Hylly
Henkilönnimi Juřičková, Jelizaveta, kirjoittaja.
Nimeke- ja vastuullisuusmerkintö Something old, something new : Czech transposition of disputes under the DSM Directive
Julkaistu Oxford University Press, Oxford : 2022.
Ulkoasutiedot
Sarjamerkintö ei-lisäkirjausmuodossa Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, ISSN 1747-1532 ; 17(5)
Huomautus sisällöstä, tiivistelmä tms. This paper examines how the Czech transposition proposal deals with alternative dispute resolution (ADR) requirements of the DSM Directive. The element that piqued our interest is the one that manifests the creative choice of the body responsible for preparation of the transposition - Section 53 and following, which propose mediation as a solution for both ADR requirements of the DSM Directive: Article 17 (9) second paragraph (out-of-commerce redress mechanisms) and Article 21. We address the following question: is the universal mediation-based solution suitable for both of these disputes? In order to find the answer, we take a closer look at the nature and purpose of mediation. We pay especially close attention to the thoughts of Lon L. Fuller on the subject and attempt to constructively enrich these concepts with newer ideas. We argue that mediation is unsuitable for content-removal disputes. On the other hand, for ADR under Article 21, the Czech approach might be suitable. In the final section, we propose technology as a useful tool to enhance the efficiency of content removal dispute resolution.
Asiasana
Maantieteellinen nimi asiasanana
Asiasana - Kontrolloimaton
Sarjalisäkirjaus - yhtenäistetty nimeke Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, 1747-1532 ; 17(5)
*000 ab a ar
*00117414
*008 s2022||||xxk|||||||||||||||||eng||
*040 $aFI-CUTE$bfin$erda
*0410 $aeng
*1001 $aJuřičková, Jelizaveta,$ekirjoittaja.
*24510$aSomething old, something new :$bCzech transposition of disputes under the DSM Directive /$cJelizaveta Juřičková.
*264 $aOxford :$bOxford University Press,$c2022.
*300 $as. 465-472
*336 $ateksti$btxt$2rdacontent
*337 $akäytettävissä ilman laitetta$bn$2rdamedia
*338 $anide$bnc$2rdacarrier
*4901 $aJournal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice,$x1747-1532 ;$v17(5)
*520 $aThis paper examines how the Czech transposition proposal deals with alternative dispute resolution (ADR) requirements of the DSM Directive. The element that piqued our interest is the one that manifests the creative choice of the body responsible for preparation of the transposition - Section 53 and following, which propose mediation as a solution for both ADR requirements of the DSM Directive: Article 17 (9) second paragraph (out-of-commerce redress mechanisms) and Article 21. We address the following question: is the universal mediation-based solution suitable for both of these disputes? In order to find the answer, we take a closer look at the nature and purpose of mediation. We pay especially close attention to the thoughts of Lon L. Fuller on the subject and attempt to constructively enrich these concepts with newer ideas. We argue that mediation is unsuitable for content-removal disputes. On the other hand, for ADR under Article 21, the Czech approach might be suitable. In the final section, we propose technology as a useful tool to enhance the efficiency of content removal dispute resolution.
*650 7$atekijänoikeus$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p2346$2yso/fin
*650 7$atekijänoikeuslaki$2yso/fin$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p9817
*650 7$aEU-oikeus$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p20733$2yso/fin
*650 7$aEU-direktiivit$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p10768$2yso/fin
*650 7$alainsäädäntö$2yso/fin$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p13854
*651 7$aTšekki $0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p107480$2yso/fin
*653 $aDSM-direktiivi
*830 0$aJournal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice,$x1747-1532 ;$v17(5)
*852 $hSA-JIPLP
^
Tästä teoksesta ei ole arvioita.
Näpäytä
kun haluat kirjoittaa ensimmäisen arvion.