Shokat Shayesteh; Mohammad Hbibi Majandeh
Abstract
If there is a foreign factor in intellectual property disputes, then the matter of choice-of-court and choice-of-law will be arisen. The most important question in the parties’ minds is that whether they can choose the competent court and applicable law by agreement and also prevent from the complicated ...
Read More
If there is a foreign factor in intellectual property disputes, then the matter of choice-of-court and choice-of-law will be arisen. The most important question in the parties’ minds is that whether they can choose the competent court and applicable law by agreement and also prevent from the complicated and vague process of the forum interference. The freedom of choice is accepted as a principle in the determination of competent court and applicable law in the intellectual property disputes and there are few exceptions. According to all international documents the choice-of-court agreements will cause exclusive jurisdiction unless otherwise is specified. Those agreements shall govern all rules except those of subject-matter jurisdiction. Choice of law is valid in IP contracts but there are hesitations over the ownership and infringement of IP rights. According to the most acceptable opinion, choice of law on the ownership of intellectual property including existence, validity, duration, infringement, assignment, … is not valid because of imperative nature of regulations over those subjects. Also choice of law on infringement can be enforceable only after the commitment of infringing act.
Fatemeh alsadat Iravan mohajeri; Morteza Nassiri; Mahmoud Sadeghi
Abstract
In the past, the protection of copyright was minimal, and the infringement of the copyright was regarded only as a tort. Conflict of law issues were resolved solely by the territorial approach to intellectual property rights and in accordance with the principle of national treatment. With the advent ...
Read More
In the past, the protection of copyright was minimal, and the infringement of the copyright was regarded only as a tort. Conflict of law issues were resolved solely by the territorial approach to intellectual property rights and in accordance with the principle of national treatment. With the advent of the Internet, the availability and use of copyright were uncontrollably accelerated and facilitated, and the possibility of using cross-border copyright as well as the entry of the foreign element caused the complexity of these claims.The ubiquitous infringment of copy right is the result of broadcasting information on the internet and indeed in world that there is no solution for it in existing documents because of its novelty.The two fundamental issues of the governing law and the competent court in this article are aimed at responding to the efficiency or ineffectiveness of the common conflict of law system by studying the provisions of the Berne Convention as the most important document, the Brussels Convention and the ALI and the CLIP principles (as non-binding principles), and it was concluded that The traditional system of conflict of laws is not enough for this purpose and doesn’t respond the copyright lawsuits and so we requires a special conflict of law system.
