The reconciliation of patents within the Taiwanese Law of Things has received negligible attention from legal scholars. The primary reason for this is the hesitation, by courts and scholars alike, to construct a new property paradigm, referring instead to treat patents under the existing rules on physical things. This dominating stance has had an impact on the manner in which Taiwanese courts adjudicate on the nature of patents, and dealings therewith. The aim of the thesis is to show that this stance is theoretically illogical. The underlying issue is the different classification of patents within the civil and common law systems. The study employs a historical and comparative law methodology in order to inform an intra-law solution to the problem of how to overcome the classification dilemma. It does this by critically analysing the evolution of patent categorisation as personal property in common law and, by employing this foundation, seeks to distinguish the substantial differences in the concept of property between the common and civil law traditions. In light of these differences, and to establish a consolidated way of reconciling patents into the current Taiwanese legal framework, the thesis further analyses the similarity of the property notion under English common law and Taiwanese customary law, both of which are shaped by exclusion rules. The hypothesis is that ownership of land within these two systems, in similar with that of patents, was not an absolute and outright ownership of land governed by inclusion rules, but was instead a freehold which granted intangible rights that could be divided by the duration of the holding. It is suggested that a theoretically more coherent property model can be achieved by adopting this approach, and analogising patents to the tenure systems that existed within both English common law and Taiwanese customary law. To this end, the thesis proposes to contextually rebuild the property model for patents within Taiwanese law by the insertion of five new reform clauses into the Patent Act and the Civil Code.

The Moral Dimensions of Intellectual Property Rights explores the various aspects of IPRs in which moral evaluation and claims play a role. According to R M Hare, moral concepts and reasoning are characterized by the universalization of prescriptions. Universalization links the various dimensions in a way that rationally forces us to revise the moral basis of the various claims we make for, about and of IPRs, and ultimately provides grounds for their reform. The method of reflective equilibrium is focused in the first place on Hare’s meta- ethics, to derive a reformulation which is herein called fundamental prescriptivism. This requires a foundational set of moral principles to work. Our expectation that moral principles and values must serve to guide us, and resolve conflict between us, with objective rational force, provides the basis for adopting such a set of fundamental prescriptions. These sum up in the equal right to freedom and well- being as the ultimate basis for moral evaluation of our institutions. An implication of this right is that property in IPR systems must be balanced with participation rights (moral and legal) of the public to a public domain which allows individuals to have access to, and use, objects of intellectual property. When, in seeking reflective equilibrium, this is applied to the various aspects of IPRs, the result is an exploration of the inter-connectedness of following: justification of IPRs based on this equal right to freedom and well-being; explanation of the function of, and justification for, the presence of moral concepts and terms in national and international IPR rules; the commitments implied by use of these moral ideas for our obligations in respect of the way we enjoy, exploit and enforce our IPRs, and, ultimately, our duty to reform of IPRs in ways that respects the participation rights implied by this principle.

In the online culture of the 21st century, people worldwide re-create and disseminate works by using existing works. Facilitated by the Internet and digital technologies, 'online re-creations' have become much more common, more widespread, and more sophisticated than ever before. Online re-creations are new works created based on pre-existing copyright protected materials: they are for instance fan fiction, parody, mash-up, fanvid, machinima and virtual world. Due to the difficulties to obtain authorisation from right owners of the original works, online re-creations are potentially infringing the rights of copyright holders. Infringements are usually assumed to occur despite the uncertain legal status and the various nature of online re-creation. Nevertheless copyright and online re-creations are both essential. Re-creations and their online culture are beneficial to individuals and the society at large due to the three principles i.e. creativity, freedom of speech and the public interest. This thesis finds that copyright law that should encourage creative expressions has restrained and discouraged creative re-creations. Besides, the existing copyright exceptions are insufficient and ineffective to safeguard the rights of the re-creators and the interest of the public in accessing and reworking from copyright protected works. It is therefore vital to reconcile the conflicting interests: the exclusive rights of the copyright owners, the rights of re-creators and the interest of the public. To achieve a fair and reasonable balance between the conflicting rights and interests, this thesis proposes that everyone should have a right to use existing works in making creative re-use of such works without infringing copyright. The 'right to re-create' will be granted to the person whose re-creation meets all specified criteria.

Contributory liability is the liability of a party who is not the direct infringer, but who facilitates or contributes to the infringement committed by the direct infringer. With respect to trade marks, neither EU law nor national laws of member states (MS) provide specific rules to deal with the issue except very limited circumstances. Thus, the question of contributory trade mark liability is assessed under tort law rules. In that regard, the law seems straightforward. Yet, it is not. This is because, contributory liability now mainly arises in a new context: the Internet. Except from the cases of where the occurrence of a direct infringement of trade mark is questionable eg selling and buying keywords, Internet intermediaries' liability arise as contributory liability since they are the vehicles to facilitate transactions between third parties on the Internet. Here, it should be underlined that the thesis' scope is limited to the cases where it is unquestionable that the direct trade mark infringement has taken place, so the intermediaries' contributory liability is an issue. More precisely the cases dealing with selling of counterfeit goods. In those circumstances, trade mark owners have been seeking to fix the liability of an intermediary rather than the direct infringers themselves since reaching the latter is not always possible as they can easily remain anonymous or be located in jurisdictions which are not easily accessible for right holders. This is why, intermediaries have been the subject of contributory liability cases. As such, how should their liability be examined given that their involvement does not go beyond providing a necessary platform and infrastructure? How can their involvement be assessed as the Internet's infrastructure differs from that of the offline world? For these questions that arise from contributory trade mark liability, there are two legal instruments applicable within the EU: 1) tort laws of the MSs, and 2) pan-EU immunity regime established by the E-Commerce Directive 2000/31. The first is also applicable to the offline world while the latter provides a more Internet-specific approach as it establishes horizontally applicable safe harbour rules for certain activities of intermediaries. According to the Directive, intermediaries which provide mere conduit, caching and hosting services can be granted immunity from the liability arising from its users' infringements provided that the conditions stated under each Article are qualified. However, the immunity is provided as an additional protection meaning that not qualifying for immunity does not automatically result in the liability of an intermediary. Thus, whether an intermediary is liable or not is ultimately a subject of tort law of the MSs which is not harmonised within the EU. Thus, the law of contributory trade mark liability in the EU appears to be incoherent. On the one hand, the immunity rules govern when an intermediary would be granted immunity from liability and apply horizontally. On the other hand, tort law rules deal with the question of contributory liability but differ from one MS to another. Therefore, an analysis on existing law appears necessary in order to build the legal framework more systematically by demonstrating how it is applied. Yet, this analysis shall be undertaken to answer whether the current regime proves to be satisfactory in dealing with ongoing and emerging issues that the Internet brings and finally what the remedy would be for the issues where the law falls short in dealing them. These are the questions that have been neglected by the EU legislators. This thesis therefore undertakes this examination in the pursuit of answers to these questions and ultimately the remedy.

The question of whether IP incentivizes innovation is a long debated one in the literature on economics of innovation and technological change. The first chapter explores this fundamental question in an emerging market context, applying a 'private returns to R&D framework' to the Indian bio-pharmaceutical industry. In a fundamental policy shift, India agreed to introduce product patents for pharmaceuticals when it signed the WTO TRIPS treaty in 19951.1 This policy came into effect through enabling legislation in 2000 and final implementation in 2005. Using this policy shift as the setting for a natural experiment, the paper estimates its impact by using data on a panel of 315 Indian pharmaceutical firms drawn from the years 1990 to 2005. Private returns of a firm are measured using a hedonic stock market valuation of the tangible total assets (A) and intangible inventive assets (K). The findings indicate an economic and statistically significant increase in private returns to inventive activity. However, this effect appears to he highly concentrated in the most technologically progressive Indian firms. Subsequent investigations through firm-level field case studies, patent data analysis and discussions with industry experts reveal that IP apart, economic liberalization in India since 1991 and the Hatch-Waxman Act in the United States have had accompanying effects in guiding the evolution of the industry. / During the period of our analysis, a substantial number of Indian bio-pharmaceutical firms became export intensive, with enhanced access to Western markets. This came about aided by a rationalized currency regime through an economic reforms process in India. The 2nd chapter explores how export destinations and firm capabilities influence the extent of learning by exporting (LBE) in Indian pharmaceutical firms that exported to a variety of both advanced and emerging destinations between 1994 and 2007. Departing from previous studies the paper explores if exports result in other gain besides improvements in technical efficiency. We find that LBE is not restricted to technical efficiency gains alone but also reduces costs of production. Furthermore, exporters also gain access to other types of knowledge that improves R&D efficiency and the rate of new product introductions. Interestingly these gains are more especially when firms export to high income destinations (as evidenced from higher gains when firms export to US rather than non-US destinations). Finally, results also indicate that the gains are higher for more capable firms. / The third chapter connects the rise of the Indian bio-pharmaceutical producers to the global value chain in the pharmaceutical industry. Specifically, it explores the welfare effects of early generic entry in the United States during the period 1997 and 2008. This is the period during which, with increasing frequency, generic drug manufacturers in the United States (many from Israeli, India, North America, or European Union) have been able to challenge the monopoly status of patent-protected drugs even before the patents expire. The legal foundation for these challenges is found in Paragraph IV of the Hatch-Waxman Act. If successful, these Paragraph IV challenges generally lead to large market share losses for incumbents and sharp declines in average market prices. The 3rd chapter estimates, for the first time, the welfare effects of accelerated generic entry via these challenges. Using aggregate brand level sales data between 1997 and 2008 for hypertension drugs in the U.S. we estimate demand using a nested logit model in order to back out cumulated consumer surplus, which we find to be approximately $270 billion. We then undertake a counterfactual analysis, removing the stream of Paragraph IV facilitated generic products, finding a corresponding cumulated consumer surplus of $177 billion. This implies that gains flowing to consumers as a result of this regulator mechanism amount to around $92 billion or about $130 per consumer in this market. These gains come at the expense to producers who lose, approximately, $14 billion. This suggests that net short-term social gains stands at around $78 billion. We also demonstrate significant cross-molecular substitution within the market and discuss the possible appropriation of consumer rents by the insurance industry. The findings from the 3rd chapter have implications related to innovation policy as it pertains to pharmaceutical markets around the world. (Abstract shortened by UMI.) / 1World trade Organization's Trade Related Intellectual Property Agreement.

Thesis (M. P. A.)--University of Hong Kong, 2006. / Title proper from title frame. Also available in printed format.

Debates over intellectual property's justifications tend to treat natural rights and utilitarian accounts as competitors, but they should be seen as complements instead. Lockean and Kantian theories of intellectual property highlight the strong interests that intellectual property creators have in profiting from and exercising some degree of control over their work, but neither theory gives sufficient justification for the full assortment of rights that intellectual property owners have under current law. Utilitarian accounts provide an essential supplement to these natural rights theories by focusing on society's interests in the production of useful information and creative expression, but that does not mean intellectual property law should single-mindedly strive only to maximize social welfare. Developing both natural rights-based and utilitarian justifications, this dissertation advances a pluralist account of intellectual property that understands different features of copyright, patent, and trademark law to be serving different normative interests. / Philosophy

The present study deals with the prerogatives associated with work distribution in copyright law. The first part is devoted to the droit de destination and the exhaustion doctrine. We will illustrate each one with legislative and jurisprudential examples. While these theories are often regarded as opposite, they in fact are dissimilar juridical solutions. The exhaustion doctrine derives from an economic conception of copyright law whereas the droit de destination originates from natural law focussed on the interests of the author. The second part is concerned with the fact that a coherent theory on work distribution in Canadian copyright law has yet to be established. It will be shown how the legislator and the jurisprudence have developed means to assure that, after the first distribution of the work, the copyright holder is still in the position to control some of its use. Finally, I will proceed to analyse the regime that deals specifically with parallel imports allowing the copyright holder to supervise imported works.

No description available.

No description available.