| 1. |
- Axhamn, Johan, 1979-
(författare)
-
Databasskydd
- 2016
-
Doktorsavhandling (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- The capacity to assemble, store, and make available information in databases is ever growing. This development has accelerated in recent decades, driven by the advent and increased use of digital networks. Already at an early stage, it led to demands for legal protection of databases. In most countries databases have been protected in national legislation based on copyright principles. However, this kind of protection has been regarded as insufficient. The reason for this is that copyright protection only covers the selection or arrangement of the contents of the database. By rearranging the contents, it is possible to avoid liability for copyright infringement. To address the specific needs of producers of databases, the then European community adopted a directive in 1996 on the legal protection of databases. The Directive aims to harmonise copyright protection for databases and to introduce a new, sui generis, right for the legal protection of databases. The sui generis right protects the investments in obtaining, verifying, and presenting the contents in a database. The sui generis right has been described in the literature as one of the most complex intellectual property rights ever established. Its complexity resides in the unclear relationship between the requirements for protection and the content and scope of protection.This dissertation describes, analyses, compares and systematises the legal protection for databases as provided for in the EU Database Directive – both in relation to copyright and sui generis protection, but also in relation to the intellectual property system in general and principles and rules on unfair competition. The study also describes and analyses the Directive as implemented into Swedish law. To do this, it makes use of relevant legal sources, with particular account taken of relevant sources of EU law such as the Directive itself, adjacent directives in the field of copyright and related rights, as well as unfair competition law and the case law and legal method developed by the Court of Justice of the European Union. The study also draws on underlying theories of intellectual property protection and unfair competition law, as well as arguments based on unjust enrichment and pure economic loss.The study establishes how the sui generis right serves as a legal hybrid between traditional intellectual property rights and protection against unfair competition. The structure of the right resembles traditional intellectual property rights, with requirements for protection, provisions on exclusive rights, exceptions and limitations and a term of protection. At the same time, the content and scope of protection provide measures similar to those countering unfair competition with aspects of protection against pure economic loss. The right protects against certain activities carried out in the market rather than providing protection for a traditional object of intellectual property law. When implementing the Directive, the Swedish legislator overlooked these aspects of the sui generis right, creating legal uncertainties when interpreting and applying the national legislation. The study concludes with a look forward and suggestions for future research.
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
- Lunell, Erika, 1966-
(författare)
-
Okonventionella varumärken : - form, färg, doft, ljud
- 2007
-
Doktorsavhandling (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- This dissertation deals with new types of marks – shape marks, colour marks, feel marks, hologram marks, motion marks, sound marks, scent marks and taste marks – which, as an option or complement to conventional word or figure marks, are being increasingly used as trade marks in the market place. This trend gives rise to legal and practical questions related to the application of already established trade mark principles in the new context. These questions are the topic of the present investigation. Two issues are studied more closely: the concept of distinctiveness and that of graphic representation.To function as a trade mark a sign must be capable of distinguishing goods or services of one undertaking from those of others. For this, a link must be established between the mark and the goods or services. A problem is that an unconventional sign often conveys functional or decorative messages in addition to the trade mark message. The problem of conflicting messages given by a mark is discussed in some detail, as well as the situation where multiple marks are used in relation to one and the same product. A special problem is that the mark sometimes may not be perceptible to the consumer until after the point of sale. An analysis is also presented of the conflict between the right of the trade mark owner to use, e.g., a colour mark, and the public interest in leaving free certain signs for everyone to use.In order to define the subject of protection, a trade mark application must include a graphic representation of the mark for which registration is sought. As a consequence of the interpretation by the European Court of Justice, the requirement of graphic representation today effectively blocks certain types of marks from being registered. It is suggested that the technical development now may motivate a generalization of the requirement, to include also other methods of representation.
|
|
| 10. |
- Marušić, Branka, 1983-
(författare)
-
The Autonomous Legal Concept of Communication to the Public in the European Union
- 2021
-
Doktorsavhandling (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- In the last decades, the manner in which we access, consume, and enjoy content has changed. The traditional way of availability of content was predetermined. In order to access content, one was required to be at a certain place in a specific time. Today, the content is available from a place and a time individually chosen by the end user and oftentimes accessed, consumed, and enjoyed over the internet. The infrastructure of the internet – for online availability of content – is becoming more and more complex. One of the reasons for this complexity can be found in an economic right of the copyright holder. This specific economic right – although found in other EU harmonising measures – is embodied in Article 3 InfoSoc Directive, which is an implementation of Article 8 WCT in EU law. The right of communication to the public, which includes the right of making available to the public (legal concept of the economic right), has in recent decades become the main economic right of a rightholder in digital realities. This economic right serves as a vehicle whereby the rightholder can prevent content from being made available online, or conversely, allow it to be. The reason why the legal concept of the economic right is aiding complexity of online availability of content is the legal uncertainty about the scope of the said legal concept. This legal uncertainty – among other issues of legal complexity – is facilitated by the interpretations of the CJEU. The legal complexity of online availability of content reflects the following factors: the plurality of legal sources for the legal concept of the economic right; the heterarchical relationship between these sources; the three expansive legal systems in which this legal concept can be found (national, EU and international); the competing legal sources on fundamental rights; and the competing realities (physical and digital). Consequently, the main origin of this complexity is twofold. It consists of the overlapping legal systems and of the overlapping realities in which these legal systems operate. The present study concentrates on the legal concept of the economic right from an EU perspective and describes and analyses the relationship between the systems on that basis. Furthermore, the legal analysis of the present study is applied to technological environments represented in the form of communication models that seek to portray how the legal concept of the economic right operates. The depiction of these technological environments provides an explanation of the environment wherein acts of communication and acts of making available occur, thereby throwing light on the nature of these acts and providing clarity on the questions of potential infringement. The right of communication to the public is exercised in linear technological environments that are traditionally found in physical realities – yet not exclusively, whereas the right of making available to the public is exercised in non-linear technological environments that are exclusively found in digital realities. The contribution of the present study to existing legal research is twofold. Firstly, it emphasises the legal standing and effect, from a constitutional perspective, of autonomous legal concepts of EU law. Secondly, it applies the legal concept of the economic right to communication models in order to explain how the said right operates in digital realities.
|
|
