Landmark intellectual property cases and their legacy2025|PDF|Epub|mobi|kindle电子书版本百度云盘下载

Landmark intellectual property cases and their legacyPDF格式电子书版下载

注意：本站所有压缩包均有解压码： 点击下载压缩包解压工具

Chapter 1 Shostakovich and John Huston: The French Supreme Court on Copyright, Contracts and Moral Rights&Andre Bertrand1

Chapter 2 Moral Rights 2.0&Peter K. Yu13

Chapter 3 The Legacy of International News Service v. Associated Press (USA)&Matthias Leistner33

Chapter 4 Odol: The Introduction of a Watery Concept with Steeled Resilience&Anselm Kamperman Sanders51

Chapter 5 Darcy v. Allen&Matthew Fisher63

Chapter 6 The Taiwanese 'Philips' CD-R Cases: Abuses of a Monopolistic Position, Cartel and Compulsory Patent Licensing&Kung-Chung Liu83

Chapter 7 The Anton Piller Case and Its Legacy: In Search of a Balance in Civil Search&Alain Strowel and Vicky Hanley105

Chapter 8 The Case eBay Inc. v. MercExchange LLC, Its Impact on NPE's and Patent Enforcement&Severin de Wit121

Chapter 9 Hitting the Bricks&Protecting the LEGO~ Brick around the World Aldo Nicotra135

Chapter 10 The Budweiser Cases: A Brewing Conflict&Christopher Heath181

Index245

Chapter 1 Shostakovich and John Huston: The French Supreme Court on Copyright, Contracts and Moral Rights&Andre Bertrand1

1. The Shostakovich Cases3

2. The John Huston Case6

Chapter 2 Moral Rights 2.0&Peter K. Yu13

1. Introduction13

2. Obsolescence15

3. Creative Reuse and Semiotic Democracy18

4. Liberative Reuse and Democracy23

5. Right to Delete28

6. Conclusion31

Chapter 3 The Legacy of International News Service v. Associated Press (USA)&Matthias Leistner33

1. The INS-Case: The Classic American Tort of Misappropriation33

1.1.The Facts in INS and the Central Elements of the Misappropriation Action33

1.2.Quasi-property or Unfair Competition?35

2. The Chequered History of INS v. AP37

2.1.The Impact of INS v. AP on States' Misappropriation Laws, on UK and Australian Law, and on Federal US Restatements in the Field37

3. Relationship to IP Rights: The Issue of Pre-emption38

3.1.Pre-emption by Federal Intellectual Property Legislation38

3.2.Lessons for European Law41

4. INS and Database Protection42

4.1.INS and European Database Protection?42

4.2.INS as a Pathfinder for US Database protection?46

5. Discovering and Developing IP Rights: An Assignment for the Judge or for the Legislator?48

Chapter 4 Odol: The Introduction of a Watery Concept with Steeled Resilience&Anselm Kamperman Sanders51

1. Introduction51

2. The Dispute52

3. The Roots of the Dilution Rationale52

4. The Legacy of Odol: Trans-Atlantic Reception53

5. The Legacy of Odol: Cross-Atlantic Parallel Import56

6. Conclusion59

Chapter 5 Darcy v. Allen&Matthew Fisher63

1. Of Monopolies…63

1. 1 . … And Legacies64

2. A Little Background65

3. The Case68

3.1.The Prerogative Questioned69

3.2.The Decision73

3.3.Coke's Report of the Decision74

3.3.1.The First Question74

3.3.2.The Second Question76

3.4.Coke's Report: Altered Reality?76

4. The Immediate Impact of the Decision78

5. Conclusion79

Chapter 6 The Taiwanese 'Philips' CD-R Cases: Abuses of a Monopolistic Position, Cartel and Compulsory Patent Licensing&Kung-Chung Liu83

1. Introduction83

2. Abuse of a Joint Monopolistic Position85

2.1.Improperly Maintaining Prices85

2.2.Other Exploitative Abuses86

3. Did the Defendants Form a Cartel?86

3.1.Confirmed by the TFTC86

3.2.Denied by the Taipei Administrative High Court and the Supreme Administrative Court87

4. The Compulsory Patent Licensing87

4.1.TIPO's Decision to Grant a Compulsory Patent License against Philips88

4.2.TIPO's Decision to Annul the Compulsory Patent License88

4.3.The Taipei Administrative High Court Rescinded TIPO's Decision to Grant a Compulsory Patent License89

5. The Ramifications Abroad89

5.1.In the US: Raising the Patent Misuse Issue under the Patent Act89

5.1.1.Philips Has Market Power in the Relevant Market90

5.1.2.Package License of 'Essential' and 'Non-essential' Patents91

5.1.3.No Patent Misuse under Per Se Analysis91

5.1.4.No Patent Misuse under Rule of Reason Analysis92

5.1.5.Even if Philips and Sony Agreed to Suppress Sony's Technology, Such an Agreement would not Constitute Patent Misuse92

5.2. In the EU92

6. The Aftermath95

6.1.Ailing CD-R Market in Taiwan95

6.2.Philips's Demand of Sensitive Information Violated Section 24 of the Fair Trade Act?95

6.3.The TFTC Substantially Revised Its Guidelines on Technology Licensing Arrangements in 200996

6.3.1.Analytical Steps97

6.3.2.White Clauses98

6.3.3.Black Clauses99

6.3.4.Evaluation of the Guidelines101

6.4.The IP Court Awarded Philips Full Royalty Despite of Violation of Article 10 of the Fair Trade Act101

6.5.The Draft Compulsory Patent-Licensing Provisions102

7. Future Prospects103

Chapter 7 The Anton PUler Case and Its Legacy: In Search of a Balance in Civil Search&Alain Strowel and Vicky Hanley105

1. Anton Piller KG v. Manufacturing Processes Ltd106

1.1.When Lord Denning meets Hugh Laddie QC106

1.2.Anton Piller: Is It a Search Warrant for Civil Cases?107

1.3.What Are the Exceptional Circumstances Particular to the Anton Piller case?108

1.4.Anton Piller Orders: Disquiet about Their Success109

2. The Anton Piller Orders Today: The Search Orders in the UK110

2.1.Procedure for Application110

2.2.Built-In Safeguards to Avoid Misuse and Protect the Defendant111

2.3.Is the Defendant Forced to Comply with the Order?112

3. Towards a Global Recognition of Civil Search or Anton Piller Order in Europe and Beyond?113

3.1 .Article 50 of the TRIPs Agreement Defines the Minimum at International Level113

3.2.The Legislative Process Leading to Article 7 of the 2004 Enforcement Directive: Some Evidence of the Legacy of Anton Piller114

3.3.Objectives and Building Blocks of Article 7 of the 2004 Enforcement Directive115

3.4.Some Unresolved Issues and Open Questions in Relation to the Implementation of Article 7 of the 2004 Enforcement Directive117

3.4.1.Protection of Confidential Information117

3.4.2.Persons Participating to the Search117

3.4.3.Persons Granting the Civil Order118

3.4.4.The Evidence Needed to Obtain a Civil Search118

3.4.5.The Possibility to Modulate the Evidence Threshold for the Description and for the Physical Seizure119

4. Conclusion: From Anton Piller to the Moderm Civil Search in Europe, in Search of the Balance of Civil search120

Chapter 8 The Case eBay Inc. v. MercExchange LLC, Its Impact on NPE's and Patent Enforcement&Severin de Wit121

Chapter 9 Hitting the Bricks&Protecting the LEGO~ Brick around the World Aldo Nicotra135

1. Overview135

1.1.The Context of the Issue135

1.2.Outline of Presentation and Paper136

2. LEGO Bricks: An Auspicious History137

2.1.Seventy Years of Commercial Success137

2.2.How Did the LEGO Brick Come to Market?137

3. A Selection of Cases139

3.1.Summary of Outcomes139

3.2.Australia (First Instance), 1991139

3.2.1.Background139

3.2.2. Copyright140

3.2.3.Trade Practices Act and Passing Off142

3.2.4.Findings144

3.3.Australia (Appeal), 1992146

3.4.Hong Kong (First Instance), 1986147

3.4.1.Background147

3.4.2.Claims148

3.4.3.Findings148

3.5.Hong Kong (Appeal and Privy Council Decision) 1987 and 1988149

3.5.1.Background and Appeal149

3.5.2.Privy Council149

3.5.3.Significance of Decision150

3.6.Sweden, 1984-1987151

3.6.1.Background151

3.6.2.Findings152

3.6.3.Summary of Appeals152

3.7.France, 1989-1994153

3.7.1.Background and First Instance153

3.7.2.Appeal153

3.8.Hungary, 1996154

3.8.1.Background and First Instance154

3.8.2.Appeal154

3.9.France, 1994-2000155

3.9.1.Background and First Instance155

3.9.2.Appeals155

3.9.3.Court of Appeal (Paris) decision156

3.10. China, 2002156

3.10.1. Background and First Instance156

3.10.2. Appeal156

3.11. Italy, 1991-1998157

3.11.1. Background157

3.11.2. Summary of Appeals157

3.12. Sweden, 2004158

3.12.1. Background158

3.12.2. Market Research158

3.12.3. Findings159

3.13. Canada, 2005159

3.13.1. Background159

3.13.2. Summary of Appeals160

3.14. Germany, 1999-2004161

3.14.1. Background161

3.14.2. Summary of Appeals161

3.14.3. Findings162

3.15. Czech Republic, 2006162

3.15.1. Background162

3.15.2. Finding163

3.16. Italy, 2008163

3.16.1. Background and Initial Findings163

3.16.2. Appeal to Supreme Court of Italy163

3.17. Registration of Shape Marks164

3.18. Switzerland, 2003164

3.18.1. Background164

3.18.2. Summary of Appeals165

3.19. Hungary, 2008166

3.19.1. Background166

3.19.2. Summary of Appeals166

3.20. Three-Dimensional Marks in the EU, 2008167

3.20.1. Background167

3.20.2. Summary of Appeals168

4. Conclusion168

Appendix. Hitting the Bricks170

Chapter 10 The Budweiser Cases: A Brewing Conflict&Christopher Heath181

1. Introduction181

2. The Parties182

2.1.Anheuser-Busch (A.B.)182

2.2.Budweiser Budvar (B.B.)182

3. 'Budweiser' Lawsuits Around the World184

3.1.The Trademark Cases185

3.2.Cases Involving the Lisbon Agreement187

3.3.Cases Involving Bilateral Treaties on Geographical Indications188

4. Analysis, Suggestions and Conclusions189

4.1.Contract Law189

4.1.1.The B.B .B.B. Agreement189

4.1.2.The Cesky Agreement192

4.1.3.The 1939 Agreement192

4.1.4.Synoptical Overview and Analysis193

4.2.The Angle of Trademarks and Trade Names195

4.2.1.General Matters195

4.2.2.Similarity196

4.2.3.Recognition196

4.2.4.Registrability196

4.2.4.1. General Considerations196

4.1.2.2. Community Law198

4.1.2.3. Cases related to Budweiser199

5. Defences201

5.1.Use of a Company or Trade Name (e.g., Article 6(1)(a) European Trade Mark Directive)201

5.2.Use of an Indication Concerning the Geographical Origin (e.g., Article 6(1)(b) European Trade Mark Directive)203

5.3.Geographical Indications206

5.3.1.The Paris Convention and Madrid Arrangement206

5.3.1.1. The Paris Convention206

5.3.1.2. The Madrid Arrangement 1891207

5.3.1.3. The Versailles Peace Treaty 1919 as a multilateral agreement207

5.3.2.Bilateral Treaties208

5.3.3.The Lisbon Agreement for the Protection of Appellations of Origin210

5.3.3.1. History210

5.3.3.2. Registration of Appellations211

5.3.3.3. Scope and contents of such right are regulated in Articles 3, 5(6) and 6212

5.3.3.4. Specific Issues related to the Budweiser cases213

5.3.3.4.1. The Lisbon Register213

5.3.3.4.2. National Courts214

5.3.3.3. Relationship to Community Law224

5.4.Comments and Conclusions225

5.4.1.Comments225

5.4.2.Conclusions226

5.4.3.Outlook227

Appendix. The Budweiser Saga228

Index245