Journal of World Intellectual Property最新文献

After Ghana gained independence in 1957, only two Collective Management Organizations (CMOs) have ever been established to collect and distribute royalties for copyright owners in musical works—the Copyright Society of Ghana (COSGA), established in 1986, and the Ghana Music Rights Organization (GHAMRO) established in 2011, which presently operates. Before them, the UK's Performing Rights Society (PRS) served this role during Ghana's colonial rule. Using an Intellectual Legal History methodology, this paper traces the evolution of CMOs in Ghana's music industry, analyzing the transition from COSGA to GHAMRO, assessing their operational effectiveness, and drawing lessons to shape future collective management practices. This paper argues that with the peculiarities of the digital age already posing its toll, the present challenges in copyright and collective management—such as, monitoring and licensing lapses, intermittent administrative absentia coupled with the seeming dearth of organizational expertism and the gaps in legal and operational frameworks, have deep-seated origins traceable to COSGA's operations. And that, the switch to GHAMRO, appears largely nominal than transformative, with limited impact on the structural and institutional reform of collective management in Ghana. As Ghana navigates the global and digital context, it is imperative to draw upon the lessons of history to inform the trajectory of its collective management practices. This includes, among others, reassessing the legal framework and fostering institutional competence.

On 24 May 2024, Member States of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) adopted the Treaty on Intellectual Property, Genetic Resources, and Associated Traditional Knowledge. While lauded as a victory for Indigenous peoples and local communities (IPLC), in this article we critique both the Treaty and its deficiencies, as well concerns of opponents of the Treaty. In addition, this article examines various ways forward in the plight of IPLC to protect their knowledge and knowledge systems, comparing and contrasting Aotearoa New Zealand, Australia and the United States, as three jurisdictions with comparable British colonial histories, but across the spectrum in terms of how their intellectual property law doctrines meet the interests of IPLC. The article warns that the Treaty might distract from meeting the deeper interests of IPLC and also that the typical paths forward are not without their disadvantages, including potentially perpetuating colonial constructs.

Innovation and patenting are pivotal drivers of economic growth, technological advancement, and global competitiveness. However, in contemporary India, there is a pressing need for a cultural shift to fully harness the potential of innovation and patenting. This study article explores the intricate landscape of patenting in India, its challenges and opportunities, and the transformative efforts required to bolster the nation's patent ecosystem. The article begins by unravelling the complexities associated with the patenting process in India, examining the hurdles faced by innovators, such as bureaucratic red tape, lengthy approval processes, and limited awareness about intellectual property rights (IPRs). This analysis sheds light on the gaps in the existing system that hinder the efficient translation of innovative ideas into patented products or processes. Furthermore, the article provides a comprehensive overview of India's standing in the global patent landscape, evaluating the country's performance in terms of patent filings, grant rates, and the sectors driving innovation. The findings highlight the disparities between India's potential and its current position, emphasizing the untapped opportunities and the need for strategic interventions to elevate India's patenting prowess on the world stage. The study also delves into the initiatives undertaken by the Indian government to bolster the patent system, analyzing policy reforms, capacity-building programs, and financial incentives aimed at promoting innovation and streamlining the patenting process. Lastly, the article discusses the evolving legal frameworks governing intellectual property rights in India, emphasizing the significance of aligning domestic IP laws with international standards. It underscores the importance of setting clear goals and objectives to guide the development of a robust and responsive IP regime that supports India's aspirations for global leadership in innovation and patenting.

Music is a language that is spoken between the performer and the listener. Platforms like SUNO AI have enabled even non-musicians to create music and don the hats of composers by giving few prompts without understanding the language in the first place This has disrupted copyright's traditional understanding of music and infringement. It has also raised a fundamental question, is music a product? or is it a process? The Authors of this paper have analysed the quandary by creating ‘music’ using SUNO AI, and by performing infringement analysis of the created song through another AI platform MIPPIA to understand the complex terrain of infringement analysis of generative AI. Through this paper, the Authors have examined whether the training of AI platforms constitute copyright infringement especially in the case of musical copyright.

Non-fungible tokens have caused a complete revolution in the digital space regarding how one thinks of unique assets such as pieces of art, music, and digital collectables, and how one trades them. Originating from blockchain technology, NFTs first came into existence in the year 2014 on a platform known as “Counterparty.” Since then, they have grown as an influential part of the digital economy. NFT is nonfungible, each token is unique and cannot be replaced-which results in unprecedented possibilities and issues in the digital world. However, with the increasing demand for NFTs, several legal issues have emerged particularly in India, where the laws are still underdeveloped. As NFTs are representations of copyrighted works primary issues arising from NFTs are also related to Copyright. Ambiguities with NFTs are misapprehension over ownership, the challenge of managing and licensing NFTs using smart contracts, and the risk of unauthorized minting of copyrighted materials. This paper addresses these critical issues evaluates the current legal status of NFTs in India and explores their intersection with copyright laws. The focus is particularly on buyers' rights, including ownership complexities, the management of rights through licensing and assignments, and the issues around copyright infringement. The research highlights the urgent need for a legal framework for NFTs, delves into the intricacies of NFT ownership, transfers, and licensing, examines the challenges of unauthorized minting and the enforcement of buyers' rights and offers possible solutions.

This study examines the role of criminalizing copyright infringement as a deterrent and explores its potential to mitigate piracy and other copyright violations in Nigeria and South Africa. The research employs a qualitative doctrinal approach to analyze the definition of copyright, instances of infringement, evidentiary requirements, and criminal liability under the copyright laws of Nigeria and South Africa. Findings reveal that criminal sanctions have contributed to a reduction in widespread copyright infringement. The study highlights the improvements in Nigeria's Copyright Act 2022, which strengthens authors' rights and introduces enhanced criminal penalties, that align with international copyright standards, particularly in the digital space. However, South Africa's outdated Copyright Act failed to explore the opportunity offered by its 2002 amendment to address its narrow fair dealing provisions and insufficient enforcement mechanisms. There is, therefore, a need for urgent reform. Given the rapid rise in piracy, which has evolved into a lucrative industry, the paper underscores the critical role of criminal liability in deterring infringement. To ensure effective implementation, the study recommends that both Nigeria and South Africa launch nationwide awareness campaigns to educate stakeholders and the public on their rights and obligations under copyright law. Such efforts will bolster intellectual property protection, promote innovation, and strengthen the legal, social, and economic frameworks of both countries.

This article focuses on Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) systems and their impact on Intellectual Property Rights (IPR). A concise snapshot of the international legal framework will provide the coordinates to address the evolution of European and Italian regulations on the subject and to place them in the current doctrinal and jurisprudential debate. To generate high-quality results, GenAIsystems require significant amounts of operational and training data, often containing information protected by IPR. Some important US cases are laying the foundations for establishing what rights should regulate the impact of GenAI on human creativity, and while US courts contemplate where and when fair use may be permissible, European institutions have recently approved the final test of the first Regulation in the world on Artificial Intelligence (AI Act). The challenge is to create a European regulatory framework capable of standing the test of time, harmonizing national IPR and maximizing the advantages of GenAI in content creation without penalizing technological evolution or human creativity. The matter is the subject of a lively debate involving men of science and law.

The paper argues that Article 66.2 of the Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Agreement (TRIPS)—which mandates developed countries to provide incentives to their enterprises and institutions to facilitate technology transfer to Least Developed Countries (LDCs)—as presently framed, is unlikely to help LDCs build a viable technological base. Examining the history and motivations for the inclusion of Article 66.2 in TRIPS and examining its framing, the paper argues that because the process that led to its inclusion was ad hoc, the construction of the provision is riddled with ambiguities that make its implementation difficult for both developed countries and LDCs. The paper also notes that the subsequent lack of interpretative guidance and enforceability through the World Trade Organization's dispute settlement system further exacerbates the conceptual failures in the provision and limits its usefulness for LDCs.

Standards have long been considered the building blocks of innovation, and central to the standardization process are patents that protect the underlying technologies essential to a standard, also known as standard essential patents (SEPs). Since the beginning of the 90s, licensing of SEPs has attracted a significant amount of discussion involving not just the industry and academia but also courts and competition agencies. While the latter have, time and again, come up with guidelines on SEP licensing, there continue to be questions asked in terms of a global solution to disputes concerning SEPs and the determination of fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory (FRAND) rates. It is to that effect that the European Commission (EC) recently published its Draft SEP Regulation, intending to bring transparency and predictability to SEP licensing. The Draft Regulation drew instant reaction from both licensors and licensees across the information and communications technology (ICT) sector. Commentators and academics joined in, with quite a few being critical of the proposed regulation. Against the above backdrop, the present paper seeks to evaluate the Draft SEP Regulation proposed by the EC and further analyze the challenges likely to be posed concerning the implementation of the Draft Regulation. In doing so, it addresses the broader question as to whether the interventionist approach adopted by the EC through the Draft Regulation is likely to help European innovators and aid SEP licensing in Europe? The said question becomes even more relevant, given the recent release of Antimonopoly Guidelines for SEPs by China's State Administration for Market Regulation (SAMR).

The image rights of athletes and celebrities are worth considerable sums of money to celebrities, brands, and sponsors alike. The desire to have celebrities endorse goods or services has meant that celebrities can benefit financially from selling and promoting their image. However, there is no image right in UK law. This is in spite of the fact that image rights exist in the practical sense, for example, in standard sports contracts. Thus, the courts have used varying degrees of judicial creativity to provide remedy when faced with image rights invasions, namely through passing off and breach of confidence actions. However, in the absence of image rights legislation in Ontario, the courts have also employed a degree of creativity, this time creating a free standing tort of appropriation of personality, specifically designed to deal with image rights invasions. Thus, in the absence of UK Parliamentary desire to legislate for image rights, this paper analyses whether it is possible to employ a ‘common law legal transplant’ by adopting the Ontario approach within the UK common law. This would provide a specific remedy, rather than circumventing the traditional intellectual property remedies which were not designed to deal with the issues image rights invasions create.