Η προστασία των πνευματικών δικαιωμάτων και η απόδειξη γνησιότητας του κατόχου, επομένως και η πιστοποίηση της αυθεντικότητας των ψηφιακών αντικειμένων είναι ένα πολύ καυτό ζήτημα και για την επίλυσή του επιστρατεύονται μέθοδοι απόκρυψης πληροφορίας και τεχνικές υδατογράφησης. Εκτός από τη φιλοσοφική αντιμετώπιση του θέματος, προτείνονται μια μέθοδος απόκρυψης πληροφορίας και δύο τεχνικές υδατογράφησης, με σκοπό την προστασία των πνευματικών δικαιωμάτων και την πιστοποίηση της αυθεντικότητας των ψηφιακών αντικειμένων. Η μέθοδος απόκρυψης πληροφορίας δανείζεται έννοιες από την κρυπτογραφία εισάγοντας σε μεγάλες εικόνες ένα δύσκολο στιγμιότυπο, δηλαδή έναν τρία χρωματίσιμο γράφο. Ο γράφος μαζί με το χρωματισμό του αποτελεί το κλειδί. Για να μην αποκαλυφθεί όλος ο χρωματισμός του γράφου σε μια πιθανή διαμάχη, εφαρμόζεται το πρωτόκολλο των διαντιδραστικών αποδείξεων μηδενικής γνώσης (ZKIP) για δύσκολα υπολογιστικά προβλήματα. Η διαδικασία της ένθεσης γίνεται με χρήση του μετασχηματισμού wavelets, παρέχοντας καλή ποιότητα των παραγόμενων εικόνων και ανθεκτικότητα σε περιπτώσεις επιθέσεων. Οι δύο τεχνικές υδατογράφησης εφαρμόζονται στο χωρικό πεδίο και στο πεδίο συχνοτήτων, αντίστοιχα. Η τεχνική που εφαρμόστηκε στο χωρικό πεδίο εκμεταλλεύεται τυχόν ομοιότητες του υδατογραφήματος με τις αρχικές εικόνες για να επιλεγούν οι θέσεις ένθεσης. Αντίθετα στην τεχνική υδατογράφησης που εφαρμόστηκε στο πεδίο συχνοτήτων γίνεται χρήση του μετασχηματισμού wavelet. Σε όλες τις τεχνικές παρατηρήθηκαν ικανοποιητικά αποτελέσματα μετά την ένθεση της εισαγόμενης πληροφορίας έτσι ώστε να μη είναι οπτικά αντιληπτή. Επίσης εξετάστηκε και η ανθεκτικότητα της εισαγόμενης πληροφορίας στις εικόνες ύστερα από πιθανές επιθέσεις και επιβεβαιώθηκε ότι επιζεί ένα αρκετά μεγάλο ποσοστό της εισαγόμενης πληροφορίας, γεγονός που καταξιώνει τις προτεινόμενες μεθόδους. / The copyright protection and the authentication is a very hot topic and for its solution are called up data hiding methods and watermarking techniques. Αpart from the philosophical confrontation of the subject, there are proposed a data hiding method and two watermarking techniques that aim to copyright protect and the authenticate digital objects. The data hiding technique combines concepts from cryptography and it can be applied to large images by inserting a hard instance, i.e. a 3-colorable graph. The graph itself with its coloring compose the key. In order not to reveal all its coloring in a possible conflict, the Zero Knowledge Interactive Proof Protocol (ZKIP) is applied. The insertion process has been done using wavelets transformation, offering good quality of the produced images and robustness against possible attacks. The two watermarking techniques are applied in spatial domain and in frequency domain, respectively. The technique that was applied in spatial domain is exploiting any similarity between the watermark and the initial images so that to select at best the insertion positions. On the contrary, in the watermarking technique that is applied in the frequency domain, wavelets transformation has been used and the watermark was inserted in the differential coefficients of the image, in order to be imperceptible. To all the above techniques, it has been observed sufficient results after the insertion of the redundant information, so that it turned to be visible imperceptibly. Moreover, the robustness of the redundant information was each time after possible attacks examined, and it was confirmed that a rather big percentage of the redundant information is survived, making more reliable the proposed techniques.

Intellectual property affects an increasingly large range of social life. Despite the breadth of goods and activities affected by intellectual property schemas, policy-makers, legislators, jurists and even many social theorists have a narrow understanding of the basis for instituting intellectual property rights and understanding their limits: most see intellectual property rights only as a means to create more intellectual goods in society. My dissertation argues that our intellectual property schemas and policies need to be more sensitive to the diversity of values involved in the social meanings of different intellectual goods and activities. Contrary to those who claim that "information wants to be free," I defend a property-based approach to the protection and regulation of intellectual goods. I argue that intellectual property schemas need to do a better job responding to the diversity of value that characterizes intellectual activities and goods. Finally, I argue that context is an important tool for marking out which values are to be promoted in different circumstances and communities.

On the 6 of October 2009 the European Court of Justice came with a preliminary ruling in the PAGO case concerning the geographical extent for a Community Trade Mark with reputation within the European Community. The judgment has given rise to a lot of questions. The fact that the ECJ, the Advocate General and Lawyers have different opi-nions on the geographical extent and on the outcome of the case creating big discus-sions on the topic of the necessity of Community Trade Marks. This has given rise to the purpose of this thesis which is to investigate the requirement for having a reputation in the Community according to Art 9.1 (c) CTMR, and analyze the legal consequences and possible threats to the Community Trade Mark system and proprietors of trade marks after the judgment of the PAGO case. This investigation has shown that there are four possible consequences for the CTM system after the judgement. Small countries, such as Luxembourg, are now might seen as a substantial part of the Community, PAGO is now protected within the European Community even in those countries where no one has heard about the brand, companies can obtain injunction in a country without proving reputation there and companies can put all their marketing effort into one country and thereby get protection in the whole Community. The outcome of this case is positive for proprietors of CTMs since it makes it easier for them to gain protection against other actors on the market. The biggest threat for the CTM system is the fact that unclear terms and judgements dis-rupt the Countries within the Community and destroys the harmonization, which the TMD, CTMR and the CTM is trying to build up.

Article 15(1) of the Community Trade Mark Regulation states that the Community Trade Mark holder has to put the mark into genuine use in the Community within five years from registration. Even though the regulation does not deal with the extent of use necessary, the Joint Statements uphold that genuine use within one country is enough. However, recent case law from national offices have ruled in the opposite direction, resulting in legal uncertainty concerning how much use that is needed. The courts claimed that use within merely one Member State is not use in a substantial part of the Community and therefore not genuine.This paper shows that it is not satisfactory to define genuine use in the Community by way of analogy to the term substantial part of the territory. The latter derives from the test of reputation concerning a different case entirely. Instead, most indicators point towards a market-oriented approach where national frontiers do not matter. Focus should be on the extent of use being made compared to the market concerned in the entire EU. A case-by-case assessment is required, where all relevant circumstances are taken into consideration.

Jämförande reklam innebär att en produkt ställs mot en konkurrent eller dennes produkt för att jämföra olika egenskaper. Detta kan ske direkt, genom att en produkt jämförs med en tydligt utpekad konkurrents produkt, men också indirekt genom att marknadsföra sig som ”billigast på marknaden” eller liknande uttryck och på så sätt jämför sig med konkurrenterna utan att nämna någon vid namn. Andra former av jämförande reklam är prisjämförelser samt tester och undersökningar. Denna marknadsföringsform har inte alltid varit tillåten i Sverige och ansågs tidigare inte utgöra god marknadsföringssed. Den åsikten ändrades under andra hälften av 1900-talet och i 1975 års marknadsföringslag var jämförande reklam fullt tillåtet under vissa i propositionen nämnda förutsättningar. Dessa förutsättningar finns numera representerade i marknadsföringslagens 18§. De rekvisit som där återges är kumulativa för att förhindra att otillbörlig marknadsföring vilseleder konsumenterna eller snedvrider konkurrensen. Syftet med jämförande reklam är att på ett objektivt sätt framhäva skillnader genom att särskilja varumärken. En annan effekt är att sådan reklam fungerar som en konsumentupplysning och har en konkurrensuppmuntrande effekt. Tillsammans med åsikten att reklamen skall vara skyddad av TF och YGL utgör dessa effekter de starkaste grunderna för den jämförande reklamens rättfärdigande. Eftersom dessa grunder bara kommer till uttryck i diverse förarbeten och doktrin, har det varit upp till domstolarna att bedöma deras omfattning och styrka som argument. Detta i motsats till rekvisiten för dess tillåtlighet som finns i 18§ MFL. Konsumentupplysningen är ett argument ofta nämnt i domskälen men sällan angivet som skäl för att tillåta annars otillbörlig marknadsföring. Den konkurrensuppmuntrande effekten får anses vara ett något starkare argument, speciellt i samband med lågprisföretag. Marknadsföringsåtgärder skyddas inte av TF eller YGL om de kan anses vara av rent kommersiell natur och ha ett rent kommersiellt förhållande till föremål. Domstolen har i enlighet med uttalanden i förarbetena ansett att företräde skall ges till TF och YGL vid oklarheter. Detta med hänsyn till det intresse de anses skydda. / Comparative advertising means that a product is placed against a competitor in order to compare different properties. This can be done directly, by comparing a product with a well known, named, competitor’s product, but it can also be done indirectly by promoting yourself as being “the cheapest on the market”. The purpose of comparative advertising is to highlight differences between marks in an objective way. Other effects are consumer enlightenment and the encouragement of competition. These effects combined with the opinion that comparative advertising should be protected by the freedom of speech and the freedom of press, compose the strongest argument for the justification of comparative advertising. While the prerequisites for admissibility are clearly expressed in 18§ MFL, the arguments for the justification of comparative advertising are only mentioned in various legislative history and doctrine. This means that it is up to the courts to assess their significance and strength of argument. Consumer information is an argument often cited in case law but rarely given as a reason to allow otherwise improper marketing. The interest of increased competition may be regarded as a somewhat stronger argument and justify some intrusions of the prerequisites in 18§, especially concerning low-cost companies. Promotional measures are not protected by TF or YGL if they are considered being of a purely commercial nature and having a purely commercial relation to the subject. Courts have ruled that when in doubt, TF and YGL has preference.

It is well recognized that there are imperfections in the market for knowledge transfer due to the nature of ideas and inventions. This is consistent with market failures commonly discussed in the economics of information literature. Some of the impediments to efficiency axe examined here in three essays—one empirical, one theoretical, and one case study—all of which share the theme of scientific knowledge movement. The first essay is empirical and measures the systematic effects of direct interaction and geographic distance between university and firm scientists on the economic performance of imported inventions. This study concludes that, with respect to licensing royalties, scientific interaction has an elasticity of approximately 3 at the mean, which is highly robust, and that distance does not have a significant effect after controlling for interaction. This suggests imperfections in the market for know-how that are sensitive to distance. The second essay is a case study of an invention from the area of robotics and control systems and augments the empirical work presented in the previous essay by illustrating specific reasons why interaction was important for the commercialization of one particular early stage invention. The third essay develops a game theoretic model involving the strategic manipulation of incentives by an incumbent to create an 'intellectual property commons' for the purpose of preventing the commercial development of a disruptive technology that would otherwise threaten existing industry margins. The strategy of spoiling incentives to commercialize public sector scientific inventions by eliminating exclusive intellectual property rights—the strategy of the commons—is motivated by a fear of cannibalization and supported by a credible threat. It is shown that the degree of cannibalization to which the new technology exposes the old market is responsible for this market failure.

In advanced industrial economies where, increasingly, intellectual assets are the principal source of value, productivity, and growth, strong intellectual property rights (IPRs)—conferred by patents, copyrights, and penalties for misappropriation of trade secrets—are an important inducement to invention and investment. For this reason, the extension and strengthening of IPRs in the United States and elsewhere in the past twenty-five years were appropriate and probably necessary. It may be that in some respects those processes should proceed further. On the other hand, there is growing friction over the assertion and exercise of some IPRs, particular patents, and claims that in some circumstances they may be discouraging research, its communication, and use. The question arises whether in some respects the strengthening and extension have proceeded too far. It is well known that the use of, reliance upon, and effects of patent protections vary across industries and technologies, but until recently there has been remarkably little empirical research documenting these differences. Fortunately, this is beginning to change, and the effects of some of the policy changes in the 1980s and 1990s are beginning to be investigated. Some evidence suggests that the effort to strengthen patent rights has indeed increased their importance and may have contributed to the growth of industrial R&D funding. On the other hand, recent survey evidence indicates that U.S. manufacturing firms in most industries rely more heavily on trade secrecy, lead time, and other technological protections to recoup their R&D investments than they do on legal mechanisms such as patents. This thesis examines the effects that a stronger, broader patent regime is having on today's industries. The main issues that emerge are those of patent quality and scope, as caused by problems with patent administration and litigation. Various solutions to these problems are then investigated, and recommendations made for future reform.

The latest European Union intellectual property settlement directives are concerned with progress of digital technology, particularly with development of internet, and with development of information society. Directive 2001/29/EC on the harmonization of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society consolidates obligations according WIPO copyright treaty and WIPO performances and phonograms treaty. Exclusive rights, i.e. reproduction right, right of communication to the public of works and right of making available to the public other subject-matter and distribution right, of authors, performers, phonogram producers, producers of the first fixations of films and for broadcasting organizations are harmonized, exceptions and limitations of these rights are determined in this document. Directive predicts obligations due to protection of technological measures and right management information and seeks to decide balance matter of right holders rights, technological measures and users’ rights. Directive 2004/48/EB on the enforcement of intellectual property rights extends intellectual property rights security measures, procedures and remedies, applicable to any infringement of intellectual property rights, consolidated in TRIPS treaty. Directive determines presumption of authorship or ownership, procedural legal measures (i.e. evidences, their preserving, provisional and precautionary measures, legal costs) and material legal measures and remedies (i.e... [to full text]

Šiuo metu moderni visuomenė pergyvena transformaciją į žinių visuomenę, kurios kūrimui svarbus inovacijų skatinimas, kūrybinio potencialo plėtojimas, intelektinės nuosavybės teisinės apsaugos tobulinimas. Žinių visuomenėje labai svarbus vaidmuo tenka kompiuterių programoms, todėl jų apsaugai būtina skirti itin daug dėmesio, siekiant užtikrinti deramą teisių turėtojų ir visuomenės interesų balansą. Svarbu suvokti, kad programinė įranga mus supa visur ir nuolat, ji yra daugelio gaminių dalis. Programinės įrangos teisinė apsauga yra kontroversiška, iki šiol nėra aišku, kokią intelektinės nuosavybės apsaugos formą tikslingiausia taikyti. Paprastai sukurta programinė įranga saugoma autorių teisių normomis, tačiau kai kuriose valstybėse papildomai gali būti taikoma patentinė apsauga. Vykstant globalizacijos procesams, kai intelektinė nuosavybė saugoma ne tik nacionaliniu, bet ir tarptautiniu lygmeniu, toks teisinis neapibrėžtumas daro neigiamą įtaką kompiuterių programų kūrėjams, o taip pat ir mums, vartotojams, todėl būtina nustatyti aiškius kriterijus, apsprendžiančius kompiuterių programų teisinę apsaugą. Svarbu, kad patentas jo savininkui suteikia bene didžiausias teises ir garantijas, todėl būtina nustatyti, ar tokia teisinė apsauga galima. Lietuvoje, Europos Sąjungoje, Japonijoje ir JAV programinės įrangos patentabilumo klausimas sprendžiamas skirtingai, tačiau šiose valstybėse kompiuterių programos, atitinkančios patentabilumo kriterijus, gali būti apsaugotos patentais... [toliau žr. visą tekstą] / Computer software is a part of almost every area of everyone’s life. Computers are getting more and more advanced every day. Global computer software piracy has become an enormous problem as the computer software industry has grown at an increasing pace over the last decade. Therefore, a very topical issue in intellectual property law has been and still is the best form of software protection. Patent is very desirable for the software creators as the given monopoly for their work gives an assurance that authors will benefit from their work. There are two typical legal regimes under which computer software might be protected: copyrights and patents. Patent protection requires disclosure of the invention to the public. In return, the holder of the patent receives a twenty–year monopoly which effectively prevents others from making, using or selling the invention without the authorization from the patentee. Copyright does not protect idea behind an expression, but just that particular expression of the idea. As a result, copyright allows the copyright owner no rights against persons who independently create similar or identical subject matter. Moreover, it does not forbid reverse engineering. The basic requirements of patentability are novelty, non-obviousness and utility. However, the standard for software patentability varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. The United States were the first to formally recognize the patentability of software in 1981. In Europe computer... [to full text]

Le présent mémoire se penche sur trois questions liées à la distribution d'oeuvres cinématographiques par Internet au Canada. Ces questions sont le reflet des principales préoccupations d'une industrie en pleine expansion et sont abordées sous un aspect pratique. La première question concerne l'applicabilité de la loi canadienne sur le droit d'auteur. L'aspect mondial du réseau Internet soulève en effet d'importantes questions de droit international privé. Il s'agit donc de connaître, à travers l'analyse de différentes hypothèses, les circonstances d'application et la portée de la loi canadienne. La deuxième question s'intéresse à la portée de la protection offerte. Les différents droits dévolus aux auteurs en vertu de la loi sont effectivement issus d'un environnement technique différent de celui proposé par Internet. Il s'agit donc d'analyser l'application de ces différents droits à la distribution d'oeuvres par Internet. Enfin, la troisième question se penche sur l'identité du titulaire des droits d'auteur sur une oeuvre cinématographique. La loi n'apporte en effet aucune réponse définitive à cette question et le processus de création particulier à la production d'une oeuvre cinématographique rend d'autant plus complexe la détermination du titulaire. Encore une fois, le présent mémoire tente de répondre à la question de la titularité par l'analyse successive de différentes hypothèses. / This work addresses three questions related to the distribution of cinematographic works by Internet in Canada. Those questions reflects the fundamental concerns of a budding industry and are examined under a practical angle. The first question deals with the applicability of the Canadian law regarding copyright. Indeed, the global aspect of Internet raises important issues related to international private law. We examine different scenarios in order to determine the scope and the circumstances under which the Canadian law applies. The second question examines the scope of the protection provided for under the Canadian law. The different rights provided to authors under the Canadian law were adopted before the Internet era and it is important to verify the applicability of those rights to the specifie technical environment of Internet. Finally, the third question addresses the issue of the ownership of a copyright related to a cinematographic work. The Canadian law doe not provide for an express answer to that question. Moreover, it is complicated by the specifie creation process leading to the production of a cinematographic work. This work undertakes to answer the question by examining different scenarios. / "Mémoire présenté à la Faculté des études supérieures en vue de l'obtention du grade de maîtrise en droit des technologies de l'information"