectual Property Rights, (IPR) for, it challenges not only traditional notions of concepts such as patents and copyrights, but also leads to the emergence of questions related to the regulation of such creations amidst others. This paper seeks to provide insight into the expanding scope of IPR laws and artificial intelligence, along with the inevitable challenges it brings from a worldwide lens on the matter. It also attempts to provide suggestions transcending IPR, and seeks to address questions concerning criminal liability for the content created by such technologies.

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.

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 Certain aspects of possible codification of legislation of intellectual property law

2021 ◽  
pp. 108-118
Author(s):  
Olena Shtefan
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Public Relations ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Civil Code ◽  
Property Law ◽  
Intellectual Property Law ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Independent Branch

Keywords: recodification of the Civil Code of Ukraine, codification of legislation onintellectual property law, subject and method of intellectual property law The article examines the issues related to the possibility ofcodification of legislation in the field of intellectual property rights. Currently, inUkraine there is a three-tier regulation of public relations in the field of intellectualproperty law. On the one hand, the Civil Code of Ukraine, the rules of which are characterizedby a corresponding nature, terminological inconsistency with special legislation;special legislation regulating legal relations arising from the creation and use ofcertain objects of intellectual property rights; as well as the provisions of ratified internationallegal acts in this area. Such legislation does not contribute to effectiveprotection or effective protection of intellectual property rights.The updating of the Civil Code of Ukraine will not improve the situation regardingproper legislative support in this area, and may lead to new conflicts. Based on the analysis of existing approaches in legal doctrine on the possible codificationof legislation in the field of intellectual property law, it is concluded that it ispossible if the latter is separated into an independent branch of law, characterized bythe subject and method of legal regulation. The existing approach to the definition ofthe subject of regulation in the doctrine of intellectual property law coincides with thecivilized approaches and does not reflect the specifics of legal relations that characterizethe field of intellectual property. The subject of intellectual property law is notlimited to private law relations, public law is also quite common. In this regard, it isproposed to understand the subject as a legal relationship arising in connection withthe creation, use and protection of intellectual property rights. It is proved that theright of intellectual property can be separated into an independent branch of law andto codify its legislation. This will be facilitated by the interest of the state and the correspondingpolitical will to do so.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document