Infringement and Exclusive Jurisdiction in Intellectual Property: a Comparison for the International Law Association

The following comparison was written for the first meeting of the International Law Association newly established (2010) Committee on Intellectual Property and Private International Law (Chair: Professor Toshiyuki Kono, Kyushu University; Co-Rapporteurs: Professors Pedro de Miguel Asensio, Madrid Complutense University, and Axel Metzger, Hannover University) (hereinafter: ILA Committee), which was hosted at the Faculty of Law of the University of Lisbon in March 16-17, 2012. The comparison at stake concerns the rules on infringement and exclusive (subject-mater) jurisdiction posed (or rejected, in case of exclusive jurisdiction) by four sets of academic principles. Notwithstanding the fact that the rules in question present several differences, those differences in the majority of cases could be overcome by further studies and work of the ILA Committee, as the following comparison explains.

Creative Commons International The International License Porting Project

When Creative Commons (CC) was founded in 2001, the core Creative Commons licenses were drafted according to United States Copyright Law. Since their first introduction in December 2002, Creative Commons licenses have been enthusiastically adopted by many creators, authors, and other content producers – not only in the United States, but in many other jurisdictions as well. Global interest in the CC licenses prompted a discussion about the need for national versions of the CC licenses. To best address this need, the international license porting project (“Creative Commons International” – formerly known as “International Commons”) was launched in 2003. Creative Commons International works to port the core Creative Commons licenses to different copyright legislations around the world. The porting process includes both linguistically translating the licenses and legally adapting the licenses to a particular jurisdiction such that they are comprehensible in the local jurisdiction and legally enforceable but concurrently retain the same key elements. Since its inception, Creative Commons International has found many supporters all over the world. With Finland, Brazil, and Japan as the first completed jurisdiction projects, experts around the globe have followed their lead and joined the international collaboration with Creative Commons to adapt the licenses to their local copyright. This article aims to present an overview of the international porting process, explain and clarify the international license architecture, its legal and promotional aspects, as well as its most recent challenges.

Enforcing Copyright Infringements Online: In Search of Balanced Private International Law Rules

Enforcement of copyright online and fighting online “piracy” is a high priority on the EU agenda. Private international law questions have recently become some of the most challenging issues in this area. Internet service providers are still uncertain how the Brussels I Regulation (Recast) provisions would apply in EU-wide copyright infringement cases and in which country they can be sued for copyright violations. Meanwhile, because of the territorial approach that still underlies EU copyright law, right holders are unable to acquire EU-wide relief for copyright infringements online. This article first discusses the recent CJEU rulings in the Pinckney and Hejduk cases and argues that the “access approach” that the Court adopted for solving jurisdiction questions could be quite reasonable if it is applied with additional legal measures at the level of substantive law, such as the targeting doctrine. Secondly, the article explores the alternatives to the currently established lex loci protectionis rule that would enable right holders to get EU-wide remedies under a single applicable law. In particular, the analysis focuses on the special applicable law rule for ubiquitous copyright infringements, as suggested by the CLIP Group, and other international proposals.