906 resultados para intellectual property protection
Resumo:
Opinnäytetyö keskittyi kriittisiin tapahtumiin, joita on tullut yhtiön tai sen edeltävän yhtiön, joka oli Mobile Screen TV – 4 ALL, tekemien aikaisempien patenttihakemusten yhteydessä . Tutkimus vertasi ja evaluoi yhtiön aikaisemmin tekemien keksintöjen suojausta. Toisaalta opinnäytetyön päämäärä oli tutkia ja selvittää monitapaus-menetelmällä yhtiön aikaisempia keksintöjä ja miten aineettoman oikeuden suojaus toteutui prosessien eri vaiheissa. Tämä päättötyötutkielma vei loppuun asti erittäin suuren patenttien ja hyödyllisyysmallien hakemusten tutkimuksen. LH Communications Oy on tehnyt monia niistä, mutta tutkimus sisälsi myös joitakin kilpailijoiden hakemuksia. Tässä tutkimuksessa oli kaksi pääkysymystä. Miten pieni yhtiö voisi suojella heidän uusia ideoitaan ja keksintöjään ja myös samalla pitää yhtiön talouden hyvällä tasolla. Tämä tutkimus käytti The Critical Incidents Technique (CIT), joka keskittyy kriittisiin tapahtumiin, selvittääkseen sopivia menetelmiä pienelle yhtiölle siitä, miten suojella uusia ajatuksia, ideoita ja keksintöjä ja samanaikaisesti olla tuottava niiden kanssa. Tutkimuksemme käsitteli kaikenlaisia tarvittavia käytäntöjä pienessä yhtiössä ja päähuomio pienessä yhtiössä tulee olla omien keksintöjen suojaamisessa. Paras suojaus on tehdä patentteja, mutta se tulee maksamaan hyvin paljon koko tapahtumasarjan aikana.
Resumo:
This thesis studies intellectual property right (also: IPR) strategies from the perspective of high growth startup companies. Due to technology development and intellectualization of business, large part of companies’ assets are nowadays intangible. At the same time, the importance of protection instruments designed to protect these intangible assets, intellectual property rights, is increasing. Utilization of these instruments, however, requires understanding of the functioning of the IPR system, as well as financial resources. Startup companies aiming for growth need to be able compete with more established companies also in relation to intangible assets, but they might not have the required knowledge ot resources to fully utilize IPRs in their business. This research aims to understand what are the benefits a startup company can have from protecting their IPRs, and how can the company achieve those benefits. Based on a review of previous literature, altogether 11 benefits of IPR registration were recognized. To answer to the research questions, six half-structured interviews were conducted with experts form different fields, all with experience in working with startup companies and IPR issues. The interviews were analyzed using different methods of qualitative data analysis, mainly derived from grounded theory and case study methods. As a result, out of the 11 benefits recognized from earlier literature, 8 were recognized to be relevant for startup companies. The most central benefits were recognized to be linked with the financial lifecycle of the startup company, including increasing credibility of the startup and stimulating an investment. In addition it was noticed, that startup companies are mainly able to utilize these benefits at later stages of their lifecycle. However, to be able to utilize the benefits at later stages, the startup company needs to be aware of the functioning of the IPR system and might need to apply for appropriate protection already early on. As a result of this study, a three-step model was formed to describe different levels of IPR utilization. The first level of the model represents the minimum level of understanding that every startup company should have regarding IPRs. The second level views IPR strategy from a risk management perspective, including securing the minimum protection of the company’s own IPRs, contract management and establishing processes for handling IPR issues. The last stage reflects strategic use of IPRs. At this third stage intellectual property rights have a central role in the startup company’s business, and they are used in the company’s value creation.
Resumo:
This study critically analyzes the historical role and influence of multinational drug cotpOrations and multinational corporations in general; the u.s. government and the Canadian state in negotiating the global recognition ofIntellectual Property Rights (IPR) under GATT/NAFTA. This process began in 1969 when the Liberal government, in response to high prices for brand-name drugs amended the Patent Act to introduce compulsory licensing by reducing monopoly protection from 20 to seven years. Although the financial position ofthe multinational drug industry was not affected, it campaigned vigorously to change the 1969 legislation. In 1987, the Patent Act was amended to extend protection to 10 years as a condition for free trade talks with the u.s. Nonetheless, the drug industry was not satisfied and accused Canada of providing a bad example to other nations. Therefore, it continued to campaign for global recognition ofIPR laws under GATT. Following the conclusion of the GATTI Trade-Related aspects of Intellectual Property Rights agreement (TRIPS) in 1991, the multinational drug industry and the American government, to the surprise of many, were still not satisfied and sought to implement harsher conditions under NAFTA. The Progressive Conservative government readily agreed without any objections or consideration for the social consequences. As a result, Bill C-91 was introduced. It abandoned compulsory licenses and was made retroactive from December 21, 1991. It is the contention of this thesis that the economic survival of multinational corporations on a global scale depends on the role and functions of the modem state. Similarly, the existence of the state depends on the ideological-political and socioeconomic assistance it gives to multinational corporations on a national and international scale. This dialectical relation of the state and multinational corporations is explored in our theoretical and historical analysis of their role in public policy.
Resumo:
"L’auteure Lucie Guibault aborde la question des ""logiciels libres"" dans le cadre des droits d’auteurs et des brevets. Ces logiciels sont des programmes informatiques qui sont gratuitement distribués au public, dont la modification et la redistribution sont fortement encouragées, mais dont la vente ou la commercialisation est découragée ou même carrément prohibée. Ces caractéristiques particulières distinguent les logiciels libres des ""programmes propriétés"" traditionnels, qui se basent sur le principe que le créateur d’un programme en possède les droits de propriété et qu’il est le seul autorisé à le modifier ou le vendre, sous réserve de sa capacité à faire cession de ces droits. Les logiciels libres sont fondés sur une idéologie de coopération, qui promeut la propagation des idées et des connaissances et qui favorise ainsi la création de meilleurs logiciels. L’auteure présente les grandes caractéristiques des trois principales licences de logiciels libres, soit la ""General Public License"", la licence ""Berkeley Software Distribution"" et la ""Mozilla Public License"". Elle soutient que ces logiciels libres et les régimes normatifs qui les encadrent sont à l’origine d’un changement de paradigme au sein des régimes européens et hollandais de protection des droits d’auteurs et des brevets. La première partie de l’article analyse les régimes des droits d’auteur des trois licences de logiciels libres. L’auteure souligne que ces régimes ont été établis en se basant sur la prémisse qu’il n’y a pas de distinction significative entre les créateurs et les utilisateurs de logiciels libres. Les régimes normatifs reflètent cette situation en prévoyant un ensemble de droits et d’obligations pour les utilisateurs dans le cadre de l’utilisation, de la reproduction, de la modification et de la redistribution gratuite des logiciels libres. L’auteur explique comment ces régimes normatifs s’intègrent au sein de la législation européenne et hollandaise, entre autre au niveau du droit de propriété, du droit commercial, du droit des communications et du droit des obligations. L’auteur démontre que, de façon générale, ces régimes normatifs législatifs semblent s’être adéquatement adaptés aux nouvelles réalités posées par les règles de droits d’auteurs des logiciels libres. La seconde partie aborde la problématique du droit des brevets, tel que défini par la législation européenne et hollandaise. La plupart des utilisateurs et créateurs de logiciels libres s’opposent aux régimes de brevets traditionnels, qui limitent l’innovation et les possibilités de développement techniques. L’auteur décrit les différents régimes alternatifs de brevets offerts par les trois licences de logiciels libres. De plus, l’auteur présente l’encadrement légal pour ces nouveaux brevets, tel que défini par les législations européennes et hollandaises. Elle soutient que cet encadrement légal est inadéquat et qu’il n’est pas adapté aux besoins des utilisateurs de logiciels libres."
Resumo:
Digital Economy is one of the crucial elements promoted by the Digital Britain Report June 2009 and its Implementation Plan August 2009 in order to maintain and further the UK’s position as one of the world’s leading digital knowledge economies. Therefore, the application of Digital Technologies is high in the agenda. As pervasive digital technologies become more widely available, it becomes increasingly important to understand the legal implications of digital assets produced via digital technologies in collaborative design communication. Architects and engineers depend on intellectual property law to protect their original works. Copyright protection is automatic once a tangible medium of expression in any form of an innovative material, conforming the Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988, is created. Although copyright law provides automatic protection to all original architectural plans, the limitation is that it only protects the expression of ideas but not the ideas themselves. The purpose of this research is to explore how effective the UK’s copyright law regime is for protecting the rights and interests of architects and engineers in their works as digital assets. The UK’s copyright law is ripe for modernisation not only to protect the rights of designers but also to further UK’s position in digital economy.
Resumo:
One of the recurring themes of the debates concerning the application of genetic transformation technology has been the role of Intellectual Property Rights (IPR). This term covers both the content of patents and the confidential expertise usually related to methodology and referred to as 'Trade Secrets'. This review explains the concepts behind patent protection, and discusses the wide-ranging scope of existing patents that cover all aspects of transgenic technology, from selectable markers and novel promoters to methods of gene introduction. Although few of the patents in this area have any real commercial value, there are a small number of key patents that restrict the 'freedom to operate' of new companies seeking to exploit the methods. Over the last 20 years, these restrictions have forced extensive cross-licensing between ag-biotech companies and have been one of the driving forces behind the consolidation of these companies. Although such issues are often considered of little interest to the academic scientist working in the public sector, they are of great importance in any discussion of the role of 'public-good breeding' and of the relationship between the public and private sectors.
Resumo:
Includes bibliography
Resumo:
Includes bibliography
Resumo:
In the face of increasing globalisation, and a collision between global communication systems and local traditions, this book offers innovative trans-disciplinary analyses of the value of traditional cultural expressions (TCE) and suggests appropriate protection mechanisms for them. It combines approaches from history, philosophy, anthropology, sociology and law, and charts previously untravelled paths for developing new policy tools and legal designs that go beyond conventional copyright models. Its authors extend their reflections to a consideration of the specific features of the digital environment, which, despite enhancing the risks of misappropriation of traditional knowledge and creativity, may equally offer new opportunities for revitalising indigenous peoples' values and provide for the sustainability of TCE.This book will appeal to scholars interested in multidisciplinary analyses of the fragmentation of international law in the field of intellectual property and traditional cultural expressions. It will also be valuable reading for those working on broader governance and human rights issues.
Resumo:
In the face of increasing globalisation, there is a pressing need for innovative trans-disciplinary analyses of the value of traditional cultural expressions (TCE) that also suggest appropriate protection mechanisms for them. The book to which this preface belongs combines approaches from history, philosophy, anthropology, sociology and law, and charts previously untravelled paths for developing new policy tools and legal designs that go beyond conventional copyright models. It reflects also upon the specific features of the digital environment, which, despite enhancing the risks of misappropriation of traditional knowledge and creativity, may equally offer some opportunities for revitalising indigenous peoples' values and provide for the sustainability of TCE.
Resumo:
Using panel data of 57 countries during the period of 1995-2012, this study investigates the impact of intellectual property rights (IPR) processes on productivity growth. The IPR processes are decomposed into three stages, innovation process, commercialization process, and IPR protection process. Our results suggest that better IPR protection is directly associated with productivity improvement only in developed economies. In addition, the contribution of IPR processes on growth through foreign direct investment (FDI) appears to be very limited. Only FDI inflows in developed countries which help to create a better innovative capability lead to a higher growth. And in connection with FDI outflows, only IPR protection and commercialization processes are proven to improve productivity in the case of developing countries, particularly when the country acts as the investing country.