This thesis examines the implementation, enforcement and evolution of IP laws and regulations in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan. The period of interest includes the last decade of the twentieth century and the first decade of the twenty first century, with emphasis on the role played by Free Trade Agreements struck between Jordan and the United States, the European Union, and Jordan’s accession to the World Trade Organization. This thesis also examines the enforcement of the current set of IP laws in Jordan, and looks at their social and economic compatibility with the Jordanian societal norms and economic realities. This thesis argues that Jordanian IP laws lack a meaningful social and economic texture, and have failed to be evenly enforced in Jordan, essentially because they do not fit the Jordanian culture and are not compatible with Jordan’s economic stage of development. Additionally, the thesis argues that IP laws have had insignificant economic impact on the Jordanian economy as the majority of technologies used in Jordan, and the majority of foreign direct investments attracted to Jordan, are not IP related. Finally, the thesis argues that the current Jordanian enforcement model, which is built on coercion by donor countries, is serving the interests of foreign companies to the exclusion of the local citizens, and will not, in the long run, produce an enforcement model based on self-regulation by Jordanians, themselves. The laws, therefore, are unable to produce tangible results for the Jordanian people, or help meet their economic interests. The last part of the thesis deals with recommendations and suggestions aimed at creating an integrated approach to the adoption of IP policies.

Des premières fascinations des graphistes pour les notions de systèmes, en passant par l’introduction des approches liées au « corporate design » et à la « corporate identity », le renforcement progressif du « marketing », puis le basculement vers le « branding » et la mise en valeur artificielle des marques, la recherche rend compte de l’évolution des représentations d’institutions, d’événements et de collectivités publics, entre les années 1970 et 2010. Cette chronologie des approches dominantes est analysée en écho à celle d’une série d’expérimentations personnelles liées à une approche qui se veut plus civique du design et qui permet de penser de réelles méthodes alternatives. En analysant les relations entre identification et identité, est proposé un déplacement du focus des questions de visibilité et de mise en valeur des marques vers des approches qui, à l’aide de langages visuels partagés, placent en leur centre : - l’intelligibilité des structures complexes, - la représentation des pluriels, des évolutions et des relations, - l’intégration au contexte, - la coordination des expressions multiples. / Research documenting the evolution of visual representations of institutions, events and public bodies between 1970 and 2010, from designers’intitial fascination with the concept of « corporate design » and « corporate identity » systems, the progressive reinforcement of « marketing », then the switch to « branding » and the artificial values attached to brands is chronologically analysed through a series of personal experiments related to an intentionally more civic design minded approach that permits the creation of real alternative methods. Analysing the relationship between identification and identity sees a proposed shift in focus concerning brand visibility and enhancement towards approaches that, with the help of shared visual languages, places at the centre – the intelligibility of complex structures – the representation of plurality, trends and relationships, - the integration of context – the coordination of multiple expressions.

No description available.

The relationship between international regimes regulating intellectual property, traditional knowledge and biodiversity has received much attention in recent times. Of the many complex and controversial issues in contemporary international legal discourse on this matter, the protection of traditional knowledge (TK) stands out as a significant challenge. Choices abound in the search for modalities to regulate rights to use and control TK systems and their underlying biodiversity. In recent times, the protection of geographical indications (GIs) has emerged as an option for protecting TK. Despite the considerable enthusiasm over it, there is appreciable research dearth on how far and in what context GIs can be used as a protection model. Indeed, not only is the concept of GIs itself widely misunderstood. As well, analyses as to their applicability for protecting TK often reflect underlying cultural differences in the nature, scope and the jurisprudence regarding GIs across jurisdictions. This thesis examines the relationship between GIs and TK, focusing on the responsiveness of GIs to the needs and desires of indigenous peoples and local communities (ILCs). The thesis posits that the search for a model to protect TK should involve identifying different modalities, including those based on intellectual property, to fit to the nature and uses of TK in particular contexts. The analysis conceptualizes GIs as a form of IP that are structurally and functionally suitable to protect aspects of TK in traditional knowledge-based agricultural products (TKBAPs). Substantively, the thesis draws attention to the conceptual underpinnings of GIs as encompassing cultural and economic objectives in the protection of TK. As such, it is argued that stronger protection of GIs should be achieved by integrating the negotiations and discussion concerning GIs and TK at the international level. Further, the case is made for the determination of immediate challenges and long-term opportunities in choosing a legal means for protecting GIs at the national level. In this connection, the thesis suggests that the potential of GIs to meet national and local imperatives to protect TK be assessed, inter alia, based on their instrumentality for economic, biodiversity, cultural and food security objectives in protecting TKBAPs.

L’internationalisation du droit de la propriété intellectuelle, initiée à la fin du XIXe siècle, a pris depuis la fin du XXe siècle une toute nouvelle tournure avec son inclusion dans le champ des disciplines commerciales multilatérales. La signature de l’accord ADPIC marque en effet l’émergence d’une véritable gouvernance mondiale de la propriété intellectuelle : l’ambition affichée par l’OMC est d’encadrer, substantiellement parlant, la marge de manœuvre des membres dans la mise en place de leurs politiques de protection. Bien qu’initié plus tardivement, la communautarisation du droit de la propriété intellectuelle revêt désormais une portée considérable : outre une conciliation effective des régimes nationaux de protection avec les principes cardinaux du traité, d’importantes directives d’harmonisation ont été édictées, et des titres européens de protection ont même été créés dans certains secteurs. Notre étude a pour vocation de montrer comment la communautarisation, au-delà de son rôle traditionnel de source du droit, officie comme un indispensable vecteur de structuration de la position européenne vis-à-vis de la mondialisation du droit de la propriété intellectuelle. Dans son versant ascendant tout d’abord – du local au global –, le vecteur communautarisation joue un rôle de mutualisation des objectifs à promouvoir sur la scène internationale. L’enjeu n’est autre que celui de façonner une gouvernance mondiale de la propriété intellectuelle qui corresponde au système d’intérêts et de valeurs de l’Union, conformément aux objectifs ambitieux assignés par le Traité. Ce processus de mutualisation n’a toutefois rien d’automatique : d’importantes contraintes institutionnelles – malgré plusieurs révisions du Traité et la progression graduelle de l’harmonisation en interne – contrarient l’émergence d’une véritable politique européenne extérieure intégrée. Mais c’est précisément à l’aune de ces contraintes qu’il convient d’apprécier la portée des accomplissements de l’UE, qui a su s’imposer comme un acteur central de la gouvernance mondiale du droit de la propriété intellectuelle. Dans son versant descendant ensuite – du global au local –, le vecteur communautarisation s’accompagne d’une montée en puissance du juge de Luxembourg dans l’arbitrage des situations d’interactions normatives fréquentes et complexes entre le droit de l’Union et le droit international de la propriété intellectuelle. L’étude systématique de la résolution par la Cour de ces interactions normatives montre combien celle-ci s’attache à préserver l’autonomie de l’ordre juridique de l’Union, en ménageant une marge d’appréciation significative dans la mise en œuvre des obligations découlant de la mondialisation du droit de la propriété intellectuelle. Cette marge d’appréciation est mise à profit pour assurer la défense d’un modèle européen original en construction, tirant parti des flexibilités du cadre normatif mondial. / The internationalization of IP Law, initiated at the end of the 19th century, has taken since the end of the 20th century a brand new twist with its inclusion in the field of multilateral trade disciplines. The signing of the TRIPS agreement marks the emergence of a global IP governance. Indeed, the ambition displayed by the WTO is to supervise the margin of maneuver of its Members in implementing their policies. Although Communitization of IP law started much later, it now has a considerable scope: national protection regimes have been conciliated with the cardinal principles of the Treaty, some important harmonization directives have been enacted, and various European titles of protection have even been created. Our study is designed to show how Communitization, beyond its traditional role of source of law, officiates as a necessary and efficient vector for structuring the European position towards the Globalization of IP Law. In its ascendant side first -- from Local to Global, the Communitization vector plays a role of merging the objectives to be promoted on the international scene. The issue at stake is to shape an IP global framework that corresponds to the system of interests and values of the EU, in accordance with the far-reaching objectives assigned by the Treaty. This merging process is, however, not automatic. In spite of several amendments to the Treaty and of the progress of internal harmonization, various institutional constraints thwart the emergence of a fully integrated external European policy in the field of IP. But it is precisely in light of these constraints that the scope of the achievements of the EU, which in now recognized as a central actor in the global IP governance, must be appreciated. In its down side then -- from Global to Local, the Communitization vector is accompanied by a rise of the European Court of Justice in arbitrating complex normative interactions between national, EU and International IP Laws. A systematic analysis of the resolution by the ECJ of these normative interactions reveals its determination to safeguard the autonomy of the EU legal order, by arranging for significant discretion in implementing international commitments. This margin of appreciation is used to defend an original European model under construction, taking advantage of the flexibilities of the global normative framework