| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
101073
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2010.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Ambush marketing has emerged in recent years as an effective, though controversial, weapon in the arsenal of marketing departments. Various corporations have indulged in ambush marketing to exploit international events such as the Olympics, Football World Cup, or the Commonwealth Games. This paper seeks to examine ambush marketing as an intellectual property infringement and suitability of the current IP legislations to tackle it. Primary data such as case laws and secondary data such as articles and parallel provisions with regard to IPR have been referred, which show that due to the absence of principle legislations and case precedents, corporations indulging in ambush marketing are able to get away scot-free. To overcome this problem, various countries such as South Africa, New Zealand, Australia, China, England, Brazil and Canada have brought out amendments or legislations defining 'ambush marketing' as a specific type of IPR infringement and fixing liability for the same. It is time that India considers introducing such a legislation not just because its peers have taken such a step but because in the light of large scale events being organized in the country, there is a need to protect legitimate sponsors.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
095578
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2010.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article shows that despite a vast harmonization programme in the field of copyright and registered design right, the degree of protection of designers in the European Union still differs greatly. This is owed to the lack of harmonization in copyright and unfair competition laws. The article shows that not only is there a difference in the scope of protection between the common law and civil law countries but also between civil law countries. The countries chosen for the comparison are the United Kingdom, France and Italy. The article concentrates on the case law of the last 5 years and concludes that there is a need for further harmonization in the fields of copyright law and unfair competition law, as well as guidance from the European Court of Justice on the test of infringement for registered designs as it has been interpreted very differently in at least two member states.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
095011
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2010.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
After the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Cultural Diversity, the interaction between the protection of traditional cultural expressions (TCEs) and geographical indicators (GIs) is an interesting one. The capacity of a geographical indication of origin to create a global market with local control over brand, quality and methods of production seems to make it immensely suitable for preservation of cultural diversity. Since the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights does not limit the potential causes of action for the unauthorized use of GIs, the tort of misappropriation may be applied in relation to TCEs. In order to reconcile intellectual property rights with non-Western belief systems, application of the tort of misappropriation, unjust enrichment and the remedy of restitution may make enforcement of GIs in relation to TCEs more palatable than other forms of protection.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
094998
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2010.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
After the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Cultural Diversity, the interaction between the protection of traditional cultural expressions (TCEs) and geographical indicators (GIs) is an interesting one. The capacity of a geographical indication of origin to create a global market with local control over brand, quality and methods of production seems to make it immensely suitable for preservation of cultural diversity. Since the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights does not limit the potential causes of action for the unauthorized use of GIs, the tort of misappropriation may be applied in relation to TCEs. In order to reconcile intellectual property rights with non-Western belief systems, application of the tort of misappropriation, unjust enrichment and the remedy of restitution may make enforcement of GIs in relation to TCEs more palatable than other forms of protection.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|