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
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  [416 journals]
  • 2021: The Year Of Data'
    • Authors: Barazza S.
      Pages: 89 - 90
      Abstract: On 25 November 2020, the European Commission published its intellectual property (IP) action plan (‘Making the most of the EU’s innovative potential—An intellectual property action plan to support the EU’s recovery and resilience’, COM(2020) 760, available at https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/'uri=CELEX:52020DC0760), identifying five key challenges for the development of future IP policies and the exploitation of the opportunities offered by IP protection. In the plan, the Commission recognised the important role that emerging technologies will play in addressing such challenges:
      PubDate: Sat, 01 May 2021 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/jiplp/jpab024
      Issue No: Vol. 16, No. 2 (2021)
       
  • US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit finds that administrative
           patent judges were unconstitutionally appointed in case now the subject of
           multiple appeals to the US Supreme Court
    • Authors: Macedo C; Goldberg D, Sturm C.
      Pages: 92 - 94
      Abstract: On 31 October 2020, a three-judge panel of the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (‘Federal Circuit’) issued a decision in Arthrex, Inc v Smith & Nephew, Inc finding that administrative patent judges of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board were appointed in violation of the Appointments Clause of the US Constitution and instituting measures to remedy the situation. On 23 March 2020, the Federal Circuit refused to the rehear the case sitting en banc. Since then, the panel decision has become the subject of multiple appeals to the US Supreme Court. We expect to learn in early autumn whether the US Supreme Court decides to grant certiorari with respect to any of the appeals and review this important decision.
      PubDate: Wed, 10 Mar 2021 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/jiplp/jpaa197
      Issue No: Vol. 16, No. 2 (2021)
       
  • The CJEU abolishes Neurim and SPCs for new therapeutic indications
    • Authors: Zemła-Pacud Ż.
      Pages: 94 - 97
      Abstract: Judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union (Grand Chamber) in Case C-673/18 Santen SAS v. Directeur général de l’Institut national de la propriété industrielle, 9 July 2020
      PubDate: Wed, 10 Mar 2021 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/jiplp/jpab001
      Issue No: Vol. 16, No. 2 (2021)
       
  • Patent pending: the law on AI inventorship
    • Authors: Adde L; Smith J.
      Pages: 97 - 98
      Abstract: Thaler v The Comptroller-General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks [2020] EWHC 2412 (Pat)
      PubDate: Mon, 08 Mar 2021 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/jiplp/jpab002
      Issue No: Vol. 16, No. 2 (2021)
       
  • Registration of a sign contrary to public interest and good morals is
           prohibited in Iran
    • Authors: Rezaei A.
      Pages: 98 - 99
      Abstract: A.G v Decision of the Tehran Intellectual Property Office, Twelfth Branch Tehran Province Court of Appeal, No 9309970221200524, 21 July 2020
      PubDate: Sun, 07 Mar 2021 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/jiplp/jpab003
      Issue No: Vol. 16, No. 2 (2021)
       
  • Swedish Patent and Market Court of Appeal says that Crocs’
           three-dimensional trade mark lacks acquired distinctiveness
    • Authors: Malovic N.
      Pages: 100 - 101
      Abstract: Swedish Patent and Market Court of Appeal, Crocs Inc v ÖoB Aktiebolag, PMT 7014-19, 2 December 2020
      PubDate: Sun, 28 Feb 2021 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/jiplp/jpab006
      Issue No: Vol. 16, No. 2 (2021)
       
  • EU General Court tackles notion of ‘average consumer’ when
           goods/services are aimed at both specialized and everyday consumers 
    • Authors: Malovic N.
      Pages: 102 - 103
      Abstract: EU General Court, Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd v European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO), EU:T:2020:330, 8 July 2020
      PubDate: Fri, 12 Feb 2021 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/jiplp/jpaa169
      Issue No: Vol. 16, No. 2 (2021)
       
  • Something old, something new' Indian High Court permits unauthorized
           use of registered trade marks on Google AdWords
    • Authors: Singh P.
      Pages: 103 - 105
      Abstract: Matrimony.com Ltd v Kalyan Jewellers India Ltd & Ors (2020) 5 MLJ 423, Madras High Court (M.M. Sundresh and Krishnan Ramasamy, JJ.), 13 March 2020
      PubDate: Sat, 20 Mar 2021 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/jiplp/jpaa182
      Issue No: Vol. 16, No. 2 (2021)
       
  • Turkish Court of Appeal finds likelihood of confusion based on a common
           weak element
    • Authors: Doğan Alkan G; C¸ıtak A.
      Pages: 105 - 107
      Abstract: Yıldız Holding Anonim Şirketi v İbrahim Aslanyavrusu (2020) 11th Chamber of Turkish Court of Appeals Merit No: 2019/3006 E., No: 2020/841 K., 03 February 2020
      PubDate: Tue, 16 Feb 2021 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/jiplp/jpaa187
      Issue No: Vol. 16, No. 2 (2021)
       
  • With its IP action plan, the European Commission is stepping up its IP
           game
    • Authors: Sautier B.
      Pages: 107 - 108
      Abstract: European Commission, 2020, Making the most of the EU’s innovative potential An intellectual property action plan to support the EU’s recovery and resilience, 25 November 2020 Brussels, COM(2020) 760 final.
      PubDate: Sat, 13 Feb 2021 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/jiplp/jpab007
      Issue No: Vol. 16, No. 2 (2021)
       
  • An assessment of the UK approach to parametric claims after Actavis v Eli
           Lilly
    • Authors: Gribanov I.
      Pages: 109 - 123
      Abstract: The authorThe author is a Patent Examiner at the UK Intellectual Property Office. The views expressed in the article are his own, and do not necessarily coincide with the views of the UK IPO.
      PubDate: Sat, 09 Jan 2021 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/jiplp/jpaa210
      Issue No: Vol. 16, No. 2 (2021)
       
  • Clash of the Titans: conflict between the regulatory and patent systems
           around second medical use claims
    • Authors: Goginashvili N.
      Pages: 136 - 145
      Abstract: The authorNatali Goginashvili holds an LL.M in European Intellectual Property Law from Stockholm University and is currently attending a Master 2 Programme in Industrial Property at Université Paris II Panthéon-Assas. This articleAlthough the drug repurposing strategy is far from new, it has gained considerable momentum in the last decade. As we better understand the mechanism of action of older drugs, the potential for finding new therapeutic uses keeps increasing. A conflict between the regulatory and patent systems—two ‘legal titans’ in the pharmaceutical sector—surrounds the repurposing of drugs and is the main subject of this article.Section I identifies the conflict between the regulatory and patent systems over second medical use claims in the UK, Germany and France. Section II analysis how the UK, German, and French courts approach the conflict, based on the unsatisfactory decisions rendered in Warner-Lambert. It further questions the very legitimacy of the courts’ quest for the ‘best’ liability standard of second medical use claim infringement. Section III suggests a practical solution to the conflict, inspired by Arnold LJ’s reference in 2015 to the possibility of incorporating indications on prescriptions in the future. In this respect, the article supports the rising practice of electronic prescribing (e-prescribing), which allows the communication of therapeutic indications to pharmacists, while maintaining the patient’s privacy.
      PubDate: Mon, 15 Feb 2021 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/jiplp/jpaa180
      Issue No: Vol. 16, No. 2 (2021)
       
  • Brazilian Supreme Court considers ruling on patent case for the first time
           this century
    • Authors: Rodrigues R; Calil A.
      Pages: 146 - 149
      Abstract: The authorsRoberto Rodrigues is a Partner at Licks Attorneys. Ana Calil is Professor of administrative law and regulatory affairs at The Federal University of Rio de Janeiro and a founding member of UERJ's Regulation Lab.This articleThis article aims to provide an overview of the direct plea of unconstitutionality (ADI) #5529 that challenges the patent term provision of the Brazilian Industrial Property Law (LPI, Article 40, sole paragraph).The ADI was filed before the Supreme Court seeking to revoke the 10-year term guarantee provided in the LPI, in order to mitigate backlog and pendency at the Brazilian Patent Office (BRPTO).The ADI #5529 ruling can impact 22 583 patents in force (46 per cent of the patents in force in the country) and another 24 575 patent applications. This article will provide an overview of the matter and demonstrate that the challenged article is compatible with the constitutional order.
      PubDate: Thu, 08 Apr 2021 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/jiplp/jpaa195
      Issue No: Vol. 16, No. 2 (2021)
       
  • The fate of the ETSI FRAND declaration in the transfer of SEPs
    • Authors: Tochtermann L.
      Pages: 150 - 163
      Abstract: Despite its omnipresence in the standard setting environment and a series of unparalleled litigations amongst almost all big players in the telecommunication industry over the past decade or more, the legal construction of the ETSI FRAND declaration11 still remains obscure.
      PubDate: Sun, 14 Feb 2021 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/jiplp/jpaa212
      Issue No: Vol. 16, No. 2 (2021)
       
  • The Australian tobacco plain packaging legislation: a case study on
           intellectual property enforcement and policy intervention to promote
           public health
    • Authors: Owoeye O; Fabusuyi O, Nkhoma M.
      Pages: 164 - 178
      Abstract: The authorsOlasupo Owoeye, LLB, PhD, is a Senior Lecturer in Law at the College of Law, Criminology and Justice, CQUniversity, Australia. Oladapo Fabusuyi, LL.B (Lagos), LL.M (Sussex), is a Doctoral Researcher at the Faculty of Law, Monash University. Mathews Nkhoma, PhD, is a Professor and the Dean of School of Business & Management, RMIT University, Vietnam.This articleThis article focuses on Australian tobacco control measures and the legal challenges brought against them, especially in relation to the curtailment of intellectual property rights. The first challenge was instituted before the Australian High Court to question the constitutionality of the measures and whether they amounted to an unjust acquisition of proprietary interest. The second challenge was an arbitral claim by Philip Morris against the Australian Government for impairing its intellectual property related investments in Australia. The third legal hurdle commenced in 2012 before the WTO Dispute Settlement Body for the alleged violation of Australia’s obligations under WTO Law. Australia successfully defended all three legal challenges.This article discusses the issues raised in these legal challenges and takes the position that the Australian experience has shown that tobacco control measures are justifiable under international economic law. It further argues that the public interest and public health exceptions incorporated into the general body of WTO law clearly recognize the right of sovereign states to adopt national measures to promote public interest.
      PubDate: Sat, 20 Mar 2021 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/jiplp/jpaa183
      Issue No: Vol. 16, No. 2 (2021)
       
  • The legal nature of a domain name: the Ukrainian dimension
    • Authors: Bulat N.
      Pages: 179 - 183
      Abstract: The authorNataliia Bulat is a PhD student at Odesa I.I. Mechnikov National University, Ukraine.This articleThe wide use of domain names requires the solving of some legal problems in this sphere and especially the determination of what a domain name is from a legal point of view.This article aims to analyse the legal nature of a domain name. In accordance with Ukrainian legislation and theoretical convictions, the author tests the hypothesis that a domain name is an IP object. Having outlined the criteria for IP objects, the article considers whether a domain name meets these criteria.Analysing legal protection of a domain name as an IP object, the author pays special attention to the Concept of the State System Reforming of Intellectual Property Legal Protection in Ukraine and the decision of the European Court of Human Rights in the case Paeffgen v Germany. The article argues that a domain name being a result of an intellectual activity is not provided with appropriate legal protection. As a way to solve the problem, the author proposes the classification of a domain name as an IP object under primary legislation.
      PubDate: Fri, 19 Mar 2021 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/jiplp/jpaa188
      Issue No: Vol. 16, No. 2 (2021)
       
  • Deciphering the transnational aspect of IP law
    • Authors: Singh K.
      Pages: 187 - 188
      Abstract: Transnational Intellectual Property Law: Text and Cases
      PubDate: Thu, 04 Mar 2021 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/jiplp/jpaa207
      Issue No: Vol. 16, No. 2 (2021)
       
  • Cornucopia of comparative case law: trade mark law in Asia
    • Pages: 189 - 189
      Abstract: Danny Friedmann. Cornucopia of comparative case law: trade mark law in Asia. Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, 2020; doi:10.1093/jiplp/jpaa204.
      PubDate: Mon, 15 Mar 2021 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/jiplp/jpaa217
      Issue No: Vol. 16, No. 2 (2021)
       
  • Corrigendum
    • Pages: 190 - 190
      Abstract: Poliana Belisário Zorzal, Renata Curi Hauegen and Fabricia Pires Pimenta. Biodiversity and the patent system: the Brazilian case. Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice (2020) 15(10), 829-837. doi:10.1093/jiplp/jpaa125.
      PubDate: Fri, 09 Apr 2021 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/jiplp/jpaa203
      Issue No: Vol. 16, No. 2 (2021)
       
  • AI-generated works and copyright law: towards a union of strange
           bedfellows
    • Authors: Salami E.
      Pages: 124 - 135
      PubDate: Sun, 29 Nov 2020 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/jiplp/jpaa189
      Issue No: Vol. 16, No. 2 (2020)
       
  • Cornucopia of comparative case law: trade mark law in Asia 
    • Authors: Friedmann D.
      Pages: 184 - 186
      Abstract: Annotated Leading Trademark Cases in Major Asian Jurisdictions
      PubDate: Wed, 09 Dec 2020 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/jiplp/jpaa204
      Issue No: Vol. 16, 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: 3.236.122.9
 
Home (Search)
API
About JournalTOCs
News (blog, publications)
JournalTOCs on Twitter   JournalTOCs on Facebook

JournalTOCs © 2009-