ERN: Intellectual Property (Topic)最新文献_第9页

Trademark Functions and Trademark Rights 商标功能与商标权

ERN: Intellectual Property (Topic) Pub Date : 2014-08-01 DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.3693270

M. Peguera

{"title":"Trademark Functions and Trademark Rights","authors":"M. Peguera","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3693270","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3693270","url":null,"abstract":"Over the last years, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has remarkably expanded the potential scope of trademark rights. Under the EU Trademark Directive, a trademark owner may only prevent third-party uses of the mark if such uses are made (i) in the course of trade, (ii) in relation to goods or services, and (iii) for the purpose of distinguishing the goods or services, that is, as a trade mark. The latter requirement had been traditionally understood by the CJEU as referring to the function to guarantee to consumers the identity of the origin of the goods or services (function of origin). Nonetheless, the CJEU case law has evolved to accept a very broad view of the use as a mark requirement so as to include referential, comparative and decorative uses when such uses may somehow affect the origin function. In yet a further step, the CJEU has come to understand that a use as a mark exists not only where the mark is used in connection to the function of origin, but also when it is used in relation to any other trademark function. Thus, in some cases, a trademark owner is entitled to prevent a third-party use even where such use is not capable of affecting the origin function, if it is liable to affect others functions of the mark, such as those of quality, communication, investment or advertising. This working paper provides an analysis of this evolution in the CJEU case law. In a further, more elaborated, version of the paper I intend enrich the analysis by comparing that European trend with US case law examples of broadening the scope of trademark rights.","PeriodicalId":125544,"journal":{"name":"ERN: Intellectual Property (Topic)","volume":"38 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130927546","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 1

Standard Setting, Intellectual Property Rights, and the Role of Antitrust in Regulating Incomplete Contracts 标准制定、知识产权和反垄断在规范不完全合同中的作用

ERN: Intellectual Property (Topic) Pub Date : 2014-07-18 DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.2467939

J. Tsai, Joshua D. Wright

{"title":"Standard Setting, Intellectual Property Rights, and the Role of Antitrust in Regulating Incomplete Contracts","authors":"J. Tsai, Joshua D. Wright","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2467939","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2467939","url":null,"abstract":"A large and growing number of regulators and academics, while recognizing the benefits of standardization, view skeptically the role standard setting organizations (SSOs) play in facilitating standardization and commercialization of intellectual property rights (IPRs). Competition agencies and commentators suggest specific changes to current SSO IPR policies to reduce incompleteness and favor an expanded role for antitrust law in deterring patent holdup. These criticisms and policy proposals are based upon the premise that the incompleteness of SSO contracts is inefficient and the result of market failure rather than an efficient outcome reflecting the costs and benefits of adding greater specificity to SSO contracts and emerging from a competitive contracting environment. We explore conceptually and empirically that presumption. We also document and analyze changes to eleven SSO IPR policies over time. We find that SSOs and their IPR policies appear to be responsive to changes in perceived patent holdup risks and other factors. We find the SSOs’ responses to these changes are varied across SSOs, and that contractual incompleteness and ambiguity for certain terms persist both across SSOs and over time, despite many revisions and improvements to IPR policies. We interpret this evidence as consistent with a competitive contracting process. We conclude by exploring the implications of these findings for identifying the appropriate role of antitrust law in governing ex post opportunism in the SSO setting.","PeriodicalId":125544,"journal":{"name":"ERN: Intellectual Property (Topic)","volume":"10 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-07-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128464963","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 25

Technological Impact of R&D Grants on Utility Models 研发经费对实用新型的技术影响

ERN: Intellectual Property (Topic) Pub Date : 2014-05-28 DOI: 10.1111/radm.12198

M. Torres-Barreto, Rebeca Méndez-Durón, Felipe Hernández Perlines

引用次数: 16

The USPTO Trademark Assignment Dataset: Descriptions and Insights USPTO商标转让数据集:描述和见解

ERN: Intellectual Property (Topic) Pub Date : 2014-04-01 DOI: 10.2139/SSRN.2848558

Alan C. Marco, Amanda F. Myers, Stuart J. H. Graham, K. Apple

{"title":"The USPTO Trademark Assignment Dataset: Descriptions and Insights","authors":"Alan C. Marco, Amanda F. Myers, Stuart J. H. Graham, K. Apple","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2848558","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2848558","url":null,"abstract":"Attention to the asset value of intellectual property (IP) has traditionally concentrated on high-value patent sales and licenses. This narrow focus neglects non-patent assets held by a broader set of economic agents, such as trademarks, and overlooks the evolving ways owners are employing and monetizing their IP assets. To help remedy this deficiency, the Office of Chief Economist of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is releasing a series of datasets in formats convenient for researchers. This paper describes the USPTO Trademark Assignment Dataset, a database of 786,931 assignments and other transactions recorded during the 1952-2013 period and affecting 4,197,645 trademark registrations or applications. Since these data have not been commonly used, we provide a comprehensive description, present key trends, and examine the rate of transaction for issued registrations. Trend analysis suggests intensifying trademark collateralization as the number of trademarks recorded as collateral to secure debt has increased in absolute terms and relative to the stock of live registrations. The number of trademarks for which an assignment was recorded has also grown, though this trend appears to be reversing in the last decade. Among the 3.4 million registrations issued during the 1978-2013 period, 31 percent were affected by some transaction over their life; 21 percent changed ownership; and 12 percent were affected by a security interest agreement. While further empirical work is needed, transaction rates by registration cohort suggest that registered trademarks may be more likely to be traded than patents. Further, we do not find a positive relationship between the incidence of trade and maintenance, suggesting that trademark assignment and maintenance outcomes may not follow the pattern observed for patents. Despite some limitations, these data open new avenues for research, particularly with respect to trademark collateralization and the market for brands.","PeriodicalId":125544,"journal":{"name":"ERN: Intellectual Property (Topic)","volume":"97 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128000067","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 4

China Utility Model Patent: Trash or Treasure – A Data-Based Analysis 中国实用新型专利:垃圾还是宝藏——基于数据的分析

ERN: Intellectual Property (Topic) Pub Date : 2014-03-31 DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.2418540

Binqiang Liu

引用次数: 1

Who Owns the Project Name? 谁拥有项目名称?

ERN: Intellectual Property (Topic) Pub Date : 2013-11-27 DOI: 10.5033/IFOSSLR.V5I2.87

Pamela S. Chestek

引用次数: 2

On the Obituary of Scientific Knowledge Monopoly 论科学知识垄断的讣告

ERN: Intellectual Property (Topic) Pub Date : 2013-09-08 DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.2493380

S. Asongu

引用次数: 19

An International Law Response to Economic Cyber Espionage 国际法对经济网络间谍活动的回应

ERN: Intellectual Property (Topic) Pub Date : 2013-08-09 DOI: 10.2139/SSRN.2305326

Christina Parajon Skinner

引用次数: 3

Working Note Draft: Undetected, Unsuspected, and Unknown: Why the Patent Law Doctrine of Inherent Anticipation Needs to be Re-Examined in Light of an Ever-Expanding Base of Scientific Knowledge 工作笔记草稿:未被发现、未被怀疑和未知:为什么固有预期的专利法原则需要在科学知识基础不断扩大的背景下重新审视

ERN: Intellectual Property (Topic) Pub Date : 2013-07-30 DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.2303730

Jeffrey K. Coleman

{"title":"Working Note Draft: Undetected, Unsuspected, and Unknown: Why the Patent Law Doctrine of Inherent Anticipation Needs to be Re-Examined in Light of an Ever-Expanding Base of Scientific Knowledge","authors":"Jeffrey K. Coleman","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2303730","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2303730","url":null,"abstract":"Part I of this Note begins by providing the reader with a brief introduction to U.S. patent law. Specifically, it focuses on the statutory provisions regarding novelty and anticipation. It also outlines the evolution of the inherent anticipation doctrine from early Supreme Court jurisprudence. Part II examines the “intra-circuit” split that developed within the Federal Circuit as the court struggled to determine whether PHOSITA recognition of the inherent feature was necessary for a finding of inherent anticipation. The Federal Circuit’s seminal decision in Schering is described, along with predictions for the future of metabolite research in the wake of the controversial rule that PHOSITA recognition is dispensable in an inherent anticipation analysis. Finally, Part III examines proposals for changes to the inherent anticipation doctrine. This Note then argues for a new “capability” standard that would focus on what a PHOSITA was capable of discovering at the time the prior art was published. As science uncovers more about the world in which we live, the only fact that we know with certainty is that we don’t know much. This Note will conclude by arguing that much of the confusion in the inherent anticipation doctrine may be avoided by simply focusing on what an inventor was capable of identifying at the time of the prior art.","PeriodicalId":125544,"journal":{"name":"ERN: Intellectual Property (Topic)","volume":"104 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132536300","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Intellectual Property Law - Marching into a New Millennium - Trends and Developments in Israeli Law 知识产权法-迈向新千年-以色列法律的趋势和发展

ERN: Intellectual Property (Topic) Pub Date : 2013-06-30 DOI: 10.2139/SSRN.2287430

Ofer Tur-Sinai

引用次数: 0