The Pursuit of Efficient Copyright Licensing : How Some Rights Reserved Attempts to Solve the Problems of All Rights Reserved

This dissertation analyses the growing pool of copyrighted works, which are offered to the public using Creative Commons licensing. The study consist of analysis of the novel licensing system, the licensors, and the changes of the "all rights reserved" —paradigm of copyright law. Copyright law reserves all rights to the creator until seventy years have passed since her demise. Many claim that this endangers communal interests. Quite often the creators are willing to release some rights. This, however, is very difficult to do and needs help of specialized lawyers. The study finds that the innovative Creative Commons licensing scheme is well suited for low value - high volume licensing. It helps to reduce transaction costs on several le¬vels. However, CC licensing is not a "silver bullet". Privacy, moral rights, the problems of license interpretation and license compatibility with other open licenses and collecting societies remain unsolved. The study consists of seven chapters. The first chapter introduces the research topic and research questions. The second and third chapters inspect the Creative Commons licensing scheme's technical, economic and legal aspects. The fourth and fifth chapters examine the incentives of the licensors who use open licenses and describe certain open business models. The sixth chapter studies the role of collecting societies and whether two institutions, Creative Commons and collecting societies can coexist. The final chapter summarizes the findings. The dissertation contributes to the existing literature in several ways. There is a wide range of prior research on open source licensing. However, there is an urgent need for an extensive study of the Creative Commons licensing and its actual and potential impact on the creative ecosystem.

Compulsory licensing of standard-essential patents and injunctive relief as abuse of dominant position in violation of Article 102 TFEU

When a dominant undertaking holding a standard-essential patent uses its exclusive right to the IP to seek injunctions against those wishing to produce either de jure or de facto standard compliant products, it creates a conflict between the exclusive right to the use of the IP on the one hand and the possible abuse of dominance due to the exclusionary conduct on the other. The aim of the thesis is to focus on the issues concerning abuse of dominance in violation of Article 102 TFEU when the holder of the standard-essential patent seeks an injunction against a would-be licensee. The thesis is mainly based on the most recent ECJ case law in Huawei and the Commission’s recent decisions in Samsung and Motorola. The case law in Europe prior to those decisions was mainly focused on the German case law from Orange Book Standard which provided IP holders great leverage due to the almost automatic granting of injunctions against infringers. The ECJ in Huawei set out the requirements for when a de jure standard-essential patent holder would not be violating Article 102 TFEU when seeking an injunction, requiring that negotiations in good faith must take place prior to the seeking of the injunction and that all offers must comply with FRAND terms, thus limiting the scope of case law derived from Orange Book Standard in Germany. The ECJ chose not to follow all of the reasoning the Commission had laid out in Samsung and Motorola which provided a more licensee-friendly approach on the matter, but rather chose a compromise between the IP holder friendly German case law and the Commission’s decisions. However, the ECJ did not disclose how FRAND terms themselves should be interpreted, but rather left it for the national courts to decide. Furthermore, the thesis strongly argues that Huawei did not change the fact that only vertically integrated IP holders who have made a FRAND declaration are subject to the terms laid out in Huawei, thus leaving non-practicing entities such as patent trolls and entities that have not made a FRAND declaration outside its scope. The resulting conclusion from the thesis is that while the ECJ in Huawei presented new exceptional circumstances for when an IP holder could be abusing its dominant position when it seeks an injunction, it still left many more questions answered, such as the meaning of FRAND and whether deception in giving a FRAND declaration is prohibited under Article 102 TFEU or not.

Application of Open Innovation Paradigm in Small and Medium Enterprises in Russia

The objective of this study is to explore how the Open Innovation paradigm is applied in by small and medium-size enterprises in Russia. The focus of the study is to understand how the processes of research and development and commercialization proceed in these kind of companies and to which extent they apply open innovation principles. Russian leadership makes certain steps for transition from the export of raw materials to an innovative model of economic growth. The research aims to disclose actual impact of these attempts. The closed innovation model and the erosion factors which lead to the destruction of an old one and emergence of new model are described. Features of open innovation implementation and intellectual property rights protection in small and medium enterprises are presented. To achieve the objective, a qualitative case study approach was chosen. Research includes facts and figures, views and opinions of management of studied companies related to innovation process in the company and in Russia in general. The research depicts the features of Open Innovation implementation by SMEs in Russia. A large number of research centers with necessary equipment and qualified personnel allow case companies to use external R&D effectively. They cooperate actively with research institutes, universities and laboratories. Thus, they apply inbound Open Innovation. On the contrary, lack of venture capital, low demand for technologies within the domestic market and weak protection of intellectual property limit the external paths to new markets. Licensing-out and creation of spin-off are isolated cases. Therefore, outbound Open Innovation is not a regular practice.