知識產(chǎn)權(quán)法專論

前言

　　這是為研究生專門編寫的一套教學用書?！　⊙芯可欠裥枰帉懡虒W用書？研究生教學活動中采取教學用書的做法是否會束縛研究生的思維？是否會影響教師開展更加具有創(chuàng)造性的研究生教學與培養(yǎng)活動？研究生教學用書能夠在多大程度上面對并且促進研究生培養(yǎng)質(zhì)量的提高與研究生教育事業(yè)的發(fā)展？盡管這些問題尚有爭議，但我們?nèi)匀贿x擇了啟動研究生培養(yǎng)改革項目。我們相信，隨著研究生人數(shù)的擴張、專業(yè)學位的發(fā)展、研究生培養(yǎng)單位的增加，隨著知識的膨脹與研究成果的不斷更新以及因此導(dǎo)致的社會對于人才的需求標準的變化，越來越需要有一種能幫助教師與研究生及時對話、溝通信息渠道，同時為研究生展開思考與深入研究提供必要的指引的工具。　　在編寫過程中，我們形成了幾點想法，希望與同行共享：　　一、研究生教學用書依然具有教學用書的特點?！　⊙芯可虒W用書應(yīng)當是個什么樣子呢？這可能是一個仁者見仁、智者見智的問題。有的學者理解，編寫教科書，是一門學科里的學問臻于成熟、教學自成體系的顯著標志，在某些時候，也是創(chuàng)建、恢復(fù)或移植學科體系的便捷方式。本科教材就給很多人這樣的預(yù)期：教材是通說或定論的載體，是理論大廈的地基，是知識寶庫的鑰匙。我們認為，盡管研究生教育的知識深度有所不同，研究生培養(yǎng)仍需承載類似的任務(wù)，研究生教學用書仍應(yīng)具有這種功能。有鑒于此，系列用書將充分正面肯定各個專業(yè)領(lǐng)域已有的研究成果，適當闡述該學科的基礎(chǔ)理論知識體系。讀者通過研讀這些著作，有望對相關(guān)學科領(lǐng)域的研究成果特別是研究現(xiàn)狀形成一個較為便捷、全面、系統(tǒng)、權(quán)威的把握。　　二、研究生教學用書要充分體現(xiàn)研究生培養(yǎng)的特殊性，凸現(xiàn)研究生教育的特點與規(guī)律?！　⊙芯可囵B(yǎng)不同于本科生，研究生教學用書也不同于本科生教材。通常的教材編寫慣例與研究生的培養(yǎng)目標不甚兼容。有的院校堅持“百花齊放”，不統(tǒng)一使用研究生教材，有的慎重出版了具有特色的研究生教材。這些做法都值得我們借鑒。研究生教育素有專題、互動、討論、指導(dǎo)與學生自主學習相結(jié)合等的經(jīng)驗，以更加個性化的方式與創(chuàng)新思想、創(chuàng)新知識、創(chuàng)新技能培養(yǎng)目標等為核心介紹相關(guān)問題的研究方法和理論成果，強調(diào)教學內(nèi)容的創(chuàng)新價值和啟發(fā)意義。

內(nèi)容概要

本書共分九個單元，基本覆蓋了知識產(chǎn)權(quán)法的主要內(nèi)容。本書的主要特點在于，直接用英文介紹知識產(chǎn)權(quán)法相關(guān)概念及規(guī)則，并對相關(guān)問題進行闡述；每單元后都附有幾個案例，用于教學及延伸閱讀，有利于學生運用所學知識實際分析問題和鍛煉書面英語能力。

書籍目錄

Unit 1 General Introduction 1 Unit 2 Balance of Interest 26 　Broadcast Music, Inc. , et al. , Petitioners, v. Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc. , et al. American Society of Composers, 　Authors and Publishers, et al. Petitioners, v. Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc. , et al 26 　Dyson Ltd v. Registrar of Trade Marks 56 Unit 3 Parallel Importation 67 　Quality King Distributors Inc. v. L'anza Research International Inc 67 　Boehringer Ingelheim KG, Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma KG and Swingward Ltd, and between Boehringer Ingelheim KG, Boehringer 　Ingelheim Pharma KG and Dowelhurst Ltd, and between Glaxo Group Ltd and Swingward Ltd, and between Boehringer Ingelheim KG, 　Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma KG and Dowelhurst Ltd, and between Glaxo Group Ltd, The Wellcome Foundation Ltd and Dowelhurst 　Ltd, and between SmithKline Beecham plc, Beecham Group plc, SmithKline & French Laboratories Ltd and Dowelhurst Ltd and 　between Eli Lilly and Co. and Dowelhurst Ltd 82 Unit 4 Patentability 99 　State Street Bank & Trust Co. v. Signature Financial Group, Inc 99 　Unit 5 Trademarkability 112 　Koninklijke Philips Electronics NV v. Remington Consumer Products Ltd 112 Unit 6 Copyrightability 130 　Feist Publications, Inc. v. Rural Telephone Service Company, Inc 130 Unit 7 Domain name 148 　Educational Testing Service v. TOEFL t48 　Educational Testing Service (ETS) v. Morrison Media LLC 157 Unit 8 Liability of Internet Service Providers 165 　Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc. , et al. , Petitioners v. Grokster, Ltd. , et al 165 　Cooper v. Universal Music Australia Pty Ltd 199 　Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studios, Inc 245 Unit 9 Geographic Indication 254 　Beringer Blass Wine Estates Ltd v. Geographical Indications Committee 254 　References 293

章節(jié)摘錄

　　Preliminary Observations　　10.By its questions，the national court seeks to obtain clarification on a number　of aspects of the Court's case-law relating to the repackaging of trade-marked　pharmaceutical products by parallel importers without authorisation from the trade　mark proprietor.　　11.Accordingly，the essential elements of that case-law must be recalled.　　12.First of all，it is clear from the Court’S case-law，in particular from Case　102／77 Hoffmann-La Roche[1978]ECR 1 139，paragraphs 6 and 7，that：-Article 30 EC allows derogations from the fundamental principle of the free　movement of goods between Member States only to the extent to which such　derogations are justified in order to safeguard the rights which constitute the specific　subject·matter of the industrial property concerned；-in that context，account must be taken of the essential function of the trade　mark，which is to guarantee to the consumer or end user the identity of the trade-　marked product'S origin by enabling him to distinguish it without any risk of confusion　from products of different origin；　-that guarantee of origin means that the.consumer or end user can be certain　that a trade·-marked product offered to him has not been SUbject at a previous stage of　marketing to interference by a third party，without the authorisation of the trade mark　proprietor，in such a way as to affect the original condition of the product.　　13.The right attributed to a trade mark proprietor of preventing any use of the　trade mark which is likely to impair the guarantee of origin SO understood is therefore　part of the specific SUbject-matter of the trade mark rights.It is therefore justifiable　under the first sentence of Article 30 EC to recognise that the proprietor of a trade　mark is entitled to prevent an importer of a trade-marked product，following　repackaging of that product，from affixing the trade mark to the new packaging　without the authorisation of the proprietor（Hoffmann-La Roche，paragraphs 7 and　8）.　　……

圖書封面

圖書標簽Tags

無

評論、評分、閱讀與下載

---

    知識產(chǎn)權(quán)法專論 PDF格式下載

---