The Relationship Between Domain Names And Intellectual Property

2019 ◽  
pp. 93
Author(s):  
Noureddine Yousfi ◽  
Said Mabrouki
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Domain Names ◽  
The Relationship

Intellectual Property—Internet Jurisdiction and Applicable Law

2021 ◽  
pp. 406-435
Author(s):  
Julia Hörnle
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
European Patent ◽  
Berne Convention ◽  
Domain Names ◽  
Applicable Law ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Personal Jurisdiction ◽  
Brussels Regulation ◽  
Copyright Directive ◽  
The Eu

Chapter 12 covers jurisdiction and applicable law in respect of internet cases involving intellectual property (IP). It covers both registered rights (eg trademarks, patents, design rights) and unregistered rights (eg passing off, copyright). It incisively discusses the relationship between IP and the territoriality principle, and how the English courts have moved away from the strict territoriality rule in recent years. The chapter discusses the Berne Convention and, within the EU, the Copyright Directive overcoming the strict territoriality of copyright. It includes a discussion of domain names and in rem jurisdiction at the place of registration of the domain name. The chapter then moves to an explanation of the jurisdictional rules in England, as well as the harmonized EU rules in the Brussels Regulation. The chapter analyses in rem, subject-matter jurisdiction and its interplay with personal jurisdiction under the Brussels Regulation and the English Jurisdiction rules. The chapter briefly discusses the jurisdictional provisions in the EU Trademark Regulation, Community Design Regulation, and the European Patent. Finally, it covers the rules on applicable law in the Rome II Regulation and the Berne Convention.

The Subject Matter of Intellectual Property

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Justine Pila
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Subject Matter ◽  
Final Stage ◽  
Theoretical Framework ◽  
Trade Mark ◽  
Second Stage ◽  
Essential Properties ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Three Stages ◽  
The Relationship

This book offers a study of the subject matter protected by each of the main intellectual property (IP) regimes. With a focus on European and UK law particularly, it considers the meaning of the terms used to denote the objects to which IP rights attach, such as ‘invention’, ‘authorial work’, ‘trade mark’, and ‘design’, with reference to the practice of legal officials and the nature of those objects specifically. To that end it proceeds in three stages. At the first stage, in Chapter 2, the nature, aims, and values of IP rights and systems are considered. As historically and currently conceived, IP rights are limited (and generally transferable) exclusionary rights that attach to certain intellectual creations, broadly conceived, and that serve a range of instrumentalist and deontological ends. At the second stage, in Chapter 3, a theoretical framework for thinking about IP subject matter is proposed with the assistance of certain devices from philosophy. That framework supports a paradigmatic conception of the objects protected by IP rights as artifact types distinguished by their properties and categorized accordingly. From this framework, four questions are derived concerning: the nature of the (categories of) subject matter denoted by the terms ‘invention’, ‘authorial work’, ‘trade mark’, ‘design’ etc, including their essential properties; the means by which each subject matter is individuated within the relevant IP regime; the relationship between each subject matter and its concrete instances; and the manner in which the existence of a subject matter and its concrete instances is known. That leaves the book’s final stage, in Chapters 3 to 7. Here legal officials’ use of the terms above, and understanding of the objects that they denote, are studied, and the results presented as answers to the four questions identified previously.

Fixing Improvisation

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anthea Kraut
Keyword(s):  
Twentieth Century ◽  
African American ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Case Studies ◽  
Copyright Law ◽  
Property Law ◽  
Intellectual Property Law ◽  
Tap Dance ◽  
American Vernacular ◽  
The Relationship

This chapter juxtaposes brief case studies of African American vernacular dancers from the first half of the twentieth century in order to reexamine the relationship between the ideology of intellectual property law and the traditions of jazz and tap dance, which rely heavily on improvisation. The examples of the blackface performer Johnny Hudgins, who claimed a copyright in his pantomime routine in the 1920s, and of Fred and Sledge, the class-act dance duo featured in the hit 1948 musical Kiss Me, Kate, whose choreography was copyrighted by the white modern dancer Hanya Holm, prompt a rethinking of the assumed opposition between the originality and fixity requirements of copyright law and the improvisatory ethos of jazz and tap dance. Ultimately, the chapter argues that whether claiming or disavowing uniqueness, embracing or resisting documentation, African American vernacular dancers were both advantaged and hampered by copyright law.

scholarly journals IPR Law Protection and Enforcement and the Effect on Horizontal Productivity Spillovers from Inward FDI to Domestic Firms: A Meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Danai Christopoulou ◽  
Nikolaos Papageorgiadis ◽  
Chengang Wang ◽  
Georgios Magkonis
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Host Countries ◽  
Productivity Spillovers ◽  
Domestic Firms ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Positive Effect

AbstractWe study the role of the strength of Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) law protection and enforcement in influencing horizontal productivity spillovers from inward FDI to domestic firms in host countries. While most WTO countries adopted strong IPR legislation due to exogenous pressure resulting from the signing of the Trade-Related Aspects of IPR (TRIPS) agreement, public IPR enforcement strength continues to vary significantly between countries. We meta-analyse 49 studies and find that public IPR enforcement strength has a direct positive effect on horizontal productivity spillovers from inward FDI to domestic firms and a negative moderating effect on the relationship between IPR law protection strength and horizontal productivity spillovers from inward FDI to domestic firms.

scholarly journals Cross-country differences in innovative entrepreneurial activity

2018 ◽  
Vol 58 (7) ◽  
pp. 1301-1329
Author(s):  
Ali Raza ◽  
Moreno Muffatto ◽  
Saadat Saeed
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Right ◽  
Intellectual Property Right ◽  
Entrepreneurial Activity ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Performance Orientation ◽  
Entrepreneurial Cognition ◽  
And Performance ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Business Freedom

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to clarify the relationship between entrepreneurial cognition and innovative entrepreneurial activity (IEA) across countries using an institutional perspective. Design/methodology/approach The paper tests theoretical model using data collected by the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor, the Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness study and the Index of Economic Freedom (IEF). A multi-level analysis is performed based on set of 1,004,620 observations from 49 countries spanning 13 years (2001–2013). Findings The results suggest that in terms of formal regulations; the relationship between entrepreneurial cognitions and IEA becomes stronger when there is an increase in intellectual property right and business freedom regulations in a country. On the other hand, in terms of informal institutions the relationship between entrepreneurial cognitions and IEA becomes stronger when the level of institutional collectivism and uncertainty decreases and performance orientation increases. Originality/value The study indicates that entrepreneurship by innovation increases when the individuals possess high level of entrepreneurial cognition under suitable institutional conditions (e.g. intellectual property right, business freedom, institutional collectivism, uncertainty avoidance and performance orientation).

A Welcome Conversation: Toward a New Historiography of Intellectual Property

2018 ◽  
Vol 43 (03) ◽  
pp. 1113-1129
Author(s):  
Kali Murray
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Legal History ◽  
Social Practices ◽  
The Body ◽  
Property Law ◽  
Legal Concept ◽  
Narrative Structures ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Insight Into

This essay considers what tools should be used to study the legal history of intellectual property. I identify three historiographical strategies: narration, contest, and formation. Narration identifies the diverse “narrative structures” that shape the field of intellectual property history. Contest highlights how the inherent instability of intellectual property as a legal concept prompts recurrent debates over its meaning. Formation recognizes how intellectual property historians can offer insight into broader legal history debates over how to consider the relationship between informal social practices and formalized legal mechanisms. I consider Kara W. Swanson's Banking on the Body: The Market in Blood, Milk and Sperm in Modern America (2014) in light of these historiographical strategies and conclude that Swanson's book guides us to a new conversation in the legal history of intellectual property law.

scholarly journals A New Balance Between IP and Antitrust

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark Lemley
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Government Regulation ◽  
Private Property ◽  
Market Competition ◽  
Antitrust Law ◽  
Dynamic Efficiency ◽  
The Relationship

In this article, I introduce the interaction between intellectual property(IP) and antitrust law. I describe the ways in which these two importantareas of government regulation are and are not in tension, and discuss thehistory of the relationship between these laws. I argue that IP andantitrust have cycled between over- and under-protection, and that we arecurrently (and mistakenly) conditioned to think of private property andprivate ordering as efficient in and of themselves, rather than asefficient only in the context of robust market competition. Further, Iargue that antitrust can serve the goals of innovation and dynamicefficiency directly in circumstances in which competition, not monopoly,serves as a spur to innovation. The goal of the IP and antitrust lawsshould be to seek a robust balance between competition and monopoly in theservice of dynamic efficiency. When IP laws are strong, antitrust lawsshould also be strong, and vice versa.

scholarly journals THE RIGHT OF AUTHORSHIP ON A WORK

2014 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 155-160
Author(s):  
Ciprian Raul Romiţan
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Moral Rights ◽  
Economic Rights ◽  
Natural Connection ◽  
Artistic Work ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Relationship

The moral rights represent the legal expression of the relationship between the workand its creator; they precede, survive and exert a permanent influence on the economic rights.Moral rights are independent of economic rights, the author of a work preserving these rightseven after the transfer of its property rights.The right to claim recognition as the author of the work, called in the doctrine as the"right of paternity of the work" is enshrined in art. 10 lit. b) of the law and it is based on theneed to respect the natural connection between the author and his work. The right toauthorship is the most important prerogative that constitutes intellectual property rights ingeneral and consists of recognizing the true author of a scientific, literary or artistic work.

scholarly journals The protection of cultural heritage: common heritage of humankind, national cultural ‘patrimony’ or private property?

2020 ◽  
Vol 64 (3) ◽  
pp. 351-364
Author(s):  
Fiona Macmillan
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Cultural Heritage ◽  
International Law ◽  
Private Property ◽  
Community Identity ◽  
Cultural Patrimony ◽  
Postcolonial Discourse ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Property Regime ◽  
Protection Of Cultural Heritage

Starting from an argument about the relationship between cultural heritage and national and/or community identity, this article considers the different ways in which both the international law regime for the protection of cultural heritage and the international intellectual property regime tend to appropriate cultural heritage. The article argues that, in the postcolonial context, both these forms of appropriation continue to interfere with the demands for justice and for the recognition of historical wrongs made both by indigenous peoples and by many developing countries. At the same time, the article suggests that these claims are undermined by the misappropriation of the postcolonial discourse with respect to restitution of cultural heritage, particularly in the intra-European context. The article advocates the need for a regime for the protection of cultural heritage that is strong enough to resist its private appropriation through the use of intellectual property rights and nuanced enough to recognise significant differences in the political context of local and national claims to cultural heritage.

Intelligente Systeme – Intelligentes Recht

2021 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Data Protection ◽  
Law School ◽  
Law And Technology ◽  
The Face ◽  
Science Conference ◽  
Data Protection Law ◽  
Smart Technologies ◽  
Adaptive Technologies ◽  
The Relationship

The relationship between law and technology is becoming increasingly complex due to the rapid advance of digitization and the development of new and "smart" technologies. Traditional anthropocentric concepts of law seem to be in question. Moreover, the ways in which law is made and applied are changing. In the face of new and adaptive technologies, must law and its enforcement themselves become more adaptive, and how can this be done? In their contributions to the 6th GRUR Young Science conference, young scientists will address these questions from the perspective of intellectual property, media, competition, information and data protection law and will present their theses for discussion at the online conference organized at Bucerius Law School on June 4 and 5, 2021. With contributions by Dr. Jonas Botta, Dr. Michael Denga, Prof. Dr. Philipp Hacker, Dr. Elsa Kirchner, David Korb, David Linke, Janine Marinello, Ferdinand Müller, Stefan Papastefanou, Dr. Joachim Pierer, Darius Rostam, Martin Schüßler, Florian Skupin, Sebastian Theß and Nora Wienfort.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document