Publications - Page 231 of 266

Top Keywords

AI Act (11)
Art. 10 EVRM (25)
Art. 17 CDSM Directive (13)
Artificial intelligence (77)
Big data (12)
Constitutional and administrative law (11)
Consumer law (11)
Content moderation (22)
Copyright (201)
Cybersecurity (10)
Data protection (29)
Data protection law (11)
Digital Services Act (DSA) (31)
Digital Single Market (13)
EU (19)
EU law (25)
Europe (12)
Fake news (14)
Freedom of expression (49)
Fundamental rights (18)
GDPR (22)
Human rights (31)
Intellectual property (30)
Internet (24)
Journalism (16)
Kluwer Information Law Series (43)
Licensing (14)
Media law (29)
Online platforms (20)
Patent law (20)
Personal data (35)
Platforms (24)
Privacy (327)
Regulation (12)
Social media (11)
Software (10)
Surveillance (11)
Text and Data Mining (TDM) (21)
Trademark law (15)
Transparency (19)

Study on the Implementation and Effect in Member States’ Laws of Directive 2001/29/EC on the Harmonisation of Certain Aspects of Copyright and Related Rights in the Information Society external link

Westkamp, G., Rieber-Mohn, T., van Eechoud, M., Guibault, L., Helberger, N. & Hugenholtz, P.B.

2007

Abstract

This study, commissioned by the European Commission, examines the application of Directive 2001/29/EC in the light of the development of the digital market. Its purpose is to consider how Member States have implemented the Directive into national law and to assist the Commission in evaluating whether the Directive, as currently formulated, remains the appropriate response to the continuing challenges faced by the stakeholders concerned, such as rights holders, commercial users, consumers, educational and scientific users. As set out in specifications of the study set out by the Commission, its aim is "to assess the role that the Directive has played in fostering the digital market for goods and services in the four years since its adoption". The impact of the Directive on the development of digital (chiefly online) business models, therefore, will be the focal point of our enquiry throughout this study.

Auteursrecht, Intellectuele eigendom

RIS

TY  - RPRT
AU  - Westkamp, G.
AU  - Rieber-Mohn, T.
AU  - van Eechoud, M.
AU  - Guibault, L.
AU  - Helberger, N.
AU  - Hugenholtz, P.B.
PY  - 0322
DA  - 2007-03-22
T1  - Study on the Implementation and Effect in Member States’ Laws of Directive 2001/29/EC on the Harmonisation of Certain Aspects of Copyright and Related Rights in the Information Society
UR  - http://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Infosoc_report_2007.pdf
AB  - This study, commissioned by the European Commission, examines the application of Directive 2001/29/EC in the light of the development of the digital market. Its purpose is to consider how Member States have implemented the Directive into national law and to assist the Commission in evaluating whether the Directive, as currently formulated, remains the appropriate response to the continuing challenges faced by the stakeholders concerned, such as rights holders, commercial users, consumers, educational and scientific users. As set out in specifications of the study set out by the Commission, its aim is "to assess the role that the Directive has played in fostering the digital market for goods and services in the four years since its adoption". The impact of the Directive on the development of digital (chiefly online) business models, therefore, will be the focal point of our enquiry throughout this study.
K1  - Auteursrecht
K1  - Intellectuele eigendom
ER  -

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Report{nokey,
	title = {Study on the Implementation and Effect in Member States’ Laws of Directive 2001/29/EC on the Harmonisation of Certain Aspects of Copyright and Related Rights in the Information Society},
	author = {Westkamp, G. and Rieber-Mohn, T. and van Eechoud, M. and Guibault, L. and Helberger, N. and Hugenholtz, P.B.},
	year = {0322},
	date = {2007-03-22},
	abstract = {This study, commissioned by the European Commission, examines the application of Directive 2001/29/EC in the light of the development of the digital market. Its purpose is to consider how Member States have implemented the Directive into national law and to assist the Commission in evaluating whether the Directive, as currently formulated, remains the appropriate response to the continuing challenges faced by the stakeholders concerned, such as rights holders, commercial users, consumers, educational and scientific users. As set out in specifications of the study set out by the Commission, its aim is "to assess the role that the Directive has played in fostering the digital market for goods and services in the four years since its adoption". The impact of the Directive on the development of digital (chiefly online) business models, therefore, will be the focal point of our enquiry throughout this study.},
	keywords = {Auteursrecht, Intellectuele eigendom},
}

Save .bib

CLIP Suggestions for amendment of the Brussels I regulation with respect to Exclusive jurisdiction and cross border intellectual property (patent) infringement external link

van Eechoud, M.

2007

Abstract

In consequence of ECJ judgments C-4/03 - GAT v. LuK and C-539/03 - Roche Nederland v. Primus, handed down on 13 July 2005, it appears no longer feasible for a national court to allow for consolidation of claims against a person infringing parallel intellectual property rights registered in different Member States, and/or to accept a joinder of claims against multiple defendants engaged in concerted actions. It is feared that this will entail considerable impediments for an efficient enforcement of intellectual property rights, in particular of patents. In these comments, the European Max-Planck Group for Conflict of Laws in Intellectual Property (CLIP) suggests the adverse affects of the ECJ's rulings should be cured. This can be done by revising the drafting of article 22(4) and article 6 of the Brussels Regulation on Jurisdiction and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters (44/2001).

Intellectuele eigendom

RIS

TY  - RPRT
AU  - van Eechoud, M.
PY  - 0419
DA  - 2007-04-19
T1  - CLIP Suggestions for amendment of the Brussels I regulation with respect to Exclusive jurisdiction and cross border intellectual property (patent) infringement
UR  - http://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/CLIP_Brussels_%20I.pdf
AB  - In consequence of ECJ judgments C-4/03 - GAT v. LuK and C-539/03 - Roche Nederland v. Primus, handed down on 13 July 2005, it appears no longer feasible for a national court to allow for consolidation of claims against a person infringing parallel intellectual property rights registered in different Member States, and/or to accept a joinder of claims against multiple defendants engaged in concerted actions. It is feared that this will entail considerable impediments for an efficient enforcement of intellectual property rights, in particular of patents. In these comments, the European Max-Planck Group for Conflict of Laws in Intellectual Property (CLIP) suggests the adverse affects of the ECJ's rulings should be cured. This can be done by revising the drafting of article 22(4) and article 6 of the Brussels Regulation on Jurisdiction and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters (44/2001).
K1  - Intellectuele eigendom
ER  -

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Report{nokey,
	title = {CLIP Suggestions for amendment of the Brussels I regulation with respect to Exclusive jurisdiction and cross border intellectual property (patent) infringement},
	author = {van Eechoud, M.},
	year = {0419},
	date = {2007-04-19},
	abstract = {In consequence of ECJ judgments C-4/03 - GAT v. LuK and C-539/03 - Roche Nederland v. Primus, handed down on 13 July 2005, it appears no longer feasible for a national court to allow for consolidation of claims against a person infringing parallel intellectual property rights registered in different Member States, and/or to accept a joinder of claims against multiple defendants engaged in concerted actions. It is feared that this will entail considerable impediments for an efficient enforcement of intellectual property rights, in particular of patents. In these comments, the European Max-Planck Group for Conflict of Laws in Intellectual Property (CLIP) suggests the adverse affects of the ECJ's rulings should be cured. This can be done by revising the drafting of article 22(4) and article 6 of the Brussels Regulation on Jurisdiction and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters (44/2001).},
	keywords = {Intellectuele eigendom},
}

Save .bib