The theme of this year’s World Intellectual Property is ‘Innovation-Improving Live’ . Let’s hope that we make maximum use of intellectual property to improve our life.
Launch of EIPIN Innovation Society
ITN/EJD Marie SkƗodowska Curie project:
15 fully-funded PhD positions
The European IP Institutes Network (EIPIN), a consortium of leading research and training centres in intellectual property, has been awarded a prestigious Horizon 2020 grant, under the Marie Skłodowska Curie Action ITN-EJD. On 1 March 2017, the project EIPIN Innovation Society will be officially launched. We are recruiting 15 PhD candidates wishing to conduct doctoral research on the role of intellectual property in the adaptive complexities of innovation. The selected and successful candidates will be conferred a joint or double doctoral degree from two of the five participating universities. The application procedure is open until 29 March 2017, 23.59 CET. The research and training programme will start on 1 September 2017 (date of recruitment) and finish on 31 August 2020.
EIPIN Innovation Society is a comprehensive project at the forefront of multidisciplinary research, examining the role of intellectual property (IP) as a complex adaptive system in innovation. The ambition is to enhance Europe’s capacity to foster innovation-based sustainable economic growth globally. The primary research objective of the programme is to provide political leaders and stakeholders reliable conclusions and recommendations in the form of doctoral IP research on how to deal with the adaptive complexities of innovation cycles that secure economic benefits and uphold justice in the innovation society.
Fifteen Early Stage Researchers (ESRs) are trained to present their research findings on a number of topics of great societal interest, and to guide inventors and entrepreneurs through the lifecycle of IP-intensive assets that takes human creativity into the marketplace. The research and training programme provides for an unprecedented environment for ESRs that aims at educating a new generation of professionals and academic researchers who are properly equipped to face these challenges of fostering innovation-based growth. It consists of a research and a training part, which are closely connected and mutually inform each other.
The involvement of industry associations representing numerous undertakings provides great access to non-academic actors. The ESR positions are open to candidates from all domains of sciences, providing a solid foundation for cross-cutting research in the area of innovation policies, while overcoming a traditional separation of disciplines.
The EIPIN Innovation programme, coordinated by Maastricht University, is a Marie SkƗodowska Curie Innovative Training Network project, funded by the European Union. This project sets up a European Joint Doctorate programme which will lead to the conferral of joint and double doctoral degrees from two of the five participating universities. These Universities are:
- Queen Mary Intellectual Property Research Institute, University of London
- Magister Lvcentinvs, University of Alicante
- Intellectual Property Law and Knowledge Management (IPKM), Maastricht University
- Centre for International Intellectual Property Studies (CEIPI), University of Strasbourg
- Munich Intellectual Property Law Center (MIPLC), University of Augsburg
For more information, see http://www.eipin-innovationsociety.org/
Please find the link below for decision of the case.
Viola Prifti, Bournemouth University
Chile has failed to ratify the 1991 International Convention for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV) as stipulated in the free trade agreement (FTA) with the United States. Since Chile is amongst the US Priority Watch List countries, it is imperative for Chile to emanate a UPOV 1991-compliant law. The ratification of UPOV 1991, however, has encountered strong resistance within the country and it is not yet clear when and how Chile will adopt UPOV 1991 provisions. Through an analysis of legal and economic aspects of the domestic plant variety law, this paper explains that Chile should make better use of UPOV flexibilities and gives recommendations in order to accommodate the interests of all stakeholders.
Please find the link below to read the Judgement & also graphical analysis of the case.
Recently, on 1 September, Upreti & Associates (Organizer) officially announced the winner of First National Intellectual Property Law & Development Essay Competition (Nepal)-2016. As an implementation partner New IP Lawyers Network would like to congratulate Mr. Bharat Paudel of Chakrabarti Habi Education Academy for securing first position and Ms. Shreya Joshi of Kathmandu University School of Law for securing second position.
Mathilde Pavis, Founding Member New IP Lawyers, University of Exeter
This article investigates the legal narrative which frames the protection of performances. The author uses an interdisciplinary approach to examine the overlap between the narratives describing performers’ creativity present in the performing art studies and in the legal jurisprudence. To this end, the analysis questions whether the law has followed similar theoretical evolutions these creative fields experienced. It is argued that a fundamental theoretical gap still separates the two worlds on core issues like creativity, authorship or performance. This article identifies when such a divide occurred and attempts to explain why such split has not yet been bridged by policy-makers. The artistic practice of Disability Dance is used to highlight the possible causes of lawyers’ (mis)understanding of the act of performing but is also presented as an argument for reform.
Key words: copyright; performers’ rights; originality; embodiment
The article is the winning Essays of the 2015 Worldwide Essay Contest of the International Association for the Advancement of Teaching and Research in Intellectual Property (ATRIP)
Elena Izyumenko, PhD Candidate
CEIPI, University of Strasbourg
This paper analyses the influence of the right to freedom of expression and information on European copyright law in the digital context. Drawing on the practice of the two major European courts – the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) – it begins by exploring how this fundamental right shapes both the scope of copyright protection in Europe and what is traditionally termed as “exceptions and limitations” to exclusive rights. Specifically, a long-standing practice of the ECtHR, in accordance with which copyright in turn may be viewed as an exception to freedom of expression and must hence be narrowly interpreted, is scrutinized. On a related note, a recent recourse by the CJEU to the language of “users’ rights” is examined, inasmuch as it allows for a reconceptualization – in a normative framework of freedom of information – of copyright “exceptions” not as the exceptions as such, but as the equal rights of users of protected subject-matter. In this regard, the locus standi of “mere users” of online content and the somewhat diverging approaches of the Strasbourg and Luxemburg courts toward granting thereof are addressed. The paper then turns to discuss the recent recourse by the European courts to freedom of expression as a means to define the role of internet service providers in digital copyright enforcement, implicating issues ranging from the providers’ liability in respect of the third-party content posted online to the often far-reaching injunctions imposed on non-liable intermediaries. Several conclusions are drawn from the above analysis, reflecting on the potential of freedom of expression and information to inform the development of European standards applicable in the field of digital copyright.
Link to the Original Article: Izyumenko, E. (2016), The Freedom of Expression Contours of Copyright in the Digital Era: A European Perspective. The Journal of World Intellectual Property. doi: 10.1111/jwip.12057
In recent years, there have been several discussions on Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) and its impact on states’ sovereign right to regulate. The latest cases of Philip Morrisand Eli Lilly are evident where intellectual property claims were brought under the scrutiny of investment tribunals. These cases have received greater attention, bringing serious debate upon ISDS provisions in the ongoing Investment Agreements, such as Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) between the European Union and the United States. On the other hand, the European Commission has proposed the Unified Patent Court (UPC) as a common patent court for all member states of the European Union. In other words, a step towards achieving further harmonization of the patent system in the European Union. On this note, let’s examine whether the proposed Unified Patent Court Agreement can be used to challenge IP claims under the ISDS.
Please find the link below for more information: