Hylly
Henkilönnimi Cañas, Juan Cuerva de, kirjoittaja.
Nimeke- ja vastuullisuusmerkintö Cumulation of Protection by Means of Industrial Design and Copyright : Thanks to the Winds of Change from Strasbourg in the Cofemel Case, Spain Begins to "Catch the Breeze"
Julkaistu Sweet & Maxwell, London : 2022.
Ulkoasutiedot
Sarjamerkintö ei-lisäkirjausmuodossa European Intellectual Property Review, ISSN 0142-0461 ; 44(6)
Huomautus sisällöstä, tiivistelmä tms. The aim of this article is to address how, after the Cofemel case (Cofemel (C-683/17) ECJ judgment of 12 September 2019), Spanish courts have begun to depart from the position traditionally adopted in Spain with regard to the cumulation of protection by means of industrial design and copyright, accepting that in order to benefit from copyright protection, an industrial design does not need to have qualified or enhanced originality, as it is sufficient for its originality to be the same (no more nor less) as that required of other copyrightable works.
Asiasana
Asiasana - Kontrolloimaton
Sarjalisäkirjaus - yhtenäistetty nimeke European Intellectual Property Review, 0142-0461 ; 44(6)
*000 ab a ar
*00117336
*008 s2022||||xxk|||||||||||||||||eng||
*040 $aFI-CUTE$bfin$erda
*0410 $aeng
*1001 $aCañas, Juan Cuerva de,$ekirjoittaja.
*24510$aCumulation of Protection by Means of Industrial Design and Copyright :$bThanks to the Winds of Change from Strasbourg in the Cofemel Case, Spain Begins to "Catch the Breeze" /$cJuan Cuerva de Cañas.
*264 1$aLondon :$bSweet & Maxwell,$c2022.
*300 $as. 359-367
*336 $ateksti$btxt$2rdacontent
*337 $akäytettävissä ilman laitetta$bn$2rdamedia
*338 $anide$bnc$2rdacarrier
*4901 $aEuropean Intellectual Property Review,$x0142-0461 ;$v44(6)
*520 $aThe aim of this article is to address how, after the Cofemel case (Cofemel (C-683/17) ECJ judgment of 12 September 2019), Spanish courts have begun to depart from the position traditionally adopted in Spain with regard to the cumulation of protection by means of industrial design and copyright, accepting that in order to benefit from copyright protection, an industrial design does not need to have qualified or enhanced originality, as it is sufficient for its originality to be the same (no more nor less) as that required of other copyrightable works.
*650 7$ateollisoikeus$2yso/fin$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p3067
*650 7$amalllioikeus$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p11911$2yso/fin
*650 7$atekijänoikeus$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p2346$2yso/fin
*650 7$aimmateriaalioikeus$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p3068$2yso/fin
*650 7$avaateteollisuus $2yso/fin$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p4451
*650 7$avaatesuunnittelu$2yso/fin$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p8513
*650 7$aEU-oikeus$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p20733$2yso/fin
*653 $aEspanja
*830 0$aEuropean Intellectual Property Review,$x0142-0461 ;$v44(6)
*852 $hSA-EIPR
^
Tästä teoksesta ei ole arvioita.
Näpäytä
kun haluat kirjoittaa ensimmäisen arvion.