Hylly
Henkilönnimi England, Paul, kirjoittaja.
Nimeke- ja vastuullisuusmerkintö Can the English Patents Court award a cross-border preliminary injunction?
Julkaistu Oxford University Press, Oxford : 2022.
Ulkoasutiedot
Sarjamerkintö ei-lisäkirjausmuodossa Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, ISSN 1747-1532 ; 17(4)
Huomautus sisällöstä, tiivistelmä tms. ‘There is no doubt that the modern trend is in favour of the enforcement of foreign intellectual property rights’. (LucasFilm) There are probably three, broad issues that have entertained English patent lawyers more than any others over the past 10 years. They all concern extra-territorial matters in some way: the Unified Patent Court (UPC); the approach to fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (FRAND) terms and the UK leaving the European Union. The last of these, Brexit, has had the well-known consequence that the UK will not participate in the first: the UPC. It also means that the UK is no longer a party to the Brussels Regulation. For the time being, at least, it is not a party to Lugano either. Whilst these developments might be thought to diminish the role of the UK in extra-territorial patent matters, the second issue, the jurisdiction to determine global FRAND terms in Unwired Planet, has increased it. If you add to Unwired Planet the impact of Actavis v Eli Lilly5 on cross-border jurisdiction then, as foreshadowed in LucasFilm, extraterritorial jurisdiction looks very much like a trend.
Asiasana
Maantieteellinen nimi asiasanana
Asiasana - Kontrolloimaton
Sarjalisäkirjaus - yhtenäistetty nimeke Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, 1747-1532 ; 17(4)
*000 ab a ar
*00117405
*008 s2022||||xxk|||||||||||||||||eng||
*040 $aFI-CUTE$bfin$erda
*0410 $aeng
*1001 $aEngland, Paul,$ekirjoittaja.
*24510$aCan the English Patents Court award a cross-border preliminary injunction? /$cPaul England.
*264 1$aOxford :$bOxford University Press,$c2022.
*300 $as. 367–375
*336 $ateksti$btxt$2rdacontent
*337 $akäytettävissä ilman laitetta$bn$2rdamedia
*338 $anide$bnc$2rdacarrier
*4901 $aJournal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice,$x1747-1532 ;$v17(4)
*520 $a‘There is no doubt that the modern trend is in favour of the enforcement of foreign intellectual property rights’. (LucasFilm) There are probably three, broad issues that have entertained English patent lawyers more than any others over the past 10 years. They all concern extra-territorial matters in some way: the Unified Patent Court (UPC); the approach to fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (FRAND) terms and the UK leaving the European Union. The last of these, Brexit, has had the well-known consequence that the UK will not participate in the first: the UPC. It also means that the UK is no longer a party to the Brussels Regulation. For the time being, at least, it is not a party to Lugano either. Whilst these developments might be thought to diminish the role of the UK in extra-territorial patent matters, the second issue, the jurisdiction to determine global FRAND terms in Unwired Planet, has increased it. If you add to Unwired Planet the impact of Actavis v Eli Lilly5 on cross-border jurisdiction then, as foreshadowed in LucasFilm, extraterritorial jurisdiction looks very much like a trend.
*650 7$ateollisoikeus$2yso/fin$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p3067
*650 7$apatentit$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p3069$2yso/fin
*650 7$abrexit$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p37972$2yso/fin
*650 7$apatenttijärjestelmät$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p21185$2yso/fin
*650 7$aEU-oikeus$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p20733$2yso/fin
*651 7$aIso-Britannia$2yso/fin$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p104990
*653 $across-border
*653 $aEuroopan unioni
*830 0$aJournal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice,$x1747-1532 ;$v17(4)
*852 $hSA-JIPLP
^
Tästä teoksesta ei ole arvioita.
Näpäytä
kun haluat kirjoittaa ensimmäisen arvion.