FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2313243396> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2313243396 endingPage "671" @default.
• W2313243396 startingPage "671" @default.
• W2313243396 abstract "When I realised that I would be writing an editorial in the week in which the Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ) was delivering its judgment in a vigorously contested trade mark infringement suit brought by the world’s largest cosmetics and beauty products company against the world’s largest internet auction and sales host, I at first assumed that I would be writing a commentary on the substantive law, explaining how it would affect that relative positions of trade mark owners, sellers of genuine and infringing goods bearing their trade marks, internet service providers and consumers. As it turns out, there is no real need to do so. The judgment reiterated both the existence of a privileged immunity from liability of internet service suppliers and the conditions which they must fulfil in order to enjoy that immunity; it confirmed the jurisprudence relating to trade mark infringement which it has articulated in a series of decisions stretching back to its Google France rulings in March 2010 (16 months is a long time in internet law; this ruling now seems to belong to the distant past); it also left a set of answers shorter and easier to understand than the raft of questions on which it was asked to give its preliminary ruling. The really interesting thing about this case is not the ruling but the circumstances in which businesses trade. Non-European readers of this journal may need a short explanation of the role of the ECJ in the field of intellectual property. European Union law on trade marks, copyright, database rights, designs and plant varieties is largely harmonized between the 27 formerly autonomous countries of the Union. To ensure consistency as between those countries in the application of harmonized IP rules, national courts may refer questions regarding ambiguities and uncertainties inherent in those rules to the ECJ for a preliminary ruling. Once that ruling is given, the national court which referred the questions now has its answers and can get on with judging the dispute before it. Additionally, in the case of pan-European rights such as the Community trade mark and registered Community designs, the ECJ serves as a top-tier court of appeal: this function is exercised in respect of both procedural and substantive law. As a system, the referral of questions for a response works well in theory. ECJ rulings are binding on all national courts, inferior Community courts and tribunals. They ensure that, as far as possible, the same rules are interpreted and therefore applied consistently across a vast, multilingual and multicultural single market. But does the theory work in practice? The reference of questions for preliminary rulings is not a novel notion, dating back to the ECJ’s foundation in 1952. In that year, postwar Europe was still striving to rebuild shattered local and national economies. The creation of a single market consisting of even the original six countries—only three of which were of any real size—was an almost unimaginably ambitious goal, a far cry from the global markets for goods and services we take for granted today. Never mind computers: most households didn’t even have a telephone or a refrigerator. It was a slow-moving world by modern standards. It was a world in which the interruption of litigation for around two years (the average time now taken for a preliminary ruling to be delivered) was, if not welcomed, certainly tolerated. Fast-forward to 2011 and globalisation—though still far from uniform—has become the accepted means of implementing business strategies, not least through the internet. When enterprises like L’Oreal and eBay trade, their daily turnover is vast (at the outbreak of their dispute, L’Oreal’s annual sales were a little short of US$ 20 billion; those of eBay were ‘only’ US$ 7.7 billion). What is more, this litigation was viewed by many as a test case since L’Oreal was by no means the only company that considered eBay was not taking adequate care to avoid infringing sales, and eBay is certainly not the only company hosting online sales, as the emergence and rapid growth of Alibaba has shown. When all the other questions are answered, one remains. Should the ECJ’s procedures be amended to provide a truly rapid response when legal issues arise, or is it better to let the parties adjust their commercial activities to lessen the risk of disaster in a market in which, two years down the line, they may be either the substantial winners or the losers in the wake of a ruling which they can seek to influence but cannot control? Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, 2011, Vol. 6, No. 10 EDITORIAL 671" @default.
• W2313243396 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2313243396 creator A5030309662 @default.
• W2313243396 date "2011-09-22" @default.
• W2313243396 modified "2023-09-25" @default.
• W2313243396 title "L'Oreal, eBay and tyranny of the unknown" @default.
• W2313243396 doi "https://doi.org/10.1093/jiplp/jpr130" @default.
• W2313243396 hasPublicationYear "2011" @default.
• W2313243396 type Work @default.
• W2313243396 sameAs 2313243396 @default.
• W2313243396 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W2313243396 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2313243396 hasAuthorship W2313243396A5030309662 @default.
• W2313243396 hasBestOaLocation W23132433961 @default.
• W2313243396 hasConcept C10138342 @default.
• W2313243396 hasConcept C110875604 @default.
• W2313243396 hasConcept C136764020 @default.
• W2313243396 hasConcept C139621336 @default.
• W2313243396 hasConcept C144133560 @default.
• W2313243396 hasConcept C155202549 @default.
• W2313243396 hasConcept C162324750 @default.
• W2313243396 hasConcept C162853370 @default.
• W2313243396 hasConcept C170706310 @default.
• W2313243396 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W2313243396 hasConcept C182306322 @default.
• W2313243396 hasConcept C190253527 @default.
• W2313243396 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W2313243396 hasConcept C2777855027 @default.
• W2313243396 hasConcept C2780378061 @default.
• W2313243396 hasConcept C2910001868 @default.
• W2313243396 hasConcept C34974158 @default.
• W2313243396 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W2313243396 hasConcept C71043370 @default.
• W2313243396 hasConceptScore W2313243396C10138342 @default.
• W2313243396 hasConceptScore W2313243396C110875604 @default.
• W2313243396 hasConceptScore W2313243396C136764020 @default.
• W2313243396 hasConceptScore W2313243396C139621336 @default.
• W2313243396 hasConceptScore W2313243396C144133560 @default.
• W2313243396 hasConceptScore W2313243396C155202549 @default.
• W2313243396 hasConceptScore W2313243396C162324750 @default.
• W2313243396 hasConceptScore W2313243396C162853370 @default.
• W2313243396 hasConceptScore W2313243396C170706310 @default.
• W2313243396 hasConceptScore W2313243396C17744445 @default.
• W2313243396 hasConceptScore W2313243396C182306322 @default.
• W2313243396 hasConceptScore W2313243396C190253527 @default.
• W2313243396 hasConceptScore W2313243396C199539241 @default.
• W2313243396 hasConceptScore W2313243396C2777855027 @default.
• W2313243396 hasConceptScore W2313243396C2780378061 @default.
• W2313243396 hasConceptScore W2313243396C2910001868 @default.
• W2313243396 hasConceptScore W2313243396C34974158 @default.
• W2313243396 hasConceptScore W2313243396C41008148 @default.
• W2313243396 hasConceptScore W2313243396C71043370 @default.
• W2313243396 hasIssue "10" @default.
• W2313243396 hasLocation W23132433961 @default.
• W2313243396 hasOpenAccess W2313243396 @default.
• W2313243396 hasPrimaryLocation W23132433961 @default.
• W2313243396 hasRelatedWork W138396914 @default.
• W2313243396 hasRelatedWork W1482675703 @default.
• W2313243396 hasRelatedWork W1769621541 @default.
• W2313243396 hasRelatedWork W1969342376 @default.
• W2313243396 hasRelatedWork W2027022956 @default.
• W2313243396 hasRelatedWork W2086942497 @default.
• W2313243396 hasRelatedWork W2103697316 @default.
• W2313243396 hasRelatedWork W2132300907 @default.
• W2313243396 hasRelatedWork W2151290063 @default.
• W2313243396 hasRelatedWork W2158240449 @default.
• W2313243396 hasRelatedWork W2528151933 @default.
• W2313243396 hasRelatedWork W2925350393 @default.
• W2313243396 hasRelatedWork W2945493775 @default.
• W2313243396 hasRelatedWork W2945638276 @default.
• W2313243396 hasRelatedWork W3124170730 @default.
• W2313243396 hasRelatedWork W3198956079 @default.
• W2313243396 hasRelatedWork W75515048 @default.
• W2313243396 hasRelatedWork W87589055 @default.
• W2313243396 hasRelatedWork W9814790 @default.
• W2313243396 hasRelatedWork W2126826026 @default.
• W2313243396 hasVolume "6" @default.
• W2313243396 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2313243396 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2313243396 magId "2313243396" @default.
• W2313243396 workType "article" @default.