Le produit de luxe n’est pas un bien comme les autres. Ses qualités matérielles et immatérielles lui confèrent une valeur particulière qui oblige son producteur à le vendre dans un environnement commercial adapté. La règle de droit peut-elle considérer cette particularité économique ? Paradoxalement, la France est leader mondiale du marché des produits de luxe, mais nul n’est en mesure d’affirmer avec précision ce qu’est le luxe. Intégrer une notion aussi insaisissable au sein d’un raisonnement juridique semble difficile. Pourtant, les atteintes subies par les titulaires des droits du produit de luxe ont convaincu le juge européen de mettre en place des règles protectrices spéciales. Le but poursuivi est légitime. Il s’agit de protéger les investissements réalisés pour vendre et promouvoir le produit de luxe. Mais cette démarche légale s’appuie sur une méthode de qualification qui n’est pas satisfaisante. L’«aura», le «prestige» ou la «sensation» de luxe qui émanent du produit marqué, sont des critères trop subjectifs pour assurer l’application systématique et cohérente de règles protectrices. C’est pourquoi, outre la démonstration d’un corpus de règles applicables au produit de luxe, il convient d’analyser les fondements de sa reconnaissance par le droit positif, ainsi que l’instauration d’un régime unifié reposant sur des critères de définition précis, prenant en considération les qualités intrinsèques de ce bien particulier. / The luxury product is not a product like any other. Its material and immaterial qualities confer a special value that requires its producer to sell it in a proper business environment. The rule of law can it consider this economic feature ? Paradoxically, France is world's leading luxury goods market, but no one is able to state precisely what is luxury. The law seems unsuited to integrate a concept as elusive as luxury. Yet, violations suffered by the owners of luxury product rights have convinced the European judge to set up special protective rules. The aim is legitimate. This is to protect the investments made to sell and promote luxury products. But this legal approach is based on a method of qualification which is not satisfactory. The "will", "prestige" or the "feel" of luxury emanating frombranded product, are too subjective criteria to ensure systematic and consistent implementation of protective rules. Therefore, in addition to the demonstration of a body of rules applicable to the luxury product, it should analyze the foundations of its recognition by positive law and the establishment of a unified system based on criteria precise definition, taking into account the intrinsic qualities of that particular property.

Malgré l’amélioration du régime des droits de propriété intellectuelle (DPI) en Chine après l’accession de celle-ci à l’Organisation mondiale du commerce (OMC) en 2001, la question relative aux DPI demeure l’un des « sujets de vive préoccupation » dans le commerce sino-européen. Selon la stratégie européenne visant à assurer le respect des DPI dans les pays tiers, adoptée en 2005 et renouvelée en 2014, la Chine est ciblée par la Commission européenne comme le premier pays tiers dans lequel les autorités locales ne prennent pas de mesure efficace pour s’attaquer aux problèmes de violations des DPI. En raison des enjeux politiques et économiques importants pour l’UE, son intervention est nécessaire pour améliorer le régime des DPI et l’environnement de l’investissement en Chine. L’analyse de l’action extérieure de l’UE s’appuie sur l’étude des instruments auxquels elle recourt en vue de renforcer la protection et le respect des DPI en Chine. L’objet de notre recherche est d’examiner la manière dont l’Union choisit d’exploiter les instruments à géométrie variable au sein des enceintes multilatérale et bilatérale. Deux axes distincts mais complémentaires orientent la mise en œuvre de l’action extérieure de l’UE vis-à-vis de la Chine : l’approche coopérative, d’une part, et de l’approche conventionnelle, d’autre part. L’approche coopérative vise d’abord à rapprocher le régime juridique chinois des standards les plus élevés du droit de l’UE. En dépit d’un certain nombre de difficultés limitant l’efficacité de l’action extérieure de l’UE, la coopération bilatérale avec la Chine permet de contribuer à l’amélioration du régime juridique chinois. La convergence normative devrait ensuite faciliter l’apparition d’une approche commune entre l’UE et la Chine sur le plan conventionnel. Il importe à cet égard de souligner la position divergente de la Chine face à la promotion de l’UE, par la voie conventionnelle, d’un renforcement de la protection et du respect des DPI. Malgré la convergence accrue des positions européenne et chinoise favorables à la protection « ADPIC-plus » des DPI, la Chine se montre réticente voire hostile envers les initiatives conventionnelles de l’UE tendant à renforcer les mesures relatives au respect des DPI. / Despite the improvement of China’s intellectual property rights (IPR) regime after this country’s World Trade Organization (WTO) accession in 2001, the IPR remains one of “major concerns” in Sino-European trade relation. According to European strategy for the enforcement of intellectual property rights in third countries, adopted in 2005 and renewed in 2014, China is identified by the European Commission as first priority country, in which the local authority does not take effective measures to tackle the problems caused by IPR violations. Taking into account the EU’s important political and economic concerns, his action is necessary in order to improve the IPR regime and the investment environment in China. The analysis of EU’s external action is based on the instruments used to strengthen IPR’s protection and enforcement in China. The purpose of our research is to examine the EU’s method to use the different instruments within the multilateral and bilateral fora. Two distinct but complementary axes orientate the undertaking of EU’s external action vis-à-vis China: cooperative approach, on the one hand, and the conventional approach, on the other hand. Firstly, the cooperative approach aims to bring Chinese legal system closer to higher standards in EU law. In spite of certain difficulties limiting the efficacy of EU external action, the bilateral cooperation with China can contribute to a better legal system in China. Then, the normative convergence should be able to facilitate the emergence of a common approach between the EU and China in the conventional framework. In this respect, it is important to emphasis Chinese divergent position with regard to EU’s conventional approach aiming to strengthen IPR protection and enforcement. Despite the increasing convergence of European and Chinese positions favorable toward “TRIPs-plus” protection, China seems reluctant even hostile to EU’s conventional initiatives intending to strengthen IPR enforcement measures.

When Martin Luther supposedly nailed his Ninety-Five Theses in 1517 to the Castle Church door in Wittenberg, the small town had only a single printing press. By the end of the century, Wittenberg had published more books than any other city in the Holy Roman Empire. Of the leading print centres in early modern Europe, Wittenberg was the only one that was not a major centre of trade, politics, or culture. This thesis examines the rise of the Wittenberg printing industry and analyses how it overtook the Empire's leading print centres. Luther's controversy—and the publications it produced—attracted printers to Wittenberg who would publish tract after tract. In only a few years, Luther became the most published author since the invention of the printing press. This thesis investigates the workshops of the four leading printers in Wittenberg during Luther's lifetime: Nickel Schirlentz, Josef Klug, Hans Lufft, and Georg Rhau. Together, these printers conquered the German print world. They were helped with the assistance of the famous Renaissance artist, Lucas Cranach the Elder, who lived in Wittenberg as court painter to the Elector of Saxony. His woodcut title page borders decorated the covers of Luther's books and were copied throughout the Empire. Capitalising off the demand for Wittenberg books, many printers falsely printed that their books were from Wittenberg. Such fraud played a major role in the Reformation book trade, as printers in every major print centre made counterfeits of Wittenberg books. However, Reformation pamphlets were not the sole reason for Wittenberg's success. Such items played only a marginal role in the local industry. It was the great Luther Bibles, spurred by Luther's emphasis on Bible reading, that allowed Wittenberg's printers to overcome the odds and become the largest print centre in early modern Germany.