Subjects -> PATENTS, TRADEMARKS AND COPYRIGHTS (Total: 29 journals)
Showing 1 - 9 of 9 Journals sorted alphabetically
Berkeley Technology Law Journal     Free   (Followers: 17)
Expert Opinion on Therapeutic Patents     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 13)
Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal     Open Access   (Followers: 20)
GRUR International     Full-text available via subscription  
IIC - International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 28)
International Data Privacy Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 29)
International Journal of Innovation Science     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 11)
International Journal of Intellectual Property Management     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 29)
IP Theory     Open Access   (Followers: 12)
JIPITEC Journal of Intellectual Property, Information Technology and E-Commerce Law     Open Access   (Followers: 26)
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: 35)
Journal of Data Protection & Privacy     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 7)
Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 30)
Journal of Intellectual Property Rights (JIPR)     Open Access   (Followers: 24)
Journal of Knowledge-based Innovation in China     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 4)
Law, State and Telecommunications Review     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
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)
Web Journal of Current Legal Issues     Open Access   (Followers: 6)
World Patent Information     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 17)
Similar Journals
Journal Cover
GRUR International
Number of Followers: 0  
 
  Full-text available via subscription Subscription journal
ISSN (Print) 2632-8623 - ISSN (Online) 2632-8550
Published by Oxford University Press Homepage  [416 journals]
  • A De Lege Ferenda Perspective on Artificial Intelligence Systems
           Designated as Inventors in the European Patent System
    • Authors: Stierle M.
      Pages: 115 - 133
      Abstract: The European patent system was designed around a paradigm of human inventorship. This paper will analyse in depth and from a de lege ferenda perspective the rather general arguments against and in favour of a possible designation of artificial intelligence (AI) systems as inventors. For the sake of a more concrete discussion, it will also outline a potential reform of the European patent system to implement AI inventorship and allocate the right to the European patent for such inventions by default to the machine’s operator. In the process, it will highlight the major specific issues associated with a reform that acknowledges AI inventorship and touch upon possible alternative approaches to addressing the growing autonomy of machines within the R&D process. The study must not be understood as a call for a reform to recognise AI systems as inventors but rather as a manner of laying the foundations for a more concrete, critical and fruitful discussion on non-human inventorship and its alternatives. The analysis will show that the more general, highly conceptional reservations advanced in the current discussion against AI inventorship are somewhat unfounded, e.g. the alleged break with the functions of the current patent system or the alleged need to endow AI with legal personality. More convincing arguments against a reform that allows for the designation of AI systems as inventor might instead relate to the specific difficulties associated with such reform.
      PubDate: Thu, 14 Jan 2021 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/grurint/ikaa186
      Issue No: Vol. 70, No. 2 (2021)
       
  • The Flexible Copyright Exception for ‘Non-Enjoyment’ Purposes ‒
           Recent Amendment in Japan and Its Implication
    • Authors: Ueno T.
      Pages: 145 - 152
      Abstract: After the long discussions in Japan over the introduction of a general clause on copyright exceptions since 2007, the ‘flexible’ provisions on copyright exceptions (Arts. 30-4, 47-4 and 47-5) were finally introduced into the Japanese Copyright Act in 2018 and came into effect in 2019. They differ widely from the US fair use clause and the UK fair dealing provisions. This article focuses on Art. 30-4, which comprehensively allows an exploitation of a work that is aimed at neither enjoying nor causing another person to enjoy the work. In particular, any exploitation for text-and-data mining (TDM) is widely permitted by any means under Art. 30-4, including for commercial purposes. The underlying theory behind this relates to the nature of copyright, or the justification for copyright protection that an exploitation not for ‘enjoyment’ purposes is beyond the inherent scope of copyright because it does not prejudice the opportunities of the copyright holders to receive compensation. While this might sound unusual, it is interesting to note that some similar theories can be found in Europe, some of which try to widely exclude TDM activities from the scope of copyright based on the idea of ‘a use as a work’. Considering such common characteristics of the theories regarding copyright and ‘enjoyment’ of a work, Art. 30-4 of the Japanese Copyright Act and the theoretical justification for it might have implications for other jurisdictions regarding copyright exceptions or the substantive scope of copyright.
      PubDate: Sun, 17 Jan 2021 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/grurint/ikaa184
      Issue No: Vol. 70, No. 2 (2021)
       
  • Criteria for Determining the Well-known Character of a Trademark
    • Pages: 185 - 188
      PubDate: Thu, 07 Jan 2021 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/grurint/ikaa180
      Issue No: Vol. 70, No. 2 (2021)
       
  • Liability of a Cable Television Operator that Provides Access to Open
           Television Signals
    • Pages: 194 - 199
      PubDate: Thu, 07 Jan 2021 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/grurint/ikaa178
      Issue No: Vol. 70, No. 2 (2021)
       
  • Blockchain and Competition Law
    • Authors: Rengifo García E.
      Pages: 113 - 114
      Abstract: In a survey led by the World Economic Forum of over 800 executives and experts from the information and communications technology industry, respondents predicted that by 2027, an average of 10% of the global gross domestic product will be stored on blockchains, with 58% of respondents expecting this tipping point to occur by 2025. This permits the assumption that even emerging economies will benefit from this development – its transparency characteristic is currently allowing the implementation of projects like the land titling reform in India. Nonetheless, this technological tool permits coordination between competitors, providing the means not only to share information but also to monitor its participants in order to ensure that the terms of private agreements are being followed. In addition, depending on the development of the technology and market conditions, private blockchains also pose exclusionary risks. Given the optimism around the spread of this technology, these risks should be taken seriously. Hence, this editorial does not focus on the traditional flattery that blockchain has received for its multiple benefits. Instead, it centers on how private blockchains can generate a series of anti-competitive events which must be subject to analysis in light of competition law.
      PubDate: Sun, 06 Dec 2020 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/grurint/ikaa159
      Issue No: Vol. 70, No. 2 (2020)
       
  • Free-Riding for the Common Good' Generics, Biosimilars and References
           to Originator Trademarks in Comparative Advertising in France
    • Authors: Rouvinen M.
      Pages: 134 - 144
      Abstract: Generic and biosimilar medicines are fiscally advantageous products in relation to which the generally applicable EU rules governing comparative advertising seemingly conflict with national healthcare policy. This article argues that the permissive stance of the French courts on the use of the trademarked names of originator medicines in advertising for generics appears inconsistent with the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union as it stands in relation to Art. 4(f) of Directive 2006/114/EC on misleading and comparative advertising. This gives rise to an undesirable divergence in the application of the Directive between Member States, suggesting that further guidance is needed on the application of the provision to generic-originator comparisons. It is submitted that treating generic drugs with particular leniency is unjustified given the detrimental effect the use of originator trademarks by the marketers of generics and biosimilars may have on the ability of the originator trademark to stimulate investment into manufacturing quality. The issue of the degree to which the use of originator trademarks in advertising promoting generics and biosimilars should be permitted serves as a poignant example of the delicate balance required for comparative advertising to increase consumer choice whilst simultaneously protecting competitors from advertising that may ultimately be detrimental to undistorted competition in the Single Market.
      PubDate: Thu, 03 Dec 2020 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/grurint/ikaa171
      Issue No: Vol. 70, No. 2 (2020)
       
  • UK Courts’ Determination of Global FRAND Rates: There Is a Will but Is
           There a Way' UKSC Judgment in Unwired Planet v Huawei, Huawei v
           Conversant, and ZTE v Conversant
    • Authors: Zafrilla Díaz-Marta V.
      Pages: 153 - 158
      PubDate: Sun, 27 Dec 2020 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/grurint/ikaa190
      Issue No: Vol. 70, No. 2 (2020)
       
  • Did the Danish Supreme Court Give the Fashion Industry the Kantian
           Boot'
    • Authors: Kianzad B.
      Pages: 159 - 163
      PubDate: Wed, 09 Dec 2020 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/grurint/ikaa181
      Issue No: Vol. 70, No. 2 (2020)
       
  • The Work-For-Hire Doctrine in Russia: Recent Law Enforcement Trends
    • Authors: Galoyan A; Glonina V.
      Pages: 164 - 168
      Abstract: This paper aims to describe the work-for-hire regime in Russia and provide the readers with practical information on the due formalization of relations between a company and its employees with regard to the intellectual property (hereinafter ‘IP’) that they create. We have reviewed recent high-profile cases (e.g. Rambler v NGINX, Mr. Mamichev v Interveeam LLC and Veeam Software, Laboratory Kaspersky v Cybersecurity Solutions) that reveal the most common problems related to the work-for-hire regime. Based on our analysis of the applicable legislation, court practice and doctrine, we have given some practical tips and recommendations on how to avoid widespread challenges concerning works for hire in Russia.
      PubDate: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/grurint/ikaa154
      Issue No: Vol. 70, No. 2 (2020)
       
  • Singling-Out Individual Elements When Filing Patent Amendments
    • Pages: 169 - 173
      PubDate: Fri, 25 Dec 2020 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/grurint/ikaa174
      Issue No: Vol. 70, No. 2 (2020)
       
  • Jurisdiction of UK Courts on FRAND Disputes Regarding Global Licences of
           Multinational Patent Portfolios
    • Pages: 174 - 184
      PubDate: Sun, 27 Dec 2020 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/grurint/ikaa188
      Issue No: Vol. 70, No. 2 (2020)
       
  • Supplier’s Liability for Misleading Online Customer Ratings for
           Therapeutic Products
    • Pages: 189 - 193
      PubDate: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/grurint/ikaa173
      Issue No: Vol. 70, No. 2 (2020)
       
  • No Copyright Protection for a Footwear Design
    • Pages: 200 - 204
      PubDate: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/grurint/ikaa176
      Issue No: Vol. 70, No. 2 (2020)
       
  • Copyright Protection for Interior Design Projects
    • Pages: 205 - 209
      PubDate: Fri, 11 Dec 2020 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/grurint/ikaa170
      Issue No: Vol. 70, No. 2 (2020)
       
  • Maria Cristina Caldarola / Joachim Schrey: Big Data and Law: A
           Practitioner’s Guide
    • Authors: Wiedemann K.
      Pages: 210 - 211
      Abstract: Maria Cristina Caldarola / Joachim Schrey: Big Data and Law: A Practitioner’s Guide CH Beck/Hart/Nomos2020, XXII, 178pp., €120.-, ISBN 978-3-406-74393-1.
      PubDate: Thu, 24 Sep 2020 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/grurint/ikaa148
      Issue No: Vol. 70, No. 2 (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: 3.226.72.118
 
Home (Search)
API
About JournalTOCs
News (blog, publications)
JournalTOCs on Twitter   JournalTOCs on Facebook

JournalTOCs © 2009-