Magister Legum - LLM / Many critics have questioned whether the protection of the IPRs would benefit developing countries. It was argued in this paper that developing countires have the interest in protecting IPRs as well. However, it was showed that the benefit of this protection can be realized only if there is a fair rule of the game to all players in the multilateral trading system. The general objective of this research was to examine the current status of IPRs protection and the levels of TRIPS compliance by Rwanda in the area of copyright. / South Africa

<p>The Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property (TRIPS) ia a multilateral international treaty introduced by the World Trade Organization (WTO) that came into effect on 1 June 1995. At a basic level it attempted to establish minimum standards for the regulation of intellectual property rights within those countries that are members of the WTO and signatories to it. This thesis served a dual purpose. The first leg was to embark on an investigation into TRIPS, criticallt analyzing the provisions of the Agreement. The important aim here was to analyze and discover whether TRIPS is sensitive to weaker countries. The second leg was to probe within the the legislative framework of South Africa and determine whether South Africa as a &quot / developing copuntry&quot / , has complied with the demands as expressed by TRIPS. This investigation was done with specific reference to South African patent law.</p>

<p>Many critics have questioned whether the protection of the IPRs would benefit developing countries. It was argued in this paper that developing countires have the interest in protecting IPRs as well. However, it was showed that the benefit of this protection can be realized only if there is a fair rule of the game to all players in the multilateral trading system. The general objective of this research was to examine the current status of IPRs protection and the levels of TRIPS compliance by Rwanda in the area of copyright.</p>

<p>The Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property (TRIPS) ia a multilateral international treaty introduced by the World Trade Organization (WTO) that came into effect on 1 June 1995. At a basic level it attempted to establish minimum standards for the regulation of intellectual property rights within those countries that are members of the WTO and signatories to it. This thesis served a dual purpose. The first leg was to embark on an investigation into TRIPS, criticallt analyzing the provisions of the Agreement. The important aim here was to analyze and discover whether TRIPS is sensitive to weaker countries. The second leg was to probe within the the legislative framework of South Africa and determine whether South Africa as a &quot / developing copuntry&quot / , has complied with the demands as expressed by TRIPS. This investigation was done with specific reference to South African patent law.</p>

<p>Many critics have questioned whether the protection of the IPRs would benefit developing countries. It was argued in this paper that developing countires have the interest in protecting IPRs as well. However, it was showed that the benefit of this protection can be realized only if there is a fair rule of the game to all players in the multilateral trading system. The general objective of this research was to examine the current status of IPRs protection and the levels of TRIPS compliance by Rwanda in the area of copyright.</p>

Magister Legum - LLM / The Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property (TRIPS) ia a multilateral international treaty introduced by the World Trade Organization (WTO) that came into effect on 1 June 1995. At a basic level it attempted to establish minimum standards for the regulation of intellectual property rights within those countries that are members of the WTO and signatories to it. This thesis served a dual purpose. The first leg was to embark on an investigation into TRIPS, criticallt analyzing the provisions of the Agreement. The important aim here was to analyze and discover whether TRIPS is sensitive to weaker countries. The second leg was to probe within the the legislative framework of South Africa and determine whether South Africa as a &quot;developing copuntry&quot;, has complied with the demands as expressed by TRIPS. This investigation was done with specific reference to South African patent law. / South Africa

La contrefaçon est un phénomène de dimension internationale qui constitue aujourd’hui plus qu’hier un véritable fléau. Il apparaît que les principaux pays de provenance des contrefaçons saisies dans l’Union Européenne sont les pays d’Asie,notamment la Thaïlande. Cette recherche a pour but d'étudier les problèmes juridiques relatifs à la contrefaçon des droits de propriété intellectuelle. Ceci nous amène à poursuivre la recherche suivant deux axes. La première partie a pour but de mettre en évidence la comparaison de la définition de la contrefaçon en France et en Thaïlande. Elle se décompose en deux sous-parties, la première s'attachant à décrire la qualification de l’atteinte constitutive de contrefaçon selon les droits concernés (le terme « contrefaçon » en lui-même, tant en France qu’en Thaïlande, désignant différentes formes d’atteintes à un droit patrimonial de propriété intellectuelle). Pour identifier les atteintes constitutives de contrefaçon, notamment l’élément matériel, nous mettons l’accent sur 4 points: l’existence de la création, la diffusion de la création, l’usage de la création et la participation à l’action contrefaisante. S’agissant de l’élément intentionnel de contrefaçon, il semble présenter de multiples facettes. La seconde définit la preuve de la contrefaçon. On observe alors les moyens de preuve de la contrefaçon : la loi prévoit deux séries de mesures principales que nous pouvons regrouper en moyens de preuve en matière civile et pénale. Par ailleurs, il y a des moyens de preuve alternatifs entre les deux régimes. Ce sont des procédures douanières.La seconde partie a pour objet la prise en considération de la répression par les juridictions civiles et pénales. Elle se décompose donc en deux sous-parties : la première concerne les sanctions prononcées par les juridictions pénales. Nous avons déjà étudié la procédure pénale et les sanctions applicables à la contrefaçon. Il se trouve que la situation en Thaïlande est totalement différente de la situation française, notamment concernant la jurisprudence en matière pénale. Il semblerait que la majorité des décisions soient des sanctions prononcées par les juridictions pénales. La seconde sous-partie concerne quant à elle la réparation des atteintes à la propriété intellectuelle. Nous constatons que le préjudice subi, en France tout comme en Thaïlande constitue en un gain manqué . En outre l’évaluation du préjudice en France et en Thaïlande est difficile (préjudice subi en matière de marque, préjudice moral et fixation de l’indemnisation de peine privée). / Counterfeiting is an international problem. It appears that the main countries of origin of counterfeit goods seized in the European Union are the Asian countries, including Thailand. The research explains concisely the entire key factors to this whole problem. The research is divided into two parts; in the first place, I will outline pointly the definition of Intellectual Property Rights law (IPRs law) infringement between French and Thailand. Firstly, we focus on the structure of IPRs infringement. The term "counterfeit" in himself both in France and Thailand indicating different forms of an intellectual property rights liability conception. To identify violations constitute infringements, including the material element, we focus on four points, the existence of the creation, dissemination of the creation, use of creation, participation in the infringing action . With regard to the intentional element of infringement, iconcerned the intention of counterfeiter by the civil and criminal aspects as well as the objectives of my research would analysis on two components. First, the application of substantive issues embodies in the civil action. The second is the criminal action. The intention of counterfeiter are also intersect into two parts of action. The secondly,, we research to the proof of infringement. There provides two measures of proof in civil matters and evidence incriminal matters. In addition, there are a customs procedures as an alternative measure of proof . In the second place, we mainly concerned the IPRs law enforcement: Firstly we concerns the penalties imposed by criminal courts. We have already studied the criminal proceedings. In addition, we studied the penaltiesfor counterfeiting. We find that the criminal proceedings in Thailand is totally different from the criminal proceedings in France. In addition, we studied the penalization of IPRs law. We find that the situation in Thailand is totally different from a France, especially in criminal jurisprudence. It seems that the majority of decisions are the penalties imposed by criminal courts. Secondly were search about categories of damages and criteria for proof of damages. We find that the damages, in France as well as in Thailand, is the recovery of profit. Also the difficulty of assessing the damage, in France as well as in Thailand, are the damage of Trademark law, moral right damage and punitive damage.