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.

No description available.

The thesis takes as its central object and problematic the contentious status of domain names in global and domestic legal systems. It considers the manner in which advances in technology have blurred the legal rights between domain names and the existing laws of trademark, contract, copyright and property. As it stands, domain names are presented as a secondary right attached to other legal rights such as trademark or contract law, rather than as a new form, or species, of intellectual property. And yet, domain names represent a valuable, distinct and scarce commodity, which, in so far as they are capable of exclusive and excludable use, control and “ownership”, exhibit regularities common to forms of property. This thesis seeks to justify the application of legal frameworks with respect to domain name registration and use to prepare the way for a discussion of the highly qualified recognition of domain names as legal property in United States courts and, to some extent, by arbitral tribunals acting under the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers ICANN mandated Uniform Dispute Resolution Mechanism. By means of a detailed exploration of the legal and practical challenges accompanying the meteoric rise of Internet technology and commerce, the thesis intends to clarify the fundamental reasons for some of the current controversies. The thesis proceeds, in a first step, to identify several “gaps” in the current framework of domain name regulation, drawing the readers’ attention to the, arguably, flawed treatment of the legal issue surrounding domain name use, control and ownership by courts and tribunals against the background of the accelerating monetisation and commoditisation of domain names. In capsule, this thesis aims to conduct a review into existing scholarship and case law on trademarks and domain names, in addition to contract and property law. It focuses on the associated legal frameworks for each, supported by cases that demonstrate their legal standing as a newly emergent property-based right. Moreover, the thesis sets these reflections against a broader discussion of doctrinal developments in the area of trademark law, the emerging role of ICANN as a custodian of the technical domain name allocation functions; the origins and theory behind the concept of property as distinct from the law of contract and, finally, the relevance of property rights to the legal standing of domain names. The thesis concludes by arguing that domain names should be treated as expressions of contract and property law, and that the relationship between domain names and trademark law be critically assessed and not confused. Further, it is argued that courts should take account of this duality towards the development of a revised framework for the regulation and adjudication of domain name assignment and use. A movement in this direction would stabilise expectations around the rights owed to, and by, domain name “owners”, alleviating the uncertainty that remains as to their status under law, while reducing the scope for dispute. By taking these issues one by one, this thesis aspires to make a small but important critical contribution to the intellectual and political debate on the future development and enforcement of domain name law.

Big Data is an interesting, developing and to some extent, vague area in respect of law. The actual value of Big Data is in its flow, not its sources. There are different options discussed which are considered as the tool to dictate ownership for Big Data, like, Copyright, Trade Secrets, Patent, Database Protection etc. However, there are also some ideas to come up with a new type of intellectual property right to deal with this. Among other available intellectual property rights, database, apparently, provides the most obvious protection for Big Data. In addition to it, laws regarding Big Data needs to be in conformity with privacy law, competition law, contract law etc. The research primarily concerns with big data database, and to identify the impact of big data, it includes some aspects of business practice. From a broader perspective, the research analyses the scope of third parties’ rights to match with the financial aspects of big data database. This research aims to identify how to balance different interests in using big data. There is no point to deny the need to control big data and simultaneously, privacy should be respected as well. It is therefore important who can access to these data and how far their right to access can be stretched. This access right extended to third parties is valuable as it is a must to ensure free flow of data which is a prerequisite for building the new data economy. In regard to methodology, the thesis is based on analytical approach where existing sources are being explained in the context of recent scenario.

Arguably one of the most prevalent issues in the field of Intellectual Property law, both international and domestic, is that of the emerging orphan works problem. Orphan works are any original literary, pictorial or graphic illustrations, and photographs whereas the prospective user cannot readily identify and/or locate the owner(s) of the copyrighted material. This poses a legal risk of liability upon the prospective user for copyright infringement. This thesis focuses on the legal topic of copyright with an emphasis on orphan works legislation. This study compared and contrasted the experiences in the United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia which have all enacted legislation to mitigate the issue of liability to prospective users of orphaned works, to the United States which has been reluctant to do the same. Each country has used its own legislative model to mitigate the liability of orphan works. This study sought out to analyze each model as well as compare the legal, political, and economic similarities of each country to test the viability of a particular model being successful in the United States.

It is undeniable that internet nowadays is part of our life and community. Internet opens door for expression of ideas and opinions which can both be given and taken freely. Moreover, with the rise of the new internet model, Web 2.0, the platform becomes wider and more interactive which has an effect on the copyright aspect all over the world. User-generated content was soon born as a result of Web 2.0 and caused unsolvable legal issues in the copyright regime due to its transformative nature which acts in contrary to the exclusive right of the author.          This thesis paper seeks the best solutions for the complicated nature of user-generated content in online platform which has been causing legal tension in copyright law for quite some time. The paper will focus mainly in the scope of EU copyright law as well as Thai copyright law. The Canadian new specific exception for user-generated content and its semi-open “fair dealing” exception will be discussed as a possible approach to the solution. Moreover, Human rights aspect in scope of freedom of expression will be analyzed in order to find the balance between the copyright and human rights in the most effective way to serve the core purpose of copyright law.

<p>For many years pharmaceutical patents and their impact on prices have been at the centre of the international debate over insufficient access to lifesaving HIV/AIDS medicines in developing countries. The conflict has largely revolved around the implementation of an intellectual property system in the developing world, subsequent the adaptation of the TRIPS Agreement, which has made a 20 year pharmaceutical patent protection mandatory for these countries and consequently contributed to high drug prices for patented medicines as well as limited the use of generic drugs.</p><p>Developing countries, where patents are already in place, have sought to reduce high drug prices by making use of compulsory licensing, a safeguarding practice allowing the production or importation of a generic medicine without the consent of the patent holder. Compulsory licences are allowed under the TRIPS Agreement, but disagreements about the conditions, under which compulsory licences are available for ‘essential medicines’, have restricted their use. A definition of the extent to which compulsory licensees can export generic drugs to developing countries unable to manufacture their own has been missing, but on 30 August 2003 the WTO announced that it had resolved this problem by lifting the TRIPS Agreement’s restrictions on exports and permitting exports of drugs produced under a compulsory license as an exception to a patent right. The main question is whether the compulsory licensing system as prescribed in the recent Decision is an ample means of improving access to patented AIDS medicines in the developing world.</p><p>By means of legal and economic reasoning this master thesis argues that the 30 August Decision on lifting TRIPS’ restrictions on exports of patented pharmaceuticals produced under compulsory licences provides complex and uncertain rules, rendering an unreliable employment of compulsory licensing. It is desirable that further recommendations are given on which generic producing companies should be awarded compulsory licences and also on which premises. In reality, the debate about compulsory licensing is part of a much wider structural problem in development policy. The solution to the inaccessibility problem requires a mix of courses of action with a functioning compulsory licensing system included. However, disagreements such as how necessary funding should be divided equitably between developed countries could protract the reaching of a pragmatic solution.</p>

As a response to trade marks’ enhanced importance within trade, the EU’s interest in the area has increased by proponing a harmonization of the member states’ trade mark pro-tection so far as needed to preserve the EU’s objective of an internal market. The area is therefore regulated by an EU Directive, however allowing some national discretion. The purpose of this study was to investigate if a specific part of the trade mark protec-tion, the assessment-based confusion doctrine, corresponds on a Swedish and EU level. The aim was to locate statutory discrepancies in order to stimulate further review of the practical application of the doctrine from the analytical perspective of legal certainty. A scientifically accepted and traditional legal research method was applied when ex-amining and interpreting the sources of law. In addition, a comparative study was con-ducted between the two investigated legal systems to achieve the overall purpose. When comparing the results from the investigated sources, the legislations present a sta-tutory diversity, opening up for practical discrepancies. So was also the case with the application at the early stage of national implementation of the EU Directive. The tradi-tional national confusion doctrine, prescribing a more legal-technical assessment, did not correspond to the more flexible and contemporary EU view. Consequently, some national courts had to endure criticism for not adjusting to the EU development. Later case law however presents a very positive transition to the EU view of the confu-sion doctrine, suggesting a partial abandonment of the national legal sources of law for the benefit of EU law. Conclusion was however that despite this practical transition to EU law, statutory changes are necessary in order to safeguard the legal certainty in the way of achieving predictability.

For many years pharmaceutical patents and their impact on prices have been at the centre of the international debate over insufficient access to lifesaving HIV/AIDS medicines in developing countries. The conflict has largely revolved around the implementation of an intellectual property system in the developing world, subsequent the adaptation of the TRIPS Agreement, which has made a 20 year pharmaceutical patent protection mandatory for these countries and consequently contributed to high drug prices for patented medicines as well as limited the use of generic drugs. Developing countries, where patents are already in place, have sought to reduce high drug prices by making use of compulsory licensing, a safeguarding practice allowing the production or importation of a generic medicine without the consent of the patent holder. Compulsory licences are allowed under the TRIPS Agreement, but disagreements about the conditions, under which compulsory licences are available for ‘essential medicines’, have restricted their use. A definition of the extent to which compulsory licensees can export generic drugs to developing countries unable to manufacture their own has been missing, but on 30 August 2003 the WTO announced that it had resolved this problem by lifting the TRIPS Agreement’s restrictions on exports and permitting exports of drugs produced under a compulsory license as an exception to a patent right. The main question is whether the compulsory licensing system as prescribed in the recent Decision is an ample means of improving access to patented AIDS medicines in the developing world. By means of legal and economic reasoning this master thesis argues that the 30 August Decision on lifting TRIPS’ restrictions on exports of patented pharmaceuticals produced under compulsory licences provides complex and uncertain rules, rendering an unreliable employment of compulsory licensing. It is desirable that further recommendations are given on which generic producing companies should be awarded compulsory licences and also on which premises. In reality, the debate about compulsory licensing is part of a much wider structural problem in development policy. The solution to the inaccessibility problem requires a mix of courses of action with a functioning compulsory licensing system included. However, disagreements such as how necessary funding should be divided equitably between developed countries could protract the reaching of a pragmatic solution.