Exclusive jurisdiction rules related to intellectual property rights cases are insufficiently supported by the arguments usually invoked in their favor. Benedetta Ubertazzi argues that such rules are even contrary to the public international law provisions on the avoidance of a denial of justice and should therefore be abandoned.--

At head of title : European Commission Research Project on Judicial Cooperation in Matters of Intellectual Property and Information Technology.

This timely and practical guide compares the jurisdictional advantages of litigating a national IP right with those of the corresponding European unitary IP right. The study offers IP practitioners a meticulous yet principled basis for their jurisdictional decisions and shows why it is advantageous for infringers to litigate based on a national IP right and rightholders to litigate based on a European unitary IP right.

Co-published by WIPO and the Hague Conference on Private International Law, this guide is a pragmatic tool, written by judges, for judges, examining how private international law operates in intellectual property (IP) matters. Using illustrative references to selected international and regional instruments and national laws, the guide aims to help judges apply the laws of their own jurisdiction, supported by an awareness of key issues concerning jurisdiction of the courts, applicable law, the recognition and enforcement of judgments, and judicial cooperation in cross-border IP disputes.

"The United States Code is the official codification of the general and permanent laws of the United States of America. The Code was first published in 1926, and a new edition of the code has been published every six years since 1934. The 2012 edition of the Code incorporates laws enacted through the One Hundred Twelfth Congress, Second Session, the last of which was signed by the President on January 15, 2013. It does not include laws of the One Hundred Thirteenth Congress, First Session, enacted between January 2, 2013, the date it convened, and January 15, 2013. By statutory authority this edition may be cited "U.S.C. 2012 ed." As adopted in 1926, the Code established prima facie the general and permanent laws of the United States. The underlying statutes reprinted in the Code remained in effect and controlled over the Code in case of any discrepancy. In 1947, Congress began enacting individual titles of the Code into positive law. When a title is enacted into positive law, the underlying statutes are repealed and the title then becomes legal evidence of the law. Currently, 26 of the 51 titles in the Code have been so enacted. These are identified in the table of titles near the beginning of each volume. The Law Revision Counsel of the House of Representatives continues to prepare legislation pursuant to 2 U.S.C. 285b to enact the remainder of the Code, on a title-by-title basis, into positive law. The 2012 edition of the Code was prepared and published under the supervision of Ralph V. Seep, Law Revision Counsel. Grateful acknowledgment is made of the contributions by all who helped in this work, particularly the staffs of the Office of the Law Revision Counsel and the Government Printing Office"--Preface.

In today’s knowledge-based global economy, most inventions are made by employed persons through their employers’ research and development activities. However, methods of establishing rights over an employee’s intellectual property assets are relatively uncertain in the absence of international solutions. Given that increasingly more businesses establish entities in different countries and more employees co-operate across borders, it becomes essential for companies to be able to establish the conditions under which ownership subsists in intellectual property created in employment relationships in various countries. This comparative law publication describes and analyses employers’ acquisition of employees’ intellectual property rights, first in general and then in depth. This second edition of the book considers thirty-four different jurisdictions worldwide. The book was developed within the framework of the International Association for the Protection of Intellectual Property (AIPPI), a non-affiliated, non-profit organization dedicated to improving and promoting the protection of intellectual property at both national and international levels. Among the issues and topics covered by the forty-nine distinguished contributors are the following: • different approaches in different law systems; • choice of law for contracts; • harmonizing international jurisdiction rules; • conditions for recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments; • employees’ rights in copyright, semiconductor chips, inventions, designs, plant varieties and utility models on a country-by-country basis; • employee remuneration right; • parties’ duty to inform; and • instances for disputes. With its wealth of information on an increasingly important subject for practitioners in every jurisdiction, this book is sure to be put to constant use by corporate lawyers and in-house counsel everywhere. It is also exceptionally valuable as a thorough resource for academics and researchers interested in the international harmonization of intellectual property law.

Within Europe the private international law rules have been harmonized to a very large extent by legislation adopted at EU level and case-law on the interpretation of this legislation. Recent developments include the entry into operation of revised versions of the Brussels I Regulation on civil jurisdiction and judgments and the Regulation on insolvency proceedings, as well as numerous decisions of the European Court and the English courts. The new edition of this authoritative work takes account of recent developments at both EU and UK levels.

This Guide, prepared by Rina Elster Pantalony, was recently updated to reflect the tremendous developments since it was first published in 2007, in particular Digital Rights Management, the role of social media as a business opportunity and traditional knowledge. The two-part Guide first describes IP issues relevant to museums then reviews existing business models that could provide museums with appropriate opportunities to create sustainable funding, and deliver on their stated objectives.

This volume examines the protection and exploitation of intellectual property rights, along with international problems relating to which court has jurisdiction and which is the relevant law in foreign cases and judgments.