Subjects -> PATENTS, TRADEMARKS AND COPYRIGHTS (Total: 26 journals)
Showing 1 - 9 of 9 Journals sorted alphabetically
Berkeley Technology Law Journal     Free   (Followers: 14)
Expert Opinion on Therapeutic Patents     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 12)
Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal     Open Access   (Followers: 20)
IIC - International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 28)
International Data Privacy Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 22)
International Journal of Intellectual Property Management     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 30)
IP Theory     Open Access   (Followers: 12)
JIPITEC Journal of Intellectual Property, Information Technology and E-Commerce Law     Open Access   (Followers: 24)
John Marshall Journal of Information Technology & Privacy Law     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 7)
John Marshall Review of Intellectual Property Law     Free   (Followers: 10)
Journal of Copyright in Education & Librarianship     Open Access   (Followers: 33)
Journal of Data Protection & Privacy     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 6)
Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 30)
Journal of Intellectual Property Rights (JIPR)     Open Access   (Followers: 23)
Law, State and Telecommunications Review     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 14)
Northwestern Journal of Technology and Intellectual Property     Open Access   (Followers: 8)
Propiedad Intelectual     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Recent Patents on Anti-Cancer Drug Discovery     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 2)
Recent Patents on Anti-Infective Drug Discovery     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 1)
Reports of Patent, Design and Trade Mark Cases     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 5)
Revista La Propiedad Inmaterial     Open Access  
The Journal of World Intellectual Property     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 25)
Ticaret ve Fikri Mülkiyet Hukuku Dergisi     Open Access  
Web Journal of Current Legal Issues     Open Access   (Followers: 6)
World Patent Information     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 17)
Similar Journals
Journal Cover
Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice
Number of Followers: 30  
 
  Hybrid Journal Hybrid journal (It can contain Open Access articles)
ISSN (Print) 1747-1532 - ISSN (Online) 1747-1540
Published by Oxford University Press Homepage  [412 journals]
  • Defining the indefinable: Legislating for “ambush marketing”
    • Authors: Johnson P.
      Pages: 313 - 314
      Abstract: Ambush marketing is coming of age. The term was coined in the 1980s by Jerry C Welsh while working for American Express. In its infancy, ambush marketing had many different meanings depending on whom was asked. Welsh himself defined it loosely to mean little more than an activity undertaken by a non-sponsor to take marketing supremacy from the sponsor. More recently, the International Olympic Committee described it in sweeping terms as an attempt to create an unauthorised or false association with an event thereby interfering with the legitimate contractual rights of the official marketing partners of the event. In the early years, these broad definitions did not matter too much as they were largely confined to marketing discussions.
      PubDate: Fri, 15 May 2020 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/jiplp/jpaa049
      Issue No: Vol. 15, No. 5 (2020)
       
  • Online marketplace operators saved from liability for trade mark
           infringement'
    • Authors: Gommers C; De Pauw E.
      Pages: 315 - 316
      PubDate: Sun, 19 Apr 2020 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/jiplp/jpaa070
      Issue No: Vol. 15, No. 5 (2020)
       
  • CJEU rules on absolute ground concerning marks contrary to accepted
           principles of morality 
    • Authors: Żelechowski Ł.
      Pages: 316 - 318
      Abstract: Court of Justice of the European Union, Case C-240/18 P, Constantin Film Produktion GmbH v EUIPO, EU:C:2020:118, 27 February 2020
      PubDate: Fri, 24 Apr 2020 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/jiplp/jpaa043
      Issue No: Vol. 15, No. 5 (2020)
       
  • US court rules that unlicensed reproduction of NBA players' tattoos in
           their videogame avatars is not a copyright infringement
    • Authors: Rosati E.
      Pages: 318 - 319
      Abstract: United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, Solid Oak Sketches, LLC v 2 K Games, Inc and Take-Two Interactive Software, Inc, 16-CV-724-LTS-SDA, 26 March 2020
      PubDate: Fri, 24 Apr 2020 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/jiplp/jpaa061
      Issue No: Vol. 15, No. 5 (2020)
       
  • Free speech in denial of a permanent injunction in US copyright practice
    • Authors: Wu Q.
      Pages: 320 - 321
      Abstract: TD Bank NA v Hill (2019) 928 F 3d 259 (3d Cir), US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, judgment of 1 July 2019
      PubDate: Tue, 07 Apr 2020 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/jiplp/jpaa044
      Issue No: Vol. 15, No. 5 (2020)
       
  • Michael Skidmore v Led Zeppelin: Copyright infringement in music under US
           law
    • Authors: Bosher H.
      Pages: 321 - 323
      Abstract: Michael Skidmore v Led Zeppelin No 16-56057, DC No 2:15-cv-03462-RGK-AGR, 9 March 2020The US Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal upheld that Led Zeppelin's song Stairway to Heaven did not infringe the copyright of the instrumental song ‘Taurus’ and overruled circuit precedent to reject the inverse ratio rule.
      PubDate: Fri, 24 Apr 2020 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/jiplp/jpaa055
      Issue No: Vol. 15, No. 5 (2020)
       
  • From ‘Sherlockian Venture’ to a ‘Matter of Trial’: Delhi High
           Court adds to the plight of the Indian direct selling market
    • Authors: Gupta A.
      Pages: 324 - 325
      Abstract: Amazon Seller Services Pvt Ltd & Ors v Amway India Enterprises Pvt Ltd & Ors, Delhi High Court, 31 January 2020
      PubDate: Fri, 01 May 2020 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/jiplp/jpaa068
      Issue No: Vol. 15, No. 5 (2020)
       
  • Debranding and rebranding of goods: the Mitsubishi decision and the scope
           of trade mark protection based on function theory
    • Authors: Stolzenburg-Wiemer S.
      Pages: 326 - 331
      Abstract: The authorDr Sandra Stolzenburg-Wiemer is Counsel in the Duesseldorf office of European IP law boutique HOYNG ROKH MONEGIER.
      PubDate: Fri, 24 Apr 2020 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/jiplp/jpaa041
      Issue No: Vol. 15, No. 5 (2020)
       
  • National copyright decisions round-up 2019
    • Authors: .
      Pages: 332 - 364
      Abstract: The authorsThis contribution is the result of a joint effort of several Bird & Bird IP lawyers in different jurisdictions who prepared individual country reports. In alphabetical order, the authors are Roman Brtka, Daniele De Angelis, Rebecca Fassihi, Daria Gęsicka, Troy Gurnett, Anna Kallio, Bettina Kövecses, Charlotte Haine, Bálint Halász, Andrea Jarolímková, Sabrina Lodder, Teresa Mercadal Menchaca, Shariqa Mestroni, Ella Mikkola, Clemens Molle, Mikko Nurmisto, Peer B Petersen, Katie Rimmer, Martin Senftleben, Graham Smith, Michał Sałajczyk, Edouard Treppoz, Benoit Van Asbroeck, and Kajsa Zenk. The reports were collated and edited by Eleonora Rosati.This articleIn 2019, national courts in individual EU Member States and in Australia delivered a series of important rulings in the copyright field. This contribution provides a round-up of the most significant judgments issued in the period 1 January—–31 December 2019.As far as decisions in EU Member States are concerned, the selection has been made by giving precedence to areas in which EU harmonization has occurred (including economic rights, exceptions and limitations, and enforcement), so that guidance provided by national courts in a certain country might be useful also to practitioners and courts in other EU Member States.The analysis is divided by area (economic rights, exceptions and limitations, enforcement issues and other issues) and country (Australia, Belgium, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, Spain, Sweden and UK).
      PubDate: Wed, 18 Mar 2020 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/jiplp/jpaa027
      Issue No: Vol. 15, No. 5 (2020)
       
  • The real problem of fakes in Africa: enabling factors and advice to rights
           holders
    • Authors: Schneider M; Ferguson V, Ho Tu Nam N.
      Pages: 365 - 377
      Abstract: The authorsMarius Schneider heads IPvocate Africa, a boutique law firm specialized in protecting, managing and enforcing IP rights in Africa. Vanessa Ferguson is the founder of Ferguson Attorneys and a South African qualified trade mark practitioner, specializing in IP protection and enforcement throughout Africa. Nora Ho Tu Nam is a lawyer at IPvocate Africa. She holds a doctorate in law from the University of Pretoria.This articleWith unprecedented economic growth and the emergence of a previously untapped upper and middle class, Africa has caught the attention of numerous rights holders. Many—including infringers—want to enter this promising market.Based on the practical experience of the authors and buttressed by official sources and statistics, this article sets out the factors which enable counterfeiting and piracy in Africa. Going beyond the usual argument of corruption of the enforcement authorities, the article also discusses free trade zones, landlocked countries and trade links between Africa and China amongst others. While the situation may seem particularly daunting, numerous improvements are taking place on the ground. The article explains the various initiatives taken by African states to protect IP rights and the growing awareness of the value of IP rights on the continent.The aim behind this article is to provide rights holders, their legal advisers and anyone involved in the enforcement of IP rights in Africa with a thorough understanding of IP enforcement in Africa and of the possible solutions. Hence, the article ends with practical advice to rights holders and highlights solutions for the benefit of their brand and consumers.
      PubDate: Fri, 17 Apr 2020 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/jiplp/jpaa023
      Issue No: Vol. 15, No. 5 (2020)
       
  • ‘Digital due process’: a need for online justice
    • Authors: Mostert F.
      Pages: 378 - 389
      Abstract: The authorFrederick Mostert is a Founder of Digilabs and the Digital Scholarship Institute, Professor of Practice at the Dickson Poon School of Law, King’s College, London, Research Fellow at the Oxford Intellectual Property Research Centre, University of Oxford and a Research Fellow at the Research Centre for Intellectual Property at of Tsinghua University School of Law, Beijing.This articlePublic discourse, free speech and global online crime prevention are all at present under extreme pressures, due, ironically, to both significant over-blocking and under-blocking by social media platforms. At the one end of the spectrum, user-generated content is far too often subject to robo-takedowns. At the other extreme, clearly criminal activity such as online child sexual abuse runs rampant and is not blocked nearly enough throughout the world.These two extremes are to a great extent caused by an inadequate and unbalanced content moderation and legal architecture developed by the digital gatekeepers. Moreover, the manner in which the Internet’s so-called ‘attention merchants’ and ‘surveillance capitalists’ abuse personal privacy through the data-harvesting and micro-targeting of individuals who gather in the ‘modern public squares’ is of enormous public concern internationally.There is a clear and present need to ensure justice is done within the international digital community as evidenced by the public outcry on these fundamental issues as they play out on the world’s social media platforms. ‘Digital due process’ might form the basis of an online infrastructure to restore fundamental freedoms and support the rule of law in the digital world. Social media platforms have evolved into the ‘modern public square’—with all the legal complexities involved. Public discourse, free speech and global online crime prevention are all at present under extreme pressures, due—ironically—to both significant over-blocking and under-blocking by social media platforms. At the one end of the spectrum, user-generated content is far too often subject to robo-takedowns.11 At the other extreme, clearly criminal activities such as online child sexual abuse run rampant and is not blocked nearly enough throughout the world.22 These two extremes are to a great extent caused by an inadequate and unbalanced content moderation and legal architecture developed by the digital gatekeepers. Moreover, the manner in which the Internet’s so-called ‘attention merchants’ and ‘surveillance capitalists’ abuse personal privacy through the data-harvesting and micro-targeting of individuals who gather in the ‘modern public squares’ is of enormous public concern internationally.33 There is a clear and present need to ensure justice is done within the international digital community as evidenced by the public outcry on these fundamental issues as they play out on the world’s social media platforms. ‘Digital due process’ might form the basis of an online infrastructure to restore fundamental freedoms and support the rule of law in the digital world.
      PubDate: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/jiplp/jpaa024
      Issue No: Vol. 15, No. 5 (2020)
       
  • Communication to the public online: protecting copyright or breaking the
           Internet'
    • Authors: McWhirter A.
      Pages: 390 - 398
      Abstract: The authorAndrew McWhirter is an intellectual property specialist at Brodies LLP and a tutor in intellectual property on the Diploma in Professional Legal Practice at the University of Edinburgh.
      PubDate: Sun, 26 Apr 2020 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/jiplp/jpaa038
      Issue No: Vol. 15, No. 5 (2020)
       
  • Artificial intelligence and inventorship: an Australian perspective
    • Authors: Li N; Koay T.
      Pages: 399 - 404
      Abstract: The authorsNick Li is an Associate within the Intellectual Property group at Allens, in Melbourne, Australia. Tzeyi Koay is a final year JD student at the University of Melbourne.
      PubDate: Fri, 24 Apr 2020 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/jiplp/jpaa039
      Issue No: Vol. 15, No. 5 (2020)
       
  • Digital Copyright: Law and Practice
    • Authors: Jütte B.
      Pages: 405 - 406
      Abstract: Digital Copyright: Law and Practice, 5th ednSimon Stokes Hart Publishing, 2019 ISBN: 978-1-5099-1729-7, Hard cover, pp. 360 Price: £60
      PubDate: Sun, 03 May 2020 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/jiplp/jpaa054
      Issue No: Vol. 15, No. 5 (2020)
       
  • Corrigendum
    • Pages: 407 - 407
      Abstract: Edvinas Meskys et al. Regulating deep fakes: legal and ethical considerations. Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, 2020. doi:10.1093/jiplp/jpz167
      PubDate: Fri, 01 May 2020 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/jiplp/jpaa072
      Issue No: Vol. 15, No. 5 (2020)
       
 
JournalTOCs
School of Mathematical and Computer Sciences
Heriot-Watt University
Edinburgh, EH14 4AS, UK
Email: journaltocs@hw.ac.uk
Tel: +00 44 (0)131 4513762
 


Your IP address: 34.238.190.122
 
Home (Search)
API
About JournalTOCs
News (blog, publications)
JournalTOCs on Twitter   JournalTOCs on Facebook

JournalTOCs © 2009-