JournalTOCs

GRUR International
Number of Followers: 4

Full-text available via subscription

Subscription journal
ISSN (Print) 2632-8623 - ISSN (Online) 2632-8550
Published by Oxford University Press

[425 journals]

Responses of Intellectual Property and Competition Law to the Challenges
of Climate Change
- Free pre-print version: Loading...
  Rate this result: What is this?
  
  Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
  A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
  
  Pages: 715 - 716
  Abstract: It becomes increasingly unlikely that the world will achieve the internationally agreed objective of limiting global warming to a maximum of 1.5 degrees centigrade as compared to pre-industrial times. As the European emergency management service Copernicus reported in February 2024, for the first time ever the increase of the temperature on earth exceeded this benchmark throughout the preceding 12-month period.
  PubDate: Wed, 26 Jun 2024 00:00:00 GMT
  DOI: 10.1093/grurint/ikae085
  Issue No: Vol. 73, No. 8 (2024)
Why Patents on Climate Technologies Must Be Cut Short
- Free pre-print version: Loading...
  Rate this result: What is this?
  
  Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
  A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
  
  Pages: 717 - 741
  Abstract: AbstractThis contribution questions the term of protection for patents under circumstances of climate change. Patents typically last for 20 years but, for climate-related technologies, this is arguably too long. Under the 1.5°C scenario of the Paris Agreement, we need to make significant headway before 2030. Luckily, the technologies that need to be implemented broadly to reach the 2030 threshold have been developed already. To save civilisation from the worst impacts of climate change, the roll-out of existing technologies (static efficiency) is more important than the development of new ones (dynamic efficiency).However, patent terms take neither static efficiency nor the climate timeframe into account. Technologies developed today will come off patent only in the 2040s, limiting their free availability when their wide roll-out should be the main concern. Conversely, the climate technologies that come off patent today were developed in the early 2000s, long before climate change acquired its current urgency and investment in climate technologies was ramped up.These developments show that innovation systems for climate change have worked well, but they also show how terms of protection may now curtail the usefulness of past innovations. The contribution will analyse patent terms from a domestic and an international political economy perspective. The contribution will argue that, on balance, the situation requires a change of the TRIPS Agreement to shorten the term of patents on mature climate technologies. The TRIPS-waiver for patents on COVID-19 vaccines provides a partial precedent.
  PubDate: Thu, 11 Jul 2024 00:00:00 GMT
  DOI: 10.1093/grurint/ikae087
  Issue No: Vol. 73, No. 8 (2024)
Innovation Policy Beyond Patents: A Case Study on the Development of
Climate-Friendly Fertilizers
- Free pre-print version: Loading...
  Rate this result: What is this?
  
  Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
  A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
  
  Pages: 742 - 750
  Abstract: AbstractNitrogen fertilizers have revolutionized agriculture since the early 20th century and made a decisive contribution to combating world hunger. Nevertheless, the technology is controversial today because production is energy-intensive and contributes significantly to climate change. In addition, conventional fertilizers pollute groundwater, rivers and coastal waters. Synthetic nitrogen fertilizer is made from ammonia (NH3) produced by the Haber-Bosch process, for which a patent was filed with the German Imperial Patent Office in 1908 (DE235421). For the urgently needed development of modern climate-friendly fertilizers, patent law seems to have played a minor role so far. The large and patent-active agrochemical corporations in the industrialized countries are focusing on other technologies, leaving fertilizer production to companies with direct access to energy below the global market price. Another reason is the very generous regulation of nitrogen fertilizers. For farmers, the use of less climate-damaging fertilizers is not worthwhile. However, the disruption of supply chains in the wake of Russia’s aggression in Ukraine and the aggravation of climate change could lead to a rethink. In the US, the first support programs for the development of climate-friendly, innovative ‘next-generation’ fertilizers have been launched. This paper examines the interplay of patent law in concert with regulatory law and government funding tools in the area of innovative fertilizers. It starts from the hypothesis that other legal frameworks have a stronger influence on innovation activity than patent law at the moment. But this could change if the regulatory framework were to impose stricter requirements for the use of fertilizers.
  PubDate: Mon, 10 Jun 2024 00:00:00 GMT
  DOI: 10.1093/grurint/ikae075
  Issue No: Vol. 73, No. 8 (2024)
The Untapped Potential of Patent Law in Deterring Environmentally
Unsustainable Innovation
- Free pre-print version: Loading...
  Rate this result: What is this?
  
  Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
  A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
  
  Pages: 751 - 762
  Abstract: AbstractDespite the common belief that the granting of a patent is a neutral act, patent protection is intended to encourage technological innovations that are acceptable from an ethical point of view: in fact, both international and supranational legislation exclude from patentability inventions whose commercial exploitation would be contrary to ordre public, a notion that certainly encompasses also the prevention of serious damage to the environment. However, the provisions excluding the patentability of inventions whose commercial exploitation is contrary to ordre public (and in particular to environmental ordre public) have rarely been applied in Europe. After outlining the reasons why ordre public exceptions have had very limited application in Europe so far, the paper offers a new perspective through which such exceptions should be interpreted and suggests how patent offices can play a new and more decisive role in promoting environmentally sustainable innovation.
  PubDate: Sun, 02 Jun 2024 00:00:00 GMT
  DOI: 10.1093/grurint/ikae067
  Issue No: Vol. 73, No. 8 (2024)
Towards a Broader Approach to Competition and the Environment: Market
Power and Environmental Disasters
- Free pre-print version: Loading...
  Rate this result: What is this?
  
  Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
  A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
  
  Pages: 763 - 768
  Abstract: AbstractThis article explores the intersection between market power and the environment, based on a study of environmental disasters in Brazil and their relationship with the activities of dominant firms. It argues that a narrow focus on price dimensions of corporate behaviour limits the legal responses for addressing broader environmental concerns emerging from market power. This highlights the need for a broader approach to understanding the operation of major players and the resulting impact on the environment. The paper concludes by discussing the institutional implications of an integrated approach for diverse fields of law for addressing market power as a driver of environmental harm, emphasising the importance of structural remedies that transcend mere compensation of affected parties.
  PubDate: Tue, 28 May 2024 00:00:00 GMT
  DOI: 10.1093/grurint/ikae065
  Issue No: Vol. 73, No. 8 (2024)
‘Brexit and the Legal Legitimacy of the Unitary Patent Court’
– A Response
- Free pre-print version: Loading...
  Rate this result: What is this?
  
  Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
  A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
  
  Pages: 769 - 771
  Abstract: AbstractIn GRUR International 2024, pp. 191-197, Nicolas Binctin (Professor in Poitiers, France) and Craig A. Nard (Professor in Cleveland, USA) come to the surprising conclusion that the conditions for the entry into force of the Agreement on a Unified Patent Court (UPCA), as set out in its Art. 89(1), are still not met. If their opinion were correct, not only would a new ratification by the contracting member states (including referenda in Denmark and Ireland) be necessary (this is what the authors advocate), the Unified Patent Court (as it is properly called) would be up in the air, along with its decisions and orders to date.In short, the authors assume that effective ratification by the United Kingdom is still required for the application of Art. 89(1) UPCA as long as the said provision has not been amended removing its alleged reference to a ratification by the United Kingdom. They derive this view essentially from the wording of Art. 7(2) UPCA (according to which a division of the central division is located in London) and from Art. 3(1) of the Protocol on the Provisional Application of the UPCA (referring to a ratification of the UPCA by the United Kingdom as a precondition for the entry into force of the Protocol).
  PubDate: Wed, 29 May 2024 00:00:00 GMT
  DOI: 10.1093/grurint/ikae068
  Issue No: Vol. 73, No. 8 (2024)
Creation Is Not Like a Box of Chocolates: Why Is the First Judgment
Recognizing Copyrightability of AI-Generated Content Wrong'
- Free pre-print version: Loading...
  Rate this result: What is this?
  
  Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
  A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
  
  Pages: 772 - 777
  Abstract: AbstractThe judgment of the Beijing Internet Court recognizing copyrightability of AI-generated images is flawed for three reasons. First, the judgment treats generative AI as a tool of creation akin to a brush, camera or Photoshop. But generative AI is not a passive means for the author to implement the act of creation that directly produce works; instead, it is actively involved in the decision-making process of the substance of the resulting content. Second, the judgment attaches much importance to the creative nature of the text prompts and other inputs of the user of generative AI, while it fails to make the analysis within the framework of the idea/expression dichotomy. Different generative AI systems, and even the same generative AI, may generate completely different images based on exactly the same ‘user’s inputs’. This fact shows that ‘user’s inputs’ are an unprotectable idea in relation to the outcome of the AI production, because a single creative and original idea may lead to a large number of expressions. Third, while acknowledging that the relationship between generative AI and its users is akin to the relationship between the commissioned party and the commissioner during the creation of a painting, the judgment wrongly attributes user’s authorship of AI-generated content to AI’s lack of free will and legal personality.
  PubDate: Fri, 05 Jul 2024 00:00:00 GMT
  DOI: 10.1093/grurint/ikae082
  Issue No: Vol. 73, No. 8 (2024)
Consequences of Asserting Rights Under a Patent Later Declared Invalid
- Free pre-print version: Loading...
  Rate this result: What is this?
  
  Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
  A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
  
  Pages: 778 - 782
  Abstract: Dutch Civil Code, Book 6, Art. 212; Dutch Patents Act, Art. 75(6) ‒ Menzis v AstraZeneca
  PubDate: Mon, 10 Jun 2024 00:00:00 GMT
  DOI: 10.1093/grurint/ikae074
  Issue No: Vol. 73, No. 8 (2024)
Assessing Novelty of a Plant Variety Patented Abroad
- Free pre-print version: Loading...
  Rate this result: What is this?
  
  Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
  A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
  
  Pages: 783 - 786
  Abstract: UPOV Convention, Arts. 11 and 12; Legislative Decree No. 30 of 10 February 2005, Arts. 3, 4, 102, 103 and 112; Presidential Decree No. 974 of 12 August 1975, Arts. 1 and 3 – Fruitgrowing Equipment & Service S.r.l. v. Novello & C. S.r.l., Ortofrutta Vitale S.r.l. and Murabito Giuseppe S.r.l.
  PubDate: Thu, 27 Jun 2024 00:00:00 GMT
  DOI: 10.1093/grurint/ikae084
  Issue No: Vol. 73, No. 8 (2024)
Registration of Personal Names as Trade Marks
- Free pre-print version: Loading...
  Rate this result: What is this?
  
  Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
  A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
  
  Pages: 787 - 788
  Abstract: Trademark Act 1991, Sec. 7 ‒ Designer ‘K’
  PubDate: Thu, 27 Jun 2024 00:00:00 GMT
  DOI: 10.1093/grurint/ikae083
  Issue No: Vol. 73, No. 8 (2024)
Admissibility of Advertising Puffery
- Free pre-print version: Loading...
  Rate this result: What is this?
  
  Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
  A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
  
  Pages: 789 - 796
  Abstract: Consumer Protection Code, Art. 37; Law on Industrial Property, Art. 195 ‒ Ketchup
  PubDate: Mon, 10 Jun 2024 00:00:00 GMT
  DOI: 10.1093/grurint/ikae073
  Issue No: Vol. 73, No. 8 (2024)
Exhaustion of the Distribution Right
- Free pre-print version: Loading...
  Rate this result: What is this?
  
  Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
  A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
  
  Pages: 797 - 801
  Abstract: Copyright Act, Art. 20 proviso – Doraemon
  PubDate: Sat, 04 May 2024 00:00:00 GMT
  DOI: 10.1093/grurint/ikae055
  Issue No: Vol. 73, No. 8 (2024)
Resale Price Maintenance Practices as a Continuing Offence
- Free pre-print version: Loading...
  Rate this result: What is this?
  
  Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
  A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
  
  Pages: 802 - 810
  Abstract: Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, Art. 101(1); Act No. 143/2001 Coll. (on the Protection of Competition and on the Amendment of Certain Laws), Secs. 3(1) and 22a(1)(b); Act No. 250/2016 Coll. (on the Responsibility for Offences and the Procedure Thereof), Sec. 7 ‒ BABY DIREKT
  PubDate: Tue, 07 May 2024 00:00:00 GMT
  DOI: 10.1093/grurint/ikae061
  Issue No: Vol. 73, No. 8 (2024)
The New EU Competition Law
- Free pre-print version: Loading...
  Rate this result: What is this?
  
  Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
  A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
  
  Pages: 811 - 813
  Abstract: COLOMOPABLO IBÁÑEZThe New EU Competition LawHart Publishing2023, 305 pp., EUR 38.00, ISBN 978-1-78225-913-8.
  PubDate: Thu, 28 Mar 2024 00:00:00 GMT
  DOI: 10.1093/grurint/ikae034
  Issue No: Vol. 73, No. 8 (2024)

HOME > Browse the 73 Subjects covered by JournalTOCs
Subject	Total Journals