Suchergebnisse

The aim of this article is to explore the conceptual bases and methodological issues involved in the codification process of Estonia׳s intellectual property law and outline the main results. The conceptual bases of this codification consist of evolutionary development, a comparative-law approach, stakeholder involvement and regulatory impact assessment. The reform draws on the existing regulatory framework (existing IP law), developed further by the identification and use of the best regulatory practices of other countries and model laws. Stakeholder involvement and regulatory impact assessment are used to improve the draft law and make it compatible with Estonian socio-economic conditions. This article summarises the results of the extensive work from 2012 to 2014 that resulted in the draft Copyright and Related Rights Act, the draft Industrial Property Code and the draft Act Implementing the Copyright and Related Rights Act and the Industrial Property Code with the relevant annexes. The analysis focuses on the Estonian codification project as a case study. The author relies on traditional research methods from social science and draws on comparative and dogmatic analysis conducted during the codification, using empirical socio-economic data acquired through stakeholder involvement and impact assessment. The article also reflects the author׳s personal experience, insights and intimate knowledge of the codification process gained through management and coordination of the project and in acting as a head of the expert group on the codification of IP law under the auspices of the Ministry of Justice of Estonia. The Estonian example could serve as a comparative model for countries aiming to modernise their IP laws within the EU acquis and international legal framework.

Abstract: Intellectual property law is being reformed in various countries worldwide, among which in the European Union at present Estonia endeavours one of the most comprehensive reform projects. While legislative challenges deriving from the 'digitalization' of social interaction, globalization, and general technical progress are widely discussed in public, some of the most essential purely legal questions to be answered while drafting Estonia's new Intellectual Property Law codification would usually stay within the small circle of the working group. The question in how far the abstraction principle - one of the core principles of both Estonian and German laws - shall be applied within the new codification is one of these issues that are of interest not only to Estonian working group members and Estonian/German legal research but also to scholars of European Private Law in general, as the central task - determining the demand for protection of author's economic rights - at present is not comprehensively regulated in any European Intellectual Property Law system. After having elucidated the current German and Estonian approaches in both written law and legal practice, this paper provides a proposal for the Estonian codification procedure that may serve as model for running Intellectual Property Law reforms in other European countries as well. Résumé: Le droit de la propriété intellectuelle est en cours de réforme dans différents pays autour du monde, parmi lesquels dans l'Union européenne à l'heure actuelle l'Estonie s'efforce l'un des projets de réforme les plus complets. Même si les questions législatives résultant de l'usage de l'internet, la mondialisation et le progrès technique général sont largement discutés en public, quelques-unes des questions les plus essentielles purement juridiques à répondre lors de la rédaction législative estonienne habituellement restant dans le petit cercle du groupe de travail au ministère. La question dans quelle mesure le principe d'abstraction - l'un des principes fondamentaux du droit estonien et allemand - doit être appliqué dans le cadre de la nouvelle codification est l'une de ces questions qui présentent un intérêt non seulement pour les membres du groupe de travail estonien et le monde scolaire estonien-allemand, mais aussi aux chercheurs de droit privé européen en général, comme la question centrale - la détermination de la demande de protection des droits économiques de l'auteur - à l'heure actuelle n'est pas réglementée de manière détaillée à ne aucun système européen de droit de la propriété intellectuelle. Après avoir élucidé l'approche actuelle allemande et estonienne par la loi et la pratique juridique, cet article-ci fournit une proposition à la procédure législative estonienne, qui peut servir comme modèle pour l'exécution de réformes du droit de la propriété intellectuelle dans autres pays européens ainsi.

Due to low patenting intensity, trade secret protection is the primary tool for the protection of valuable entrepreneurial knowledge base in the Baltic states. The adoption of the Trade Secrets Directive, which aims to harmonize trade secret protection at the European Union level, potentially has a significant impact in the region. Nevertheless, there are several reasons why the changes brought by the Trade Secrets Directive may not have a desirable harmonization effect. Firstly, it is a minimum harmonization directive which allows more far-reaching protection in the different EU Member States. Secondly, some aspects of the protection of trade secrets are at the discretion of the EU Member States. Two notable examples are the duration of the limitation period and the scope of the lawful acquisition, use and disclosure of a trade secret. Thirdly, the Directive leaves some essential questions outside its scope. One of such issues is the employee's duty of confidentiality, especially after the termination of an employment contract. Besides, the Baltic states differ about the additional level of protection – the so-called "confidential information". The paper aims to evaluate the implementation models of the Trade Secrets Directive in the national law of the three Baltic states, i.e., Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania, and to compare them. Likewise, the paper endeavours to highlight the remaining or newly emerged differences in the legal protection of trade secrets. To achieve this aim, the authors analyse the legal regulation of trade secrets in the three Baltic states before and after the implementation of the Trade Secrets Directive.

Language technology provides several possibilities to commercialise collected language resources (data) in the form of providing access to databases, dictionaries, translation, text analysis and localisation services, storage of documents and personal language data, software, and other types of digital content. This article focuses on the contractual relationships in selling language technology products and providing services to the customers, and explores the entrepreneurial perspective on the supply of digital content to compare its compatibility with the existing regulatory framework. For comparison, the authors have chosen Estonian companies specialising in language technology. The main conclusions concerning the entrepreneurial perspective are based on a study of homepages and personal interviews. The compatibility between the business model and the regulatory framework is analysed based on the case study and Estonian legislation. The authors aim to outline how language technology entrepreneurs in Estonia themselves conceptualise the digital content they are commercialising, the nature of their business models, and entrepreneurial practice (business model). The authors take into account the applicable regulatory framework (protection of intellectual property, contract law, proprietary relations), and also analyse the contracting method, contractual remedies, and need for an objective neutrality in legal regulation.

Due to low patenting intensity, trade secret protection is the primary tool for the protection of valuable entrepreneurial knowledge base in the Baltic states. The adoption of the Trade Secrets Directive, which aims to harmonize trade secret protection at the European Union level, potentially has a significant impact in the region. Nevertheless, there are several reasons why the changes brought by the Trade Secrets Directive may not have a desirable harmonization effect. Firstly, it is a minimum harmonization directive which allows more far-reaching protection in the different EU Member States. Secondly, some aspects of the protection of trade secrets are at the discretion of the EU Member States. Two notable examples are the duration of the limitation period and the scope of the lawful acquisition, use and disclosure of a trade secret. Thirdly, the Directive leaves some essential questions outside its scope. One of such issues is the employee's duty of confidentiality, especially after the termination of an employment contract. Besides, the Baltic states differ about the additional level of protection – the so-called "confidential information". The paper aims to evaluate the implementation models of the Trade Secrets Directive in the national law of the three Baltic states, i.e., Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania, and to compare them. Likewise, the paper endeavours to highlight the remaining or newly emerged differences in the legal protection of trade secrets. To achieve this aim, the authors analyse the legal regulation of trade secrets in the three Baltic states before and after the implementation of the Trade Secrets Directive.

The strategies of the European Union and its Member States suppose that intellectual property (IP) created as the result of R&D is the engine of economic growth and welfare in society. Studies based on the European Regional Innovation Scoreboard (RIS) have demonstrated that R&D investments, support to the high technology industry and patenting intensity of the public sector differ in high- and low-income European countries. This fact refers to the need for adequate IP strategic indicators' system facilitating innovation in less developed countries. The paper aims to conceptualize and suggest a strategic indicators' system of IP for a small efficiency-driven economy. In contrast to the rather modest level of patenting by industry, universities of the Baltic States file approximately 50% of PCT patent applications. Therefore, it is crucial to overcome barriers, hindering universities' IP commercialization. Academia-Industry collaboration includes two types of IP strategies: Active non-linear and Passive linear behavioural models of universities and public sector. An essential part of the active approach focuses on the "soft measures" for networking with firms in collaborative platforms such as AIMday® at the Uppsala University in Sweden. The proposed IP strategy system involves qualitative and quantitative indicators at the state as well as university and company level. The comparison of academic publishing and patenting by the staffs of Tartu and Uppsala universities testifies to their rather same levels of productivity. Three times wider patent families of the inventions of Uppsala origin characterize actors' market ambition as well as the strength of University-Industry linkages that are more developed in Uppsala than in Tartu. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5755/j01.ee.27.3.13799

Language technology provides several possibilities to commercialise collected language resources (data) in the form of providing access to databases, dictionaries, translation, text analysis and localisation services, storage of documents and personal language data, software, and other types of digital content. This article focuses on the contractual relationships in selling language technology products and providing services to the customers, and explores the entrepreneurial perspective on the supply of digital content to compare its compatibility with the existing regulatory framework. For comparison, the authors have chosen Estonian companies specialising in language technology. The main conclusions concerning the entrepreneurial perspective are based on a study of homepages and personal interviews. The compatibility between the business model and the regulatory framework is analysed based on the case study and Estonian legislation. The authors aim to outline how language technology entrepreneurs in Estonia themselves conceptualise the digital content they are commercialising, the nature of their business models, and entrepreneurial practice (business model). The authors take into account the applicable regulatory framework (protection of intellectual property, contract law, proprietary relations), and also analyse the contracting method, contractual remedies, and need for an objective neutrality in legal regulation. ; Peer reviewed

Sometimes legal scholars get relevant but baffling questions from laypersons like: "The reference to a work is personal data, so does the GDPR actually require me to anonymise it? Or, as my voice data is personal data, does the GDPR automatically give me access to a speech recognizer using my voice sample? Or, can I say anything about myself without the GDPR requiring the web host to anonymise or remove the post? What can I say about others like politicians? And, what can researchers say about patients in a research report?" Based on these questions, the authors address the interaction of intellectual property and data protection law in the context of data minimisation and attribution rights, access rights, trade secret protection, and freedom of expression

Sometimes legal scholars get relevant but baffling questions from laypersons like: "The reference to a work is personal data, so does the GDPR actually require me to anonymise it? Or, as my voice data is personal data, does the GDPR automatically give me access to a speech recognizer using my voice sample? Or, can I say anything about myself without the GDPR requiring the web host to anonymise or remove the post? What can I say about others like politicians? And, what can researchers say about patients in a research report?" Based on these questions, the authors address the interaction of intellectual property and data protection law in the context of data minimisation and attribution rights, access rights, trade secret protection, and freedom of expression.

A critical history of the Americanization of legal education in fourteen countriesThe second half of the twentieth century witnessed the export of American power—both hard and soft—throughout the world. What role did US cultural and economic imperialism play in legal education? American Legal Education Abroad offers an unprecedented and surprising picture of the history of legal education in fourteen countries beyond the United States.Each study in this book represents a critical history of the Americanization of legal education, reexamining prevailing narratives of exportation, transplantation, and imperialism. Collectively, these studies challenge the conventional wisdom that American ideas and practices have dominated globally. Editors Susan Bartie and David Sandomierski and their contributors suggest that to understand legal education and to respond thoughtfully to the mounting present-day challenges, it is essential to look beyond a particular region and consider not only the ideas behind legal education but also the broader historical, political, and cultural factors that have shaped them.American Legal Education Abroad begins with an important foundational history by leading Harvard Law School historian Bruce Kimball, who explains the factors that created a transportable American legal model, and the book concludes with reflections from two prominent American law professors, Susan Carle and Bob Gordon, whose observations on recent disruptions within US law schools suggest that their influence within the global order of legal education may soon fall into further decline. This book should be considered an invaluable resource for anyone in the field of law