The following comparison was written for the first meeting of the International Law Association newly established (2010) Committee on Intellectual Property and Private International Law (Chair: Professor Toshiyuki Kono, Kyushu University; Co-Rapporteurs: Professors Pedro de Miguel Asensio, Madrid Complutense University, and Axel Metzger, Hannover University) (hereinafter: ILA Committee), which was hosted at the Faculty of Law of the University of Lisbon in March 16-17, 2012. The comparison at stake concerns the rules on infringement and exclusive (subject-mater) jurisdiction posed (or rejected, in case of exclusive jurisdiction) by four sets of academic principles. Notwithstanding the fact that the rules in question present several differen...
The chapter “Applicable Law” of the International Law Association’s Guidelines on Intellectual Prope...
The chapter “General Provisions” of the International Law Association’s Guidelines on Intellectual P...
When a foreign state infringes a US-held intellectual property right abroad, it is unclear to what e...
The following comparison was written for the first meeting of the International Law Association’s ne...
In the recent past, prestigious courts around the world have refused to adjudicate cases relating ...
The report compares applicable law rules to intellectual property (IP) disputes as proposed in the r...
The chapter “Jurisdiction” of the International Law Association’s Guidelines on Intellectual Propert...
The objective of this paper is to analyse the regulation of jurisdiction in intellectual property di...
With the advent of the Internet, some new problems in the field of intellectual property law have ap...
The private international law of intellectual property is currently much debated both in Europe and ...
Cross-border infringement of intellectual property rights raises a number of issues. The Internet me...
This paper aims to provide an overview of international jurisdiction rules when it comes to intellec...
In 2010 the International Law Association (ILA) formed a committee to develop a new set of rules on ...
The chapter “Applicable Law” of the International Law Association’s Guidelines on Intellectual Prop...
From their inception, the different intellectual property rights (IPRs) have progressively enlarged ...
The chapter “Applicable Law” of the International Law Association’s Guidelines on Intellectual Prope...
The chapter “General Provisions” of the International Law Association’s Guidelines on Intellectual P...
When a foreign state infringes a US-held intellectual property right abroad, it is unclear to what e...
The following comparison was written for the first meeting of the International Law Association’s ne...
In the recent past, prestigious courts around the world have refused to adjudicate cases relating ...
The report compares applicable law rules to intellectual property (IP) disputes as proposed in the r...
The chapter “Jurisdiction” of the International Law Association’s Guidelines on Intellectual Propert...
The objective of this paper is to analyse the regulation of jurisdiction in intellectual property di...
With the advent of the Internet, some new problems in the field of intellectual property law have ap...
The private international law of intellectual property is currently much debated both in Europe and ...
Cross-border infringement of intellectual property rights raises a number of issues. The Internet me...
This paper aims to provide an overview of international jurisdiction rules when it comes to intellec...
In 2010 the International Law Association (ILA) formed a committee to develop a new set of rules on ...
The chapter “Applicable Law” of the International Law Association’s Guidelines on Intellectual Prop...
From their inception, the different intellectual property rights (IPRs) have progressively enlarged ...
The chapter “Applicable Law” of the International Law Association’s Guidelines on Intellectual Prope...
The chapter “General Provisions” of the International Law Association’s Guidelines on Intellectual P...
When a foreign state infringes a US-held intellectual property right abroad, it is unclear to what e...