<p>Intelektualni kapital je neopipljivo jedinstvo obično nevidljivih resursa i aktivnosti baziranih na znanju koje dodaju vrednost organizaciji u očima internih i eksternih aktera (stejkholdera).<br />U radu se istražuje mogućnost merenja ovog nematerijalnog konstrukta, sačinjenog od ljudskog, organizacionog i relacionog kapitala.<br />Metoda za merenje, odnosno monetarnu valuaciju, uspešno je razvijena, a predloženi model verifikovan je statističkom analizom. Metoda je namenjena prvenstveno eksternom izveštavanju, ali se usled velike preciznosti, pouzdanosti i proverljivosti rezultata može koristiti i kao kontrolna alatka menadžmenta.</p> / <p>Intellectual capital is the intangible unity of usually invisible knowledge-based<br />resources and activities that add value to an organization in the eyes of<br />internal and external stakeholders.<br />This study explores the possibility of measuring that intangible construct<br />composed of human, organizational and relational capital. The method for<br />measurement and monetary valuation has been successfully developed and<br />the proposed model was verified by statistical analysis. The method is<br />intended primarily for external reporting, but due to high accuracy, reliability<br />and verifiability of results can also be used as a tool of management control.</p>

A importância da proteção à propriedade industrial foi deflagrada com o advento da Revolução Industrial e, posteriormente, com a Revolução Francesa. A proteção internacional à propriedade industrial teve origem na França, em 1883, com a Convenção da União de Paris para a Proteção da Propriedade Industrial (CUP), na qual foi estabelecido o tratamento jurídico para as patentes, marcas, bem como a obrigatoriedade aos países da União de assegurar proteção efetiva contra a concorrência desleal, nos termos de seu artigo 10 bis, parágrafo 1º. Todavia, somente no bojo do Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights - TRIPS, o segredo industrial encontrou proteção internacional efetiva, por meio das normas de repressão à concorrência desleal, conforme dispõe o artigo 39 do referido Acordo. Assim, cumpre analisar, a partir do respectivo regime de proteção internacional, qual o conceito, a natureza jurídica, o regime jurídico e a finalidade de proteção do segredo industrial. Para tanto, é preciso ter em mente a natureza imaterial do segredo industrial, os requisitos exigidos para que seja protegido, o regime jurídico e estrutura do TRIPS e o fundamento constitucional de proteção à propriedade industrial, ao qual vincula-se o interesse social e o desenvolvimento tecnológico e econômico do Brasil. / The relevance of industrial property protection was carried out by the Industrial Revolution and, lately, by the French Revolution. The international protection to the industrial property had been originated in France, in 1883, with the adoption of the Union of Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property, in which the legal treatment to patents and trademarks was set forth, as well as the obligation to the countries of the Union to make the protection against the unfair competition effective, pursuant to the article 10 bis, paragraph 1st of such Convention. However, only in the Agreement ontTrade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights - TRIPS, the trade secret has found effective international legal protection through the rules agaisnt unfair competition, in accordance with the article 39 of the referred Agreement. Thus, it is necessary to analize the definition, the legal nature, the legal regime and the aim of protection of trade secret from the respective regime of international protection. In this connection, it is important to emphasize the innmaterial nature of the trade secret and the requirements for its legal protection, the legal regime and the structure of the TRIPS and the industrial property constitutional fundament for its protection, which is connected to the social interest and the Brazilian technological and economic developement.

A propriedade intelectual, em especial as patentes, tornou-se uma questão importante para as gestões corporativa e tecnológica nas empresas. A quantidade de documentos de patentes que as empresas passaram a lidar aumentou substancialmente e de forma muito rápida nas últimas décadas, sendo a gestão do portfólio de patentes uma necessidade emergente dentro dessas corporações. O trabalho traz uma revisão sistemática da literatura sobre o que há em gestão de portfólio de patentes, organiza a evolução e as tendências na gestão desses portfólios, apresenta as motivações para patentear, as características específicas de gestão de patentes e os modelos de gestão de portfólios de patentes encontrados. A partir da revisão da literatura e a escassez de artigos científicos relacionados a gestão de portfólio de patentes, foi identificada uma oportunidade para propor um modelo para fazer a gestão de portfólio de patentes com suporte de uma teoria consolidada (gestão de portfólio de novos produtos), relacionando as motivações para patentear e as características específicas identificadas. O estudo pretende contribuir com a proposição de um modelo de gestão que possui ancoragem teórica e indica como as patentes são geridas dentro do portfólio. O modelo foi validado e refinado com base em testes feitos com dados coletados em estudos de casos. Os casos forneceram ainda informações para derivar sugestões de ações para empresas obterem melhores práticas na gestão de seus portfólios de patentes. / Intellectual property, especially patents, has become an important issue for corporate and technological management in companies. The number of patent documents that companies have to deal with has very rapidly increased over the las decades and patent portfolio management has become an emerging need for these corporations. This work brings a systematic review on patent portfolio management, organizing the evolution and tendencies in the management of these portfolios, presenting the motivations for patenting, the specific features of patent management and models of portfolio management of patents found in the literature. From the literature review and the lack of scientific works related to patent portfolio management, was identified an opportunity to propose a model for managing patent portfolios supported by a consolidated theory (new product development portfolio management), relating the motivations for patenting and the specific features identified. The study intends to contribute to the proposition of a management model with theoretical anchorage and indicating how patents are managed within the portfolio. The model was validated and refined based on data collected from case studies. The cases also provided information to derive suggestions to companies to obtain best practices in the management of their patent portfolios.

Le droit transitoire est une discipline dont la vocation est universelle. Cet ensemble de règles a pour finalité de permettre la découverte de la loi applicable à un fait ou un acte donné. Tout comportement a une traduction juridique, même neutre, selon une norme unique. À ce titre, peu importe le domaine du Droit concerné. De nombreuses règles, forgées par la doctrine et la jurisprudence à partir de l’article 2 du Code civil, permettent à l’interprète de la loi nouvelle de décliner le principe de non rétroactivité selon les spécificités d’une espèce. Par exception, le législateur peut proposer lui-même des dispositions transitoires, qui s’avèrent pour la plupart, en droit de la propriété intellectuelle, conformes au principe de sécurité juridique. D’une manière générale, l’opération de qualification nécessaire porte sur l’acte ou le fait étudié ou bien sur la norme nouvelle elle-même. L’étude menée a pour objet la transposition de cette opération de qualification au sein du domaine précis de la propriété intellectuelle. Dans cette optique, les notions de « droit acquis » et de « situation juridique » sont confrontées aux spécificités de la discipline, dont la filiation apparente avec le droit des biens est parfois source d’erreurs. En plus de ces qualifications qui se rapportent aux éléments saillants d’une espèce donnée, sont également recherchées en droit de la propriété intellectuelle les illustrations des qualifications classiques de « loi interprétative », de « loi pénale plus douce », de « loi d’ordre public » et de « loi de procédure ». Leur signification transitoire est appréciée au regard de l’exigence de sécurité juridique, fil conducteur de toute discussion relative à la résolution d’un conflit de lois dans le temps. Au cours de cette étude, les systèmes de protection très disparates qu’offre le droit de la propriété intellectuelle à tout créateur ou « découvreur », apparaissent comme autant de facteurs d’une diversité jurisprudentielle gênante. À l’inverse, le mécanisme de réservation d’une chose intellectuelle semble constituer un dénominateur commun intéressant. Celui-ci trouve une traduction efficace avec la notion de « situation juridique » écrite de cette manière : « titularité d’un droit de propriété intellectuelle ». Par suite, l’indépendance de la matière se confirme et ses disparités internes sont gommées. Seulement, si l’exigence de sécurité juridique commande de retenir la notion de « situation juridique », il convient, au contraire, de se méfier de la notion de « droit acquis ». De plus, il est constaté que l’utilisation de la notion de «loi d’ordre public » n’est pas conforme à l’exigence de sécurité juridique, quand le maniement de la qualification de « loi de procédure » se révèle souvent délicate. Enfin, la notion de « loi interprétative » semble implicitement justifier de nombreux choix jurisprudentiels, orientés par l’absence de nouveauté manifeste de la norme nouvelle. Il convient alors de proposer la qualification de « loi de codification ». / A lawyer can settle conflicts of legal provisions through the application of several rules. They can be used like universal tools, in every juridical domain. The aim of the operation consist in determining the law which has to be applied. Each behavior can be translated in juridical terms. In this way, only one set of laws has to be taken into account. The lawyer can use the principles created by doctrine and precedents in order to solve conflicts of legal provisions. The article 2 of the Civil Code is the foundation of them. In the intellectual property domain, the legislator can intervene and suggest transitory provisions. The judge is not allowed to enforce the law retroactively, no matter the facts or the acts under consideration. The purpose of this investigation lies in the adaption of these rules for intellectual property issues. Therefore, “vested interests” and “legal status” concepts are confronted with specificities of intellectual property as such a corpus o findependent rules. In a certain extent, there is a link between this discipline and the law of property. When the lawyer has to choose the law to apply, there are disturbing parallels to be made. He may easily make a mistake. Furthermore, the concepts of “declaratory act”, “softer penal act”, “public order law”, and “proceedings act” can be used to resolve special problems in the intellectual property domain. When a conflict of legal provisions is under discussion, the judge has to ensure a certain security of the procedure. The judge must always be able to justify precisely his choice. It’s a significant guarantee for any persons subject to trial. It has been widely recognized that intellectual property offers a large selection of rights. As a result, the judge is tempted to follow several different lines of thought and case law on the subject is not always uniform. On the contrary, legal precedents could be unified if the judge has used the “legal status” concept. It should be written in an efficient way : “to be entitled to exercise an intellectual property right”. The independence of the discipline is confirmed and its internal disparities disappear. The “vested interests” concept does not seem to be appropriate to the characteristics of intellectual property. Moreover, the concept of “public order law” doesn’t square properly with intellectual property issues. The concept of “proceedings act” is delicate to use. Lastly, it appears that the concept of “declarative law” is implicitly used by judges to prove the retroactivity of the law. Finally, the concept of “codification act” should be applied to this situation.

Between 1818 and 1824, radical printer and publisher Richard Carlile made a determined effort to disseminate copies of Thomas Paine's banned text The Age of Reason in England. Despite strict censorship laws and harsh legal penalties used to curtail previous publishers of this title, Carlile employed a number of creative techniques that kept Paine's deistic writings in print and in circulation during the Regency period. These included republishing public domain court documents when he was charged with seditious libel and reading The Age of Reason in its entirety into testimony during his trial, making it part of the public record. Copied from trial transcripts and reprinted in cheap pamphlet form, Carlile's editions of The Age of Reason would sell an impressive 20,000 copies in these formats. He managed to provide wide-scale access to a work that had been suppressed by the British government since its original publication in 1794. My paper argues that Carlile's approach to subverting Regency-era censorship of The Age of Reason provided an early test for the recognition of the public domain in British law. Instead of continuing to suppress this text, the British government acknowledged the public's right to read the text in this format, allowing Carlile to use his own court documents to continue its publication. This event paved the way for recognition of the public ownership of texts and access to public records in nineteenth-century British print culture.

La question de la protection et de la valorisation des données de santé fait l’objet d’un renouvellement permanent car elle est tiraillée pas des intérêts contradictoires. Les logiques juridiques, sanitaires et économiques s’affrontent et s’expriment au travers d’une règlementation particulièrement fournie et disparate des données de santé. Le droit de propriété semble à même de concilier ces enjeux d’apparence antinomiques. Au regard de la place de ce droit dans notre ordonnancement juridique et de la singularité des données de santé, l’étude de leur rapprochement mérite une étude d’une certaine ampleur. Il s’agit dans un premier temps de s’assurer de la compatibilité de ce droit avec les données de santé. La réponse impose une vision de la propriété simplifiée pour finalement constater que les droits existants sur ces données sont en fait déjà des droits de propriétés mais qui, du fait de la particularité des données de santé, sont largement limités. Dans un second temps, se pose donc la question de la pertinence de l’application d’un droit de propriété plus « complet » aux données de santé. Or, on remarque que la spécificité de ces données est telle que cette solution n’est pas la plus efficace pour parvenir à un juste équilibre entre patients et collecteurs de données. Pour autant, d’autres solutions sont possibles. / The question of the protection and enhancement of health data is subject to a permanent renewal because it appears to be in the middle of some conflicting interests. Legal, health and economic logics confront and express themselves through a particularly heterogenous set of regulations on health data. Property rights here seem able to reconcile these issues that first look contradictory appearance issues. Given the place of this right in our legal system and uniqueness of health data, the study of their reconciliation deserves a study of some magnitude. This is a first step to ensure the compatibility of this law with health data. The answer requires a vision of simplified property only to find that the existing rights of the data is already in the property rights but which, because of the particularity of health data, are largely limited. Secondly, therefore the question of the relevance of the application of "more complete" property rights applies to health data. However, we note that the specificity of health data implies that such a the solution is not the most effective for achieving a fair balance between patients and data collectors. Nevertheless, other solutions are possible.

Les trolls de brevets ont connu un développement économique et médiatique très important depuis le début des années 2000. Ce modèle économique consiste à acquérir et valoriser des brevets d'invention de manière agressive en exploitant les faiblesses du système de brevets. Les revenus des trolls proviennent exclusivement des accords de licences conclus avec les entreprises fabricantes ou des dommages et intérêts obtenus à l’issu d’actions en contrefaçon. L’étude des trolls implique une analyse juridique, statistique et économique de leurs pratiques afin de pouvoir déterminer la réalité de ces modèles économiques et envisager une réponse à ces comportements. De plus, une approche de droit comparé est nécessaire car les disparités entre les règles de droit américaines et européennes permettent sont à l'origine des différences de situations observées entre les deux continents.La première partie est consacrée à la cinématique des trolls de brevets, détaillant les différentes stratégies et diversifications des pratiques au cours des quinze dernières années. On constate alors la nécessité de dépasser l’opposition manichéenne classique entre trolls des brevets et entreprises fabricantes. La réalité est plus complexe, les entreprises fabricantes et certaines entités publiques étant désormais fortement impliquées dans des stratégies similaires.La seconde partie est consacrée à la dynamique des trolls avec l'étude des conditions de développement, qui permettent de comprendre pourquoi cette pratique n’est pas présente sur le territoire européen dans les mêmes proportions. L’analyse de ces comportements face aux fonctions du droit de brevet est ensuite nécessaire pour caractériser l’abus constitué par ces stratégies. Enfin, l’encadrement de ces pratiques est étudié à travers les défenses disponibles pour les entreprises victimes de ces stratégies, tant en droit positif qu’en droit prospectif. Ces défenses sont appelées à traiter les conséquences et non les causes des trolls de brevets, il est donc nécessaire d’envisager le développement du marché secondaire des brevets, car ses faiblesses sont en partie responsables de l’avènement des trolls. Ainsi, un meilleur encadrement de ce marché pourrait permettre de développer les échanges de brevets et réduire les possibilités d’abus autorisées par le système des brevets aujourd’hui. / The economic development and media coverage of patent trolls has tremendously increased since 2000. This business model consists in acquiring and aggressively monetizing patents through the exploitation of the patent system failures. Patent trolls generate revenues from licensing agreements with manufacturing entities and damages obtained by court decision. The conduct of a legal, economic and statistical study is necessary in order to determine the reality of these business models and to suggest a response to these behaviors. A comparative law approach is necessary as the differences between the american and european law is the source of factual disparities observed between these two continents.The first part is dedicated to the patent trolls kinematics through the study of the various business models and their diversification over the past 15 years. It reveals the need to overcome the classical opposition between trolls and manufacturing companies as these companies and even some public funded structures are now developing similar strategies.The second part study the mechanic of patent trolls through their conditions of development, which helps to understand why trolls are not operating in Europe through the same proportions. The assessment of an abuse of the patent system is then conducted with the study of these behaviors through the lens of the patent function. Furthermore, the actual and future legal responses offered to companies facing abusive infringement claims are studied. However these defenses are meant to treat the consequences of abusive behavior and not their causes, it is therefore necessary to study the development of the secondary patent market, since some of its weakness are partially responsible for the development of patent trolls. We suggest that the enhancement of some elements of the secondary patent market could help foster patent exchange and reduce the possibility of abusing the patent system.

[pt] Inseridas em ambiente extremamente competitivo, frente às novas tecnologias e à redução contínua dos investimentos governamentais em pesquisa e desenvolvimento, as Instituições de Ensino Superior (IES) são instadas a interagir, constantemente, com vários órgãos governamentais e entidades privadas, por meio de parcerias que visam à realização de pesquisas básicas e aplicadas. Essa necessidade contribui, por outro lado, para o avanço tecnológico do país, melhorando sua competitividade, frente à inevitável globalização da economia, por meio de inovações e da transferência de tecnologia. Neste contexto, a definição e manutenção de políticas de Propriedade Intelectual (PI) passam a ser um requisito para a sobrevivência de qualquer instituição que investe em pesquisa e desenvolvimento tecnológico, por representar uma condição mandatória para o seu sucesso na transferência do conhecimento gerado para a sociedade, colaborando para a inserção e sustentabilidade das organizações brasileiras e do próprio país no mercado, face às regras que norteiam a competitividade global e fazer jus, em contrapartida, ao recebimento de recursos que ajudam a manter as suas atividades de pesquisa. No caso das IES, em geral, este é um desafio especial, na medida em que são organizações com características específicas, talvez nem sempre propícias à implantação de uma política de PI. Para as IES privadas, isto pode representar um caminho essencial para a sustentabilidade das atividades de pesquisa, dada a necessidade crescente de gerarem seus próprios recursos. O objetivo desta pesquisa é o de identificar requisitos, oportunidades e dificuldades organizacionais para a implementação de uma política de PI em uma IES de gestão privada, no Brasil. O objeto de estudo foi o caso da PUC-Rio, uma das mais tradicionais instituições de pesquisa no país. A metodologia fundamenta-se na percepção de diferentes indivíduos envolvidos nas atividades de pesquisa e desenvolvimento. Os resultados apontam que não há uma homogeneidade acerca da importância e da problemática da gestão de PI entre os participantes da pesquisa, bem como predomina a opinião de que a criação e implementação de uma política de PI não pode ser algo determinado verticalmente, de cima para baixo, pela instituição, mas algo que deve emergir ou ser aceito pelos atores da própria atividade de pesquisa e desenvolvimento, institucionalizando-se após amplo debate entre eles. / [en] Institutions of undergraduate and graduate studies are in an extremely competitive environment, facing new technologies and the continuous government investment reductions in research and development. They must interact constantly with several governmental institutions and private entities searching partnerships in order to make feasible basic and applied research. On the other hand, these efforts contribute to the technological advancement of the country, improving its competitiveness to face the inevitable economy´s globalization, throw technological transfers and innovation. In this context, the significance and maintenance of intellectual properties (IP) policies become a requisite for the survival of any institution that invests in technological development research. It also represents a mandatory condition for the success of knowledge transfer for the benefits to the sustainability of Brazilian organizations and the insertion of itself in the marketplace, taking into account the global competitiveness rules and proving at the same time that the receipt of resources that assist research activities were well worth it. This is a challenge, especially in the case of IES since they are organizations that have specific characteristics that may not be the best scenario for IP policies. For the private IES, this can represent an essential path for the sustainment of its research activities, given the growing need for themselves generating its own resources. The objective of this research at is to identify organizational requisites, opportunities and difficulties for the implementation o IP policies in a private managed IES in Brazil. The Case study is the case of PUCRio, one of the most traditional research institutions in the country. The methodology bases on the perception of different individuals involved in research and development activities. The results point that it does not have a homogeneity concerning the importance and problematic of IP management between the participants of the research, as well as predominates the opinion of that the creation and implementation of IP policies cannot be something determined vertically, top down, by the institution, but should come about or be accepted by its own research and development activities actors, and that its implementation occurs after extensive debate between them.

Abstract not available

自19世紀以降，各國體認以國內法律為基礎的保護方式具有侷限性，因此開始嘗試以國際條約的方式對智慧財產權進行規範，產生了巴黎公約、伯恩公約、羅馬公約等國際協定，可定位為智慧財產權保護多邊貿易架構形成的第一階段，也是第一次各國國內立法朝國際保護靠攏的現象。1967年WIPO成立使多邊貿易架構顯得較為完備，然而在WIPO之運作架構下又因為不同國家的立場分歧未能進一步修正智慧財產權公約，多邊架構發展出現瓶頸，已開發國家未因此退出多邊貿易架構，反而選擇持續完善此多邊架構。TRIPS於1995年烏拉圭回合後生效，規定了嚴格且具體的執行規範，但是多邊架構未能於TRIPS後再取得重大成果，已開發國家和開發中國家在智慧財產權利益之立場分歧使得多邊架構之發展陷入僵局。已開發國家於TRIPS後時期選擇了另一種途徑，本文舉美國FTAs貿易政策為例，發現此時出現了暫時偏離多邊架構，改以雙邊架構為政策重心的分離，惟雙邊貿易政策經本文分析並無法產生美國的預期效果。 ACTA的發展可以定位出美國目前的政策走向，改採協商複邊貿易協定的方式，希望可以循FTAs政策的途徑，企圖讓ACTA此複邊架構的成果可以擴張到多邊架構中。本文認為2010年12月公布最終版本的ACTA能否順利生效仍屬未知數，即便順利生效，依其談判成果可以推定，已無法達到所有參與談判國的預期。不論已開發國家之後的政策走向為何，我們可以發現擁有智慧財產權利益國家的最終目標仍是提升國際間智慧財產權保護水準，過程中則變動地、持續地在多邊、複邊貿易架構中，選擇性執行能達成最終目標的政策，國際智慧財產權保護貿易架構中存在著各國政策反覆於多邊、複邊架構間來回擺盪的分合現象。 關鍵字：TRIPS、反仿冒貿易協定、智慧財產權保護、TRIPS-Plus / Countries found out that the protection of intellectual property based only on national law was insufficient. They chosen to base on international agreement from 19 century and concluded important treaties such as Paris Convention, Berne Convention and Rome Convention. This is the first phase in the process of which the intellectual property protection under the multilateral trade framework forming. WIPO was established at 1967 and completed the multilateral trade framework a little further. But countries had different positions thus could not obtain mutual recognition on specific issues. The developed countries did not walk away from the framework; nevertheless, they worked even harder to try to get some result. TRIPS came into force at 1995 after the Uruguay Round which is the most important multilateral agreement at the present day. The multilateral trade framework was stuck after TRIPS resulting from the gap between the developed and developing countries. The former began to work in other direction. We took the U.S. bilateral trade policy of FTAs as an example and found out there is a temporary departure from the multilateral trade framework at this phase. The U.S. policy of FTAs however didn’t achieve the goal expected. We could point out the next step of U.S. by observing the negotiation of Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA). U.S. took a different approach by negotiating the ACTA and hoped there will be a spillover effect from the plurilateral agreement to the multilateral framework. Negotiating parties announced the final draft of ACTA on December 3rd, 2010. After analyzing the final draft, we could make a conclusion that the result from the negotiation is not outstanding; moreover, it is not clear whether the agreement will come into force in time. No matter what kind of action will the developed countries take in the next, their final and utmost goal is always trying to protect the intellectual property and their related interest. Changing policy becomes the normal condition. This leads to the phenomenon that the intellectual property protection is continuously swaying from the multilateral side to the bilateral or plurilateral trade framework, and vice versa. Key Words: TRIPS, Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, Intellectual Property Protection, TRIPS-Plus