Suchergebnisse

Preface -- Contents -- Editor and Contributors -- 1 IP Debt Finance and SMEs: Revealing the Evolving Conceptual Framework Drawing on Initiatives from Around the World -- Abstract -- 1 Introduction -- 1.1 IP Finance and SMEs: Debt Versus Equity -- 1.2 Equity Finance -- 1.3 IP-Backed Debt Finance and Information Asymmetry -- 2 International Economic Research to Underpin IP Finance Policy Developments -- 2.1 Office for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) Research -- 2.2 World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) and United Nations Commission on International Trade (UNCITRAL) Initiatives -- 3 IP Finance Developments in the UK and Europe -- 3.1 The United Kingdom (UK) -- 3.2 The European Union (EU) -- 4 The United States Patent Quality Initiative (PQI) -- 5 Government IP-Backed Debt Finance Initiatives in Asia to Stimulate Economic Growth and Address the Young SME Funding Gap -- 5.1 Singapore's 'IP Financing Scheme' -- 5.2 The People's Republic of China (PRC) IP Pledge Financing Program -- 5.3 Malaysia Debt Ventures Bhd (MDV) IP Financing Scheme (IPFS) -- 5.4 Hong Kong -- 5.5 Japan -- 6 Analysis of the Global Initiatives -- 6.1 Systemic Change and a Conceptual Framework for IP Finance -- 6.2 Lenders and IP-Backed Finance Policy -- 7 Conclusions and Outlook: Supporting the Agile Development of Globally Enhanced Access to IP Finance -- References -- 2 Intellectual Properties and Debt Finance for Startups -- Abstract -- 1 Introduction -- 2 Japan's Attempts to Introduce IP-Backed Lending and the Aftermath -- 3 The Questionnaire Survey -- 3.1 Method -- 3.2 Result of the Survey for Startups -- 3.3 Results of the Survey for Fund Providers -- 4 Discussion -- 5 Conclusion -- References -- 3 IP and Debt Finance: Cross-Border Considerations -- Abstract -- 1 Introduction -- 1.1 Background -- 1.2 Proposals and Debates at Milestone UNCITRAL Meetings

Intro -- Efficiency in Private International Law -- Copyright -- Table of contents -- Chapter I. Introduction -- Chapter II. Conflicts revolution through the lens of efficiency -- 2.1. Traditional approaches -- 2.1.1. Joseph Beale and the vested rights doctrine -- 2.1.2. The adoption of the First Restatement -- 2.1.3. Criticism of the First Restatement -- 2.2. The choice of law revolution -- 2.2.1. Departure from traditional approaches -- (a) Auten v. Auten -- (b) Babcock v. Jackson -- 2.2.2. Government interest analysis -- (a) false conflicts -- (b) true conflicts -- (c) "unprovided-for" cases -- 2.2.3. Criticism of the interest analysis -- 2.2.4. Leflar's "better law" approach -- 2.2.5. Principles of preference -- 2.3. The Second Restatement -- 2.4. Economic analysis of conflict of laws -- 2.4.1. Public and private utilities -- 2.4.2. Legal certainty or flexibility : rule versus standard -- 2.4.3. Criticism of economic analysis and emergence of pragmatic approaches -- Chapter III. Uniform law and private international law - is uniform law more desirable than private international law? -- 3.1. Critical analysis of the conventional arguments -- 3.2. Costs and benefits analysis -- 3.2.1. Mapping of issues -- 3.2.2. Uniformity and diversity : costs and benefits analysis -- 3.2.3. Under what conditions might private international law be more beneficial ? -- 3.3. Empirical analysis -- 3.4. Conclusion -- Chapter IV. Uniform private international law -- 4.1. Introduction -- 4.2. Incentive analysis on the unification of private international law - focusing on the maintenance phase -- 4.3. Conditions for harmonization and unification -- 4.3.1. Interactions -- 4.3.2. Long-term relationship -- 4.3.3. Multiple contacts -- 4.3.4. Benefits of co-operation -- 4.4. Analysis -- Chapter V. Unification of intellectual property law.

Das Justizministerium Japans hat dem japanischen Parlament am 2. März 2010 den Entwurf eines Gesetzes zur Regelung der internationalen Zuständigkeit übermittelt. Eine englische Übersetzung des Entwurfes findet sich im Anhang 1 zu diesem Beitrag. Der Entwurf soll das Zivilprozessgesetz und das Zivilsicherungsgesetz ergänzen. Der Beitrag stellt einige der charakteristischen Vorschriften des Entwurfes vor, dessen Verfasser augenscheinlich besonderes Gewicht auf flexible Regelungen gelegt haben. Um den Hintergrund der Reform zu illustrieren, gibt der Verfasser zu Beginn einen kurzen Überblick über die einschlägige Rechtsprechung der japanischen Gerichte in den vergangenen 40 Jahren.Dem Entwurf des Justizministeriums gingen der Entwurf einer Arbeitsgruppe, veröffentlicht im Juni 2008, und der Zwischenentwurf des Gesetzgebungsausschusses, veröffentlicht im Juli 2009, voraus. Da der vom Justizministerium im Februar 2010 angenommene Entwurf hinsichtlich seiner einzelnen Bestimmungen das Ergebnis einer Auswahl zwischen verschiedenen Regulierungsalternativen ist, die auch die Entscheidung einschließt, bezüglich bestimmter Fragen auf eine explizite Regelung zu verzichten, dürfte es hilfreich sein, die Genese der einzelnen Vorschriften anhand der beiden Vorentwürfe zu verfolgen. Zu diesem Zweck findet sich im Anhang 2 eine tabellarische Gegenüberstellung aller drei Entwürfe.(die Red.) ; The Ministry of Justice (MOJ) submitted a draft for a new legislation on international jurisdiction to the Diet of Japan on 2 March 2010. An English translation of the draft is presented as Appendix 1. The draft is scheduled to amend the Code of Civil Procedure and the Civil Provisional Remedies Act. This article highlights a few of the draft's characteristic provisions. Flexibility seems to have been the main priority of its drafters. To illustrate the background of the reform the article starts with briefly summarizing the case law on international jurisdiction that Japanese courts have developed during the last 40 years.The MOJ Draft of 2010 was preceded by a Working Group Draft published in June 2008 and an interim draft of the Drafting Committee published in July 2009. The MOJ Draft adopted in February 2010 is the result of a selection from several choices for each provision, which also included the choice not to create any black-letter rules on certain issues. Therefore it is important and useful to trace the development of each provision in the preparation process by knowing what options the Working Group Draft had proposed and what was taken in the MOJ Draft. Appendix 2 offers a comparative overview of three Drafts in form of a chart.(The Editors)

Introduction -- Questioning the Adaptability of Global Governance in the Safeguarding of Cultural Heritage in Post-Trauma Situations -- Governance Challenges in Nepal After the Kathmandu Earthquake, in Light of the World Heritage Convention -- Introduction -- Japanese Approach and Practice for Cultural Heritage in Post-Disaster Situations. .

This volume is based on presentations delivered at a symposium held in May 2015 at the Max Planck Institute for Comparative and International Private Law in Hamburg. It seeks to reinvigorate the scholarly exchange which can be traced back to the late 19th century between company law academics in Germany, China, Japan and South Korea. Contributions from all four jurisdictions include papers on directors' liability and capital maintenance as well as studies of the role of shareholders in public companies and the regulation of groups of companies.

Cover; Preface; Contents; Abbreviations; Introduction; Jürgen Basedow: Boosting the Economy -- Special Economic Zones or Nationwide Deregulation?; I. Special Economic Zones in Asian Countries; 1. Survey; 2. Comparative observations; II. Reasons for the Geographical Confinement of Reform Legislation; III. Variants of Deregulation in Europe and Germany; IV. Market Deregulation -- Foundations; 1. Constitutive and restrictive regulations; 2. Consequences of (de- )regulation; V. Market Deregulation -- Implementation in Germany; VI. Flexibilization of the Labor Market; VII. Conclusion; I. Foundations.