Suchergebnisse

The principle of proportionality covers a broad field of application, arising from the protection of fundamental rights, of which intellectual property is undeniably a part. Its implementation, through several types of proportionality controls, has upset doctrinal certainties and triggered a reflection on the motivation and legal interpretation. The most discussed of these proportionality checks is the one used in cases of fundamental conflict.Its impact at the judicial level has been made in several stages. It originates from the jurisprudence of the two European courts, itself inspired by the German principle of proportionality. The European Court of Human Rights and the Court of Justice of the European Union have developed their own proportionality checks to resolve a conflict between fundamental rights. While the former takes a more concrete approach than the latter, due to the nature of its task, both courts confirm the non-absolute nature of intellectual property rights and the need to reconcile them with other fundamental rights (recognized by the European Convention on Human Rights and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union). In their proportionality test, the two courts reserve a certain margin of appreciation to the Member States, but give indications as to how to carry it out in their turn. Beyond the development of a three-step test (adequacy, necessity and proportionality stricto sensu), the European courts reveal elements to be taken into account according to the fundamental right opposed to the intellectual property right and the facts of the case (type of speech at stake for the freedom of expression invoked for a use of an intellectual property outside the legal exceptions; duration, complexity, cost, necessity for the freedom of enterprise or the right to privacy invoked for a blocking measure on the Internet.). France launched this process of adopting proportionality review in a fundamental dispute at the judicial level on May 15, 2015 by a ruling of the First Civil Chamber of ...

The development of information technologies in what is often reffered to as the "information society" is at the origin of new uses, new exchanges wich necessitate the implementation of new economic and judicial models. The copyright constraints and above all its the immateriality have not only been misunderstood but also ignored by society. Recently, French parliament has proclaimed the principle of illegality of peer to peer file sharing between internet users. We will need to reconcile a fair and equal compensation of "authors", taking into consideration international legal constraints regarding free access to knowledge and information, as required by the Tunis agreement. The issue of the compensation of authors therefore appears to be one of the most important aspects the new internet governance. ; Le développement des technologies de l'information dans ce que l'on appelle la « société de l'information » est à l'origine de nouveaux usages, de nouveaux échanges qui imposent, de manière coercitive, la mise en place de nouveaux modèles économiques et juridiques. Les contraintes du droit d'auteur et surtout son immatérialité étaient alors mal comprises voire ignorées par le corps social. Récemment les parlementaires français posaient dans des circonstances exceptionnelles le principe de l'illégalité du téléchargement entre internautes. Il faudra conjuguer : juste et équitable rémunération des auteurs, prise en considération des contraintes juridiques internationales avec la garantie de l'accès à la connaissance et à l'information pour tous, conformément à l'engagement de Tunis. La question de la rémunération des auteurs apparaît donc comme un des aspects majeurs de la gouvernance de l'Internet.

The development of information technologies in what is often reffered to as the "information society" is at the origin of new uses, new exchanges wich necessitate the implementation of new economic and judicial models. The copyright constraints and above all its the immateriality have not only been misunderstood but also ignored by society. Recently, French parliament has proclaimed the principle of illegality of peer to peer file sharing between internet users. We will need to reconcile a fair and equal compensation of "authors", taking into consideration international legal constraints regarding free access to knowledge and information, as required by the Tunis agreement. The issue of the compensation of authors therefore appears to be one of the most important aspects the new internet governance. ; Le développement des technologies de l'information dans ce que l'on appelle la « société de l'information » est à l'origine de nouveaux usages, de nouveaux échanges qui imposent, de manière coercitive, la mise en place de nouveaux modèles économiques et juridiques. Les contraintes du droit d'auteur et surtout son immatérialité étaient alors mal comprises voire ignorées par le corps social. Récemment les parlementaires français posaient dans des circonstances exceptionnelles le principe de l'illégalité du téléchargement entre internautes. Il faudra conjuguer : juste et équitable rémunération des auteurs, prise en considération des contraintes juridiques internationales avec la garantie de l'accès à la connaissance et à l'information pour tous, conformément à l'engagement de Tunis. La question de la rémunération des auteurs apparaît donc comme un des aspects majeurs de la gouvernance de l'Internet.

The development of information technologies in what is often reffered to as the "information society" is at the origin of new uses, new exchanges wich necessitate the implementation of new economic and judicial models. The copyright constraints and above all its the immateriality have not only been misunderstood but also ignored by society. Recently, French parliament has proclaimed the principle of illegality of peer to peer file sharing between internet users. We will need to reconcile a fair and equal compensation of "authors", taking into consideration international legal constraints regarding free access to knowledge and information, as required by the Tunis agreement. The issue of the compensation of authors therefore appears to be one of the most important aspects the new internet governance. ; Le développement des technologies de l'information dans ce que l'on appelle la « société de l'information » est à l'origine de nouveaux usages, de nouveaux échanges qui imposent, de manière coercitive, la mise en place de nouveaux modèles économiques et juridiques. Les contraintes du droit d'auteur et surtout son immatérialité étaient alors mal comprises voire ignorées par le corps social. Récemment les parlementaires français posaient dans des circonstances exceptionnelles le principe de l'illégalité du téléchargement entre internautes. Il faudra conjuguer : juste et équitable rémunération des auteurs, prise en considération des contraintes juridiques internationales avec la garantie de l'accès à la connaissance et à l'information pour tous, conformément à l'engagement de Tunis. La question de la rémunération des auteurs apparaît donc comme un des aspects majeurs de la gouvernance de l'Internet.

The development of information technologies in what is often reffered to as the "information society" is at the origin of new uses, new exchanges wich necessitate the implementation of new economic and judicial models. The copyright constraints and above all its the immateriality have not only been misunderstood but also ignored by society. Recently, French parliament has proclaimed the principle of illegality of peer to peer file sharing between internet users. We will need to reconcile a fair and equal compensation of "authors", taking into consideration international legal constraints regarding free access to knowledge and information, as required by the Tunis agreement. The issue of the compensation of authors therefore appears to be one of the most important aspects the new internet governance. ; Le développement des technologies de l'information dans ce que l'on appelle la « société de l'information » est à l'origine de nouveaux usages, de nouveaux échanges qui imposent, de manière coercitive, la mise en place de nouveaux modèles économiques et juridiques. Les contraintes du droit d'auteur et surtout son immatérialité étaient alors mal comprises voire ignorées par le corps social. Récemment les parlementaires français posaient dans des circonstances exceptionnelles le principe de l'illégalité du téléchargement entre internautes. Il faudra conjuguer : juste et équitable rémunération des auteurs, prise en considération des contraintes juridiques internationales avec la garantie de l'accès à la connaissance et à l'information pour tous, conformément à l'engagement de Tunis. La question de la rémunération des auteurs apparaît donc comme un des aspects majeurs de la gouvernance de l'Internet.

The principle of proportionality covers a broad field of application, arising from the protection of fundamental rights, of which intellectual property is undeniably a part. Its implementation, through several types of proportionality controls, has upset doctrinal certainties and triggered a reflection on the motivation and legal interpretation. The most discussed of these proportionality checks is the one used in cases of fundamental conflict.Its impact at the judicial level has been made in several stages. It originates from the jurisprudence of the two European courts, itself inspired by the German principle of proportionality. The European Court of Human Rights and the Court of Justice of the European Union have developed their own proportionality checks to resolve a conflict between fundamental rights. While the former takes a more concrete approach than the latter, due to the nature of its task, both courts confirm the non-absolute nature of intellectual property rights and the need to reconcile them with other fundamental rights (recognized by the European Convention on Human Rights and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union). In their proportionality test, the two courts reserve a certain margin of appreciation to the Member States, but give indications as to how to carry it out in their turn. Beyond the development of a three-step test (adequacy, necessity and proportionality stricto sensu), the European courts reveal elements to be taken into account according to the fundamental right opposed to the intellectual property right and the facts of the case (type of speech at stake for the freedom of expression invoked for a use of an intellectual property outside the legal exceptions; duration, complexity, cost, necessity for the freedom of enterprise or the right to privacy invoked for a blocking measure on the Internet.). France launched this process of adopting proportionality review in a fundamental dispute at the judicial level on May 15, 2015 by a ruling of the First Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation. The latter now requires trial judges to explain in a concrete manner how the search for a fair balance between intellectual property rights and another opposing fundamental right commands the sentence handed down. The first judgments and rulings on the merits have applied this jurisprudence of the Cour de cassation, in particular in the case of a conflict between freedom of expression through the notion of necessity of use. Their motivation should certainly be developed in the coming years.At the same time, one should not neglect the control of the proportionality of the sanction, which also derives from the principle of proportionality and which has decisive applications for the control during a fundamental conflict. A disproportionate sanction could directly threaten the application and coherence of fundamental rights, and this risk makes the conjunction of the two controls indispensable. If the legislator, both national and European, has adopted various measures inspired by the desire to achieve a proportionate sanction, the judge remains essential in the application of the principle of proportionality, since he chooses the sanction best adapted to the facts. The issue is central to intellectual property law in that it offers a wide variety of sanctions, both criminal and civil, to combat counterfeiting. However, its application remains timid, as much as its interest for the doctrine. This application is bound to develop further through case law. Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version) ; Le principe de proportionnalité recouvre un champ d'application large, découlant de la protection des droits fondamentaux, dont la propriété intellectuelle fait indéniablement partie. Sa mise en œuvre, par plusieurs types de contrôles de proportionnalité, a bouleversé les certitudes doctrinales et enclenché une réflexion relative à la motivation et l'interprétation juridique. Le plus discuté desdits contrôles de proportionnalité est celui utilisé en cas de conflit fondamental. Son impact au niveau judiciaire s'est fait en plusieurs étapes. Il a pour origine la jurisprudence des deux cours européennes, elle-même inspirée du principe de proportionnalité allemand. La Cour européenne des droits de l'homme et la Cour de justice de l'Union européenne ont développé leurs propres contrôles de proportionnalité pour résoudre un conflit entre droits fondamentaux. Si la première entreprend une démarche plus concrète que la seconde, liée à la nature de sa mission, ces deux juridictions confirment toutes deux le caractère non absolu du droit de la propriété intellectuelle et la nécessité de le concilier avec les autres droits fondamentaux (reconnus par la Convention européenne des droits de l'homme et la Charte des droits fondamentaux de l'Union européenne). Lors de leur contrôle de proportionnalité, les deux cours réservent une certaine marge d'appréciation aux États membres mais donnent des indications afin de le réaliser à leur tour. Au-delà du développement d'un test en trois étapes (adéquation, nécessité et proportionnalité stricto sensu), les cours européennes révèlent des éléments à prendre en compte selon le droit fondamental opposé au droit de la propriété intellectuelle et les faits de l'espèce (type de discours en cause pour la liberté d'expression invoqué pour une utilisation d'un bien intellectuel hors des exceptions légales ; durée, complexité, coût, nécessité pour la liberté d'entreprise ou le droit à la vie privée invoquée pour une mesure de blocage sur internet…). La France a lancé ce processus d'adoption du contrôle de proportionnalité lors d'un conflit fondamental au niveau judiciaire le 15 mai 2015 par un arrêt de la première chambre civile de la Cour de cassation. Celle-ci impose désormais aux juges du fond d'expliquer de façon concrète en quoi la recherche d'un juste équilibre entre le droit de la propriété intellectuelle et un autre droit fondamental opposé commande la condamnation prononcée. Les premiers jugements et arrêts au fond ont appliqué cette jurisprudence de la Cour de cassation, notamment en cas de conflit de la liberté d'expression à travers la notion de nécessité d'usage. Leur motivation devrait assurément s'étoffer dans les prochaines années. En parallèle, il ne faut pas négliger le contrôle de proportionnalité de la sanction, qui découle également du principe de proportionnalité et qui a des applications déterminantes pour le contrôle lors d'un conflit fondamental. Une sanction disproportionnée pourrait menacer directement l'application et la cohérence des droits fondamentaux et ce risque rend indispensable la conjonction des deux contrôles. Si le législateur, tant national et européen, a adopté différentes mesures inspirées par la volonté de parvenir à une sanction proportionnée, le juge demeure essentiel dans l'application du principe de proportionnalité, puisqu'il choisit la sanction la mieux adaptée aux faits. L'enjeu est central pour le droit de la propriété intellectuelle en ce qu'il offre une grande variété de sanctions, tant pénales que civiles, afin de lutter contre la contrefaçon. Cependant, son application reste timide, autant que son intérêt pour la doctrine. Cette application est appelée à se développer davantage à travers la jurisprudence.

In this article, the author carries out a double examination of the competitive relationships in the light of the evolution of ongoing conflicts and also of the initiatives envisaged in order to anticipate them. By means of a retrospective analysis, it is possible to highlight a number of trends on the part of the institutions: reaffirmation of the requirement of freedom of competition by the Court of Justice of the European Union (Case C-179/16) and the Competition Authority (Decision No 17-D-25 of 20 December 2017). The requirement of fair competition could also be reaffirmed in cases concerning the transfer of documents containing confidential information (Com., 13 September 2017) and relating to the copying of a competing product (Com. 25 September 2017). According to the author, a number of improvements can be envisaged concerning, first, the functioning of competition in the medicinal products and medical biology sector (in particular as regards the distribution chain of the medicinal product and the fixing of prices). As regards the very common practice of mergers in the pharmaceutical sector, the role of the institutions is crucial with the Commission of the European Union on the one hand and the Competition Authority on the other. ; International audience In this article, the author carries out a double examination of competition relations linked to the evolution of ongoing conflicts but also with regard to the initiatives envisaged in order to anticipate them. Through a retrospective analysis, the institutions highlight several trends: reaffirmation of the requirement of freedom of competition by the European Union Court of Justice on the one hand (Case C-179/16) and the Competition Authority on the other hand (Decision No 17-D-25 of 20 December 2017). Also, the requirement of fair competition could be reaffirmed in cases concerning the transfer of documents containing confidential information (Com., 13 September 2017) and concerning the copying of a competing product (Com. 25 September 2017). ...

The internationalization of IP Law, initiated at the end of the 19th century, has taken since the end of the 20th century a brand new twist with its inclusion in the field of multilateral trade disciplines. The signing of the TRIPS agreement marks the emergence of a global IP governance. Indeed, the ambition displayed by the WTO is to supervise the margin of maneuver of its Members in implementing their policies. Although Communitization of IP law started much later, it now has a considerable scope: national protection regimes have been conciliated with the cardinal principles of the Treaty, some important harmonization directives have been enacted, and various European titles of protection have even been created. Our study is designed to show how Communitization, beyond its traditional role of source of law, officiates as a necessary and efficient vector for structuring the European position towards the Globalization of IP Law. In its ascendant side first -- from Local to Global, the Communitization vector plays a role of merging the objectives to be promoted on the international scene. The issue at stake is to shape an IP global framework that corresponds to the system of interests and values of the EU, in accordance with the far-reaching objectives assigned by the Treaty. This merging process is, however, not automatic. In spite of several amendments to the Treaty and of the progress of internal harmonization, various institutional constraints thwart the emergence of a fully integrated external European policy in the field of IP. But it is precisely in light of these constraints that the scope of the achievements of the EU, which in now recognized as a central actor in the global IP governance, must be appreciated. In its down side then -- from Global to Local, the Communitization vector is accompanied by a rise of the European Court of Justice in arbitrating complex normative interactions between national, EU and International IP Laws. A systematic analysis of the resolution by the ECJ of these normative interactions reveals its determination to safeguard the autonomy of the EU legal order, by arranging for significant discretion in implementing international commitments. This margin of appreciation is used to defend an original European model under construction, taking advantage of the flexibilities of the global normative framework ; Cette étude se propose de dépasser l'analyse statique des différentes sources supranationales du droit de la propriété intellectuelle pour s'intéresser spécifiquement aux interactions entre les processus de communautarisation et de mondialisation en la matière. Ce parti-pris méthodologique procède de la conviction que le sens de la communautarisation de la propriété intellectuelle ne peut être pleinement saisi qu'en y intégrant sa dimension externe, au travers d'une analyse systématique des relations qu'elle entretient avec la mondialisation de cette branche du droit. Par-delà son rôle traditionnel de source du droit, la communautarisation s'érige en effet en vecteur entre les ordres juridiques nationaux et un ordre international multipolaire, en modifiant fondamentalement les données de la dialectique du global au local. L'ambition de cet ouvrage est précisément de mettre en lumière combien la communautarisation - malgré son apparente fragmentation - officie comme un indispensable vecteur de structuration de la position européenne vis-à-vis de la mondialisation du droit de la propriété intellectuelle.Dans son versant ascendant tout d'abord, du local au global, la communautarisation se pose en vecteur de mutualisation des objectifs à promouvoir sur la scène internationale. L'enjeu n'est autre que de façonner une gouvernance mondiale qui corresponde aux intérêts et valeurs de l'UE, conformément aux buts ambitieux assignés par le Traité. En dépit d'un cadre institutionnel complexe et hétérogène qui fragilise parfois dangereusement sa cohésion, l'Union s'impose peu à peu comme un acteur incontournable dans la mondialisation du droit de la propriété intellectuelle, parvenant à exporter efficacement les standards européens de protection, tout en s'ouvrant progressivement aux revendications légitimes des pays en développement. Dans son versant descendant ensuite, du global au local, la communautarisation s'accompagne d'une montée en puissance de la Cour de justice dans l'arbitrage des interactions normatives entre le droit de l'Union et le droit international de la propriété intellectuelle. Dans le cadre de cette mission, le juge de Luxembourg s'attache à préserver l'autonomie de l'ordre juridique de l'Union, en ménageant une marge d'appréciation significative dans la mise en œuvre des obligations découlant de la mondialisation du droit de la propriété intellectuelle. Cette marge de manœuvre est mise à profit pour construire - touche par touche - un modèle européen original, tirant parti des flexibilités du cadre normatif mondial.Vincent RUZEKJuriste propriété intellectuelle, L'Oréal.Chargé d'enseignement à l'École de droit de Sciences Po et au Centre d'études internationales de la propriété intellectuelle (CEIPI).Lauréat du prix de thèse de la Fondation Rennes 1

The internationalization of IP Law, initiated at the end of the 19th century, has taken since the end of the 20th century a brand new twist with its inclusion in the field of multilateral trade disciplines. The signing of the TRIPS agreement marks the emergence of a global IP governance. Indeed, the ambition displayed by the WTO is to supervise the margin of maneuver of its Members in implementing their policies. Although Communitization of IP law started much later, it now has a considerable scope: national protection regimes have been conciliated with the cardinal principles of the Treaty, some important harmonization directives have been enacted, and various European titles of protection have even been created. Our study is designed to show how Communitization, beyond its traditional role of source of law, officiates as a necessary and efficient vector for structuring the European position towards the Globalization of IP Law. In its ascendant side first -- from Local to Global, the Communitization vector plays a role of merging the objectives to be promoted on the international scene. The issue at stake is to shape an IP global framework that corresponds to the system of interests and values of the EU, in accordance with the far-reaching objectives assigned by the Treaty. This merging process is, however, not automatic. In spite of several amendments to the Treaty and of the progress of internal harmonization, various institutional constraints thwart the emergence of a fully integrated external European policy in the field of IP. But it is precisely in light of these constraints that the scope of the achievements of the EU, which in now recognized as a central actor in the global IP governance, must be appreciated. In its down side then -- from Global to Local, the Communitization vector is accompanied by a rise of the European Court of Justice in arbitrating complex normative interactions between national, EU and International IP Laws. A systematic analysis of the resolution by the ECJ of these normative ...

citizens' rights of access to culture diminish, fundamental freedoms are under threat but citizens do not react. Reducing cognitive dissonance and/or increasing confidence as social ties become weakened may partly explain this phenomenon. However, secular morals must be defined and associated with the law so that intellectual property is not protected for the benefit of large companies and to the detriment of authors and citizens. ; free access to culture and fundamental freedoms are greatly endangered, but citizens do not react. The reduction of cognitive dissonance and / or increasing confidence due to the weakening of social links may partly explain this phenomenon. However, we need to define a common morality associated to law to protect intellectual property. The new copyright policy should not be to the sole benefit of large firms at the expense of authors and citizens. ; citizens' rights of access to culture diminish, fundamental freedoms are under threat but citizens do not react. Reducing cognitive dissonance and/or increasing confidence as social ties become weakened may partly explain this phenomenon. However, secular morals must be defined and associated with the law so that intellectual property is not protected for the benefit of large companies and to the detriment of authors and citizens. ; les droits d'accès à la culture des citoyens diminuent, les libertés fondamentales sont largement menacées mais les citoyens ne réagissent pas. La réduction de la dissonance cognitive et/ou l'augmentation de la confiance au fil de la fragilisation du lien social peuvent expliquer pour partie ce phénomène. Il reste qu'une morale laïque est à définir et à associer à la loi pour que la protection de la propriété intellectuelle ne se fasse pas au profit des grandes firmes et au détriment des auteurs et des citoyens.

A lawyer can settle conflicts of legal provisions through the application of several rules. They can be used like universal tools, in every juridical domain. The aim of the operation consist in determining the law which has to be applied. Each behavior can be translated in juridical terms. In this way, only one set of laws has to be taken into account. The lawyer can use the principles created by doctrine and precedents in order to solve conflicts of legal provisions. The article 2 of the Civil Code is the foundation of them. In the intellectual property domain, the legislator can intervene and suggest transitory provisions. The judge is not allowed to enforce the law retroactively, no matter the facts or the acts under consideration. The purpose of this investigation lies in the adaption of these rules for intellectual property issues. Therefore, "vested interests" and "legal status" concepts are confronted with specificities of intellectual property as such a corpus o findependent rules. In a certain extent, there is a link between this discipline and the law of property. When the lawyer has to choose the law to apply, there are disturbing parallels to be made. He may easily make a mistake. Furthermore, the concepts of "declaratory act", "softer penal act", "public order law", and "proceedings act" can be used to resolve special problems in the intellectual property domain. When a conflict of legal provisions is under discussion, the judge has to ensure a certain security of the procedure. The judge must always be able to justify precisely his choice. It's a significant guarantee for any persons subject to trial. It has been widely recognized that intellectual property offers a large selection of rights. As a result, the judge is tempted to follow several different lines of thought and case law on the subject is not always uniform. On the contrary, legal precedents could be unified if the judge has used the "legal status" concept. It should be written in an efficient way : "to be entitled to exercise an ...

A lawyer can settle conflicts of legal provisions through the application of several rules. They can be used like universal tools, in every juridical domain. The aim of the operation consist in determining the law which has to be applied. Each behavior can be translated in juridical terms. In this way, only one set of laws has to be taken into account. The lawyer can use the principles created by doctrine and precedents in order to solve conflicts of legal provisions. The article 2 of the Civil Code is the foundation of them. In the intellectual property domain, the legislator can intervene and suggest transitory provisions. The judge is not allowed to enforce the law retroactively, no matter the facts or the acts under consideration. The purpose of this investigation lies in the adaption of these rules for intellectual property issues. Therefore, "vested interests" and "legal status" concepts are confronted with specificities of intellectual property as such a corpus o findependent rules. In a certain extent, there is a link between this discipline and the law of property. When the lawyer has to choose the law to apply, there are disturbing parallels to be made. He may easily make a mistake. Furthermore, the concepts of "declaratory act", "softer penal act", "public order law", and "proceedings act" can be used to resolve special problems in the intellectual property domain. When a conflict of legal provisions is under discussion, the judge has to ensure a certain security of the procedure. The judge must always be able to justify precisely his choice. It's a significant guarantee for any persons subject to trial. It has been widely recognized that intellectual property offers a large selection of rights. As a result, the judge is tempted to follow several different lines of thought and case law on the subject is not always uniform. On the contrary, legal precedents could be unified if the judge has used the "legal status" concept. It should be written in an efficient way : "to be entitled to exercise an intellectual property right". The independence of the discipline is confirmed and its internal disparities disappear. The "vested interests" concept does not seem to be appropriate to the characteristics of intellectual property. Moreover, the concept of "public order law" doesn't square properly with intellectual property issues. The concept of "proceedings act" is delicate to use. Lastly, it appears that the concept of "declarative law" is implicitly used by judges to prove the retroactivity of the law. Finally, the concept of "codification act" should be applied to this situation. ; Le droit transitoire est une discipline dont la vocation est universelle. Cet ensemble de règles a pour finalité de permettre la découverte de la loi applicable à un fait ou un acte donné. Tout comportement a une traduction juridique, même neutre, selon une norme unique. À ce titre, peu importe le domaine du Droit concerné. De nombreuses règles, forgées par la doctrine et la jurisprudence à partir de l'article 2 du Code civil, permettent à l'interprète de la loi nouvelle de décliner le principe de non rétroactivité selon les spécificités d'une espèce. Par exception, le législateur peut proposer lui-même des dispositions transitoires, qui s'avèrent pour la plupart, en droit de la propriété intellectuelle, conformes au principe de sécurité juridique. D'une manière générale, l'opération de qualification nécessaire porte sur l'acte ou le fait étudié ou bien sur la norme nouvelle elle-même. L'étude menée a pour objet la transposition de cette opération de qualification au sein du domaine précis de la propriété intellectuelle. Dans cette optique, les notions de « droit acquis » et de « situation juridique » sont confrontées aux spécificités de la discipline, dont la filiation apparente avec le droit des biens est parfois source d'erreurs. En plus de ces qualifications qui se rapportent aux éléments saillants d'une espèce donnée, sont également recherchées en droit de la propriété intellectuelle les illustrations des qualifications classiques de « loi interprétative », de « loi pénale plus douce », de « loi d'ordre public » et de « loi de procédure ». Leur signification transitoire est appréciée au regard de l'exigence de sécurité juridique, fil conducteur de toute discussion relative à la résolution d'un conflit de lois dans le temps. Au cours de cette étude, les systèmes de protection très disparates qu'offre le droit de la propriété intellectuelle à tout créateur ou « découvreur », apparaissent comme autant de facteurs d'une diversité jurisprudentielle gênante. À l'inverse, le mécanisme de réservation d'une chose intellectuelle semble constituer un dénominateur commun intéressant. Celui-ci trouve une traduction efficace avec la notion de « situation juridique » écrite de cette manière : « titularité d'un droit de propriété intellectuelle ». Par suite, l'indépendance de la matière se confirme et ses disparités internes sont gommées. Seulement, si l'exigence de sécurité juridique commande de retenir la notion de « situation juridique », il convient, au contraire, de se méfier de la notion de « droit acquis ». De plus, il est constaté que l'utilisation de la notion de «loi d'ordre public » n'est pas conforme à l'exigence de sécurité juridique, quand le maniement de la qualification de « loi de procédure » se révèle souvent délicate. Enfin, la notion de « loi interprétative » semble implicitement justifier de nombreux choix jurisprudentiels, orientés par l'absence de nouveauté manifeste de la norme nouvelle. Il convient alors de proposer la qualification de « loi de codification ».

National audience The aim of this article is to raise new intellectual property issues in the light of information and communication technologies and to show that intellectual property rights serve not only to protect innovation but even more to be offensive to competitors. In particular, we explore the effects of the increase in patents in ICT through two reflections: on the one hand, we focus on the strategic role of patents and the new behaviour of firms in standardisation and standardisation and show that this behaviour is similar for the standards set up today in the context of the Internet. On the other hand, we are focusing on deviating pipelines around intellectual property for innovation, and on the rise of litigation and litigation, a means of putting pressure on competitors. ; 14 ; National audience The aim of this article is to raise new intellectual property issues in the light of information and communication technologies and to show that intellectual property rights serve not only to protect innovation but even more to be offensive to competitors. In particular, we explore the effects of the increase in patents in ICT through two reflections: on the one hand, we focus on the strategic role of patents and the new behaviour of firms in standardisation and standardisation and show that this behaviour is similar for the standards set up today in the context of the Internet. On the other hand, we are focusing on deviating pipelines around intellectual property for innovation, and on the rise of litigation and litigation, a means of putting pressure on competitors. ; The aim of this article is to analyse new problems concerning intellectual property in the Information and Communication Technologies and to show that intellectual property rights are a way to protect innovation but also a tool to be offensive towards competitors. Particularly, we explore the increasing patents number in the ICT in two ways : first, we draw attention on the strategic role of patents and new firms strategies in the de jure ...