The Unequal Tax Treatment of Intellectual Property
In: 130 Tax Notes 931 (2011)
18302 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: 130 Tax Notes 931 (2011)
SSRN
In: Chicago-Kent Law Review, Band 68, S. 585
SSRN
In: Frosio , G , Bulayenko , O , Lawrynowicz , A & Mangal , N 2021 , Cross Border Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights in EU . European Parliament .
This study, commissioned by the European Parliament's Policy Department for Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs at the request of the JURI Committee, aims to provide an overview of crossborder enforcement of intellectual property rights in the EU with a particular emphasis on copyright and related rights in the online environment. The study provides a detailed analysis of the current situation of cross-border IPR enforcement and formulates various policy recommendations to improve current IPR enforcement options among MS.
BASE
In: International social science journal: ISSJ, Heft 171
ISSN: 0020-8701
Proposes an interpretation of intercultural processes that take place in the exchange of traditional knowledge between ethnic groups and different kinds of agents in modern societies. Guidelines for a regulatory framework protecting vernacular knowledge and simultaneously providing incentives for modern scientific research are suggested. Under this scheme, communities might improve their ability to defend their rights and demand the enforcement of certain rules conditioning the use of traditional knowledge by firms, laboratories, and research institutes. (Original abstract - amended)
In: Routledge research in intellectual property
"The global transmission of infectious diseases has fuelled the need for a more developed legal framework in international public health to provide prompt and specific guidance during a large-scale emergency. This book develops a means for States to take advantage of the flexibilities of compulsory licensing in the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS), which promotes access to medicines in a public health emergency. It presents the precautionary approach (PA) and the structure of risk analysis as a means to build a workable reading of TRIPS and to help States embody the flexibilities of intellectual property (IP). The work investigates the complementary roles of the World Health Organization (WHO) and the World Trade Organization (WTO) in order to promote the harmonisation of the precautionary approach in relation to the patenting of crucial pharmaceutical products. By bringing together international trade law and intellectual property law Phoebe Li demonstrates how through the use of risk analysis and the precautionary approach, States can still comply with their legal obligations in international law, while exercising their sovereignty right in issuing a compulsory licence of a drug patent in an uncertain public health emergency. This book will be of great interest to students and academics of medical and healthcare law, intellectual property law, and human rights law"--
In: International journal of cyber warfare and terrorism: IJCWT ; an official publication of the Information Resources Management Association, Band 4, Heft 4, S. 47-63
ISSN: 1947-3443
Knowledge-based assets, intellectual property, and capital play a fundamental role in an enterprise's competitiveness, especially in small knowledge intensive enterprises. Small knowledge intensive enterprises need to create new ways of operating in order to manage the intellectual and knowledge-based assets in their organizations more efficiently. Organizational knowledge and intellectual property can be protected, either formally via IPR, or informally via efficient knowledge management. Successful IP protection requires systematic intellectual property and knowledge management. Intellectual property protection via efficient knowledge management affects the entire organization rather than being just a separate task. It needs to be embedded in organizational work routines, practices, and processes as an overall operational strategy. When embedded in organizational work processes, IP protection and knowledge management become a continuous part of work routines and tasks in the enterprise, not a separate action.
In: Leiden Journal of International Law (2023), pp. 1–27 doi:10.1017/S0922156523000146
SSRN
In: Information law series 32
In: Research handbooks on the WTO series
In: Oxford handbooks online
This handbook is currently in development, with individual articles publishing online in advance of print publication. At this time, we cannot add information about unpublished articles in this handbook, however the table of contents will continue to grow as additional articles pass through the review process and are added to the site. Please note that the online publication date for this handbook is the date that the first article in the title was published online.
In: Problems & perspectives in management, Band 20, Heft 3, S. 465-477
ISSN: 1810-5467
Introducing the results of innovative activity into economic circulation is one of the essential characteristics of an effective industrial enterprise. Commercializing intellectual property objects involves coordinated production and commercial activity, adopting and implementing scientifically based decisions. This is necessary to successfully pass an intellectual product through all stages of its life cycle.The purpose of this study is to form market processes for commercializing intellectual property objects at industrial enterprises, finding the most effective option for their introduction into economic circulation.The theoretical investigation of the problem made it possible to identify and analyze various possible conceptual approaches to commercializing intellectual property in an industrial enterprise. Among them are market push, market pull, engineering, and reengineering commercialization models.Separate stages of forming the market model for commercializing intellectual property in an industrial enterprise are highlighted. First, the methodological principles of the vertical, horizontal, and vertical-horizontal market processes of intellectual property commercialization have been developed. The peculiarities of an intellectual product's life cycle are determined; based on this, a market model of intellectual property's life cycle (model of successive changes) is proposed. Finally, for each of the proposed market processes, the main advantages and disadvantages of their practical use are determined, as well as the areas of their most effective usage.
In: INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY: MORAL, LEGAL, AND INTERNATIONAL DILEMMAS, p. 81, A. Moore, ed., Rowman & Littlefield, 1997
SSRN
In: http://hdl.handle.net/11427/15215
The most important rights, which state such a balance between these two parties, are the rights of intellectual property. Thus, an important question is to what extent 3D-printing conflicts with intellectual property rights. In general, intellectual property balances the rights between the owners of genuine products and their use through third parties. On the one hand the intellectual property rights give exclusive rights to the genuine owners, on the other hand they give as well some important exceptions for the use of third parts material. Hence, the purpose of this work is to examine, which intellectual property rights are affected by the production of a 3D-printed object. In each of the following chapters I will look at the different categories of intellectual property rights. I will examine in how far the creators of a CAD, the uploaders who upload a CAD on a website for a free or commercial download, the website owners who facilitate that uploads and the printers, whether private or with a commercial purpose, may be in conflict with any intellectual property rights. The most important intellectual property rights, which could be affected, are copyright, patents, registered designs, trade marks and passing off. For the present investigation it will be necessary to have a closer look at the different steps of the developing process of a 3D-printed product. More precisely, we have to differentiate between the creation of the CAD, the uploading of a CAD and finally the home-printing or the printing on demand through a specialised company. The aim of this work is to show how these single steps conflict with intellectual property rights and how the different actors in this process are liable for any infringing activity and in how far their activity is covered by any exception. Furthermore, we will also examine whether current legislation and jurisdiction appropriately address issues brought about by this new technology. Because of the reason, that the issue of 3D-printing in relation to intellectual property is quite a new one, this work will occasionally have a look abroad to other jurisdiction how they already dealt with similar problems. With this in mind, especially the US, European and German jurisdiction and laws will be regarded.
BASE