首页 > 最新文献

Journal of World Intellectual Property最新文献

英文 中文
Copyright in the age of artificial intelligence: Navigating access to algorithmic training materials and the three-step test for text and data mining in Nigeria 人工智能时代的版权:在尼日利亚导航获取算法培训材料和文本和数据挖掘的三步测试
IF 0.7 Q2 LAW Pub Date : 2024-12-25 DOI: 10.1111/jwip.12342
Morris K. Odeh

Over the past decade, the Nigerian government has sought to leverage Artificial Intelligence (AI) to drive socio-economic transformation and improve the welfare of its citizenry. Recent initiatives, such as the establishment of the National Centre for AI and Robotics (NCAIR) and the development of several strategic AI policies, highlight the country's commitment to this objective. This article explores the often-overlooked issue of how the Nigeria's copyright regime hinders these initiatives, revealing that the regime permits only fair dealing and the transient or incidental reproductions of copyrighted materials for limited technological purposes. This study argues that this regime is unduly restrictive for algorithmic training and risks stifling AI innovation and the development of machine-learning models in Nigeria. It recommends adopting a bespoke text and data mining (TDM) exception tailored to Nigeria's needs, allowing the use of copyrighted works for training AI models and machine learning activities within defined limits. Drawing on comparative analyses of copyright frameworks in jurisdictions such as Singapore, Japan, the United Kingdom, and the European Union, this study demonstrates that the proposed TDM exception aligns with the three-step test under international copyright conventions. For instance, the exception is limited to specific users and types of reproductions, applies only to internalized and transformative reproductions, and avoids traditional methods of exploiting copyrighted works that prejudice the legitimate interests of rightsholders. The ultimate goal of this exception is to recalibrate Nigeria's copyright system to justly balance AI innovation with authors' rights, aligning it with foundational principles of the international copyright system in an era of rapid technological advancements.

在过去的十年中,尼日利亚政府一直试图利用人工智能(AI)来推动社会经济转型,提高公民的福利。最近的举措,如建立国家人工智能和机器人中心(NCAIR)和制定几项人工智能战略政策,突显了该国对这一目标的承诺。本文探讨奈及利亚的版权制度如何阻碍这些倡议,这个经常被忽略的问题,揭示了该制度只允许公平交易,以及为有限的技术目的暂时或偶然复制受版权保护的材料。本研究认为,这一制度对算法训练有过度限制,有可能扼杀尼日利亚的人工智能创新和机器学习模型的发展。它建议采用根据尼日利亚需求定制的文本和数据挖掘(TDM)例外,允许在规定的范围内使用受版权保护的作品来训练人工智能模型和机器学习活动。通过对新加坡、日本、英国和欧盟等司法管辖区的版权框架进行比较分析,本研究表明,拟议的TDM例外符合国际版权公约的三步检验。例如,该例外仅限于特定用户和复制类型,仅适用于内部化和变革性复制,并避免使用损害权利持有人合法利益的版权作品的传统方法。这一例外的最终目标是重新调整尼日利亚的版权制度,以公正地平衡人工智能创新与作者的权利,使其与技术快速进步时代国际版权制度的基本原则保持一致。
{"title":"Copyright in the age of artificial intelligence: Navigating access to algorithmic training materials and the three-step test for text and data mining in Nigeria","authors":"Morris K. Odeh","doi":"10.1111/jwip.12342","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jwip.12342","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Over the past decade, the Nigerian government has sought to leverage Artificial Intelligence (AI) to drive socio-economic transformation and improve the welfare of its citizenry. Recent initiatives, such as the establishment of the National Centre for AI and Robotics (NCAIR) and the development of several strategic AI policies, highlight the country's commitment to this objective. This article explores the often-overlooked issue of how the Nigeria's copyright regime hinders these initiatives, revealing that the regime permits only fair dealing and the transient or incidental reproductions of copyrighted materials for limited technological purposes. This study argues that this regime is unduly restrictive for algorithmic training and risks stifling AI innovation and the development of machine-learning models in Nigeria. It recommends adopting a bespoke text and data mining (TDM) exception tailored to Nigeria's needs, allowing the use of copyrighted works for training AI models and machine learning activities within defined limits. Drawing on comparative analyses of copyright frameworks in jurisdictions such as Singapore, Japan, the United Kingdom, and the European Union, this study demonstrates that the proposed TDM exception aligns with the three-step test under international copyright conventions. For instance, the exception is limited to specific users and types of reproductions, applies only to internalized and transformative reproductions, and avoids traditional methods of exploiting copyrighted works that prejudice the legitimate interests of rightsholders. The ultimate goal of this exception is to recalibrate Nigeria's copyright system to justly balance AI innovation with authors' rights, aligning it with foundational principles of the international copyright system in an era of rapid technological advancements.</p>","PeriodicalId":54129,"journal":{"name":"Journal of World Intellectual Property","volume":"28 2","pages":"428-470"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2024-12-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jwip.12342","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144615496","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
The elephant in the room of EU copyright originality: Time to unpack and harmonize the essential requirement of copyright 欧盟版权原创性的隐忧:是时候拆解和协调版权的本质要求了
IF 0.7 Q2 LAW Pub Date : 2024-12-25 DOI: 10.1111/jwip.12343
Vincenzo Iaia

The dividing line between the artistic and literary heritage privatized by copyright and the public domain depends on just one word which is completely alien to the traditional legal jargon: originality. As if it were not enough the essential requirement of copyright is highly polysemic, being its meaning also sensitive to the specific temporal and geographical context. For instance, the same interior design for make-up stores has been reputed original in Italy but not in France and Portugal. The European legislator has deeply regulated several aspects of copyright, but paradoxically it is laconic on the fundamental element triggering the exclusive right: a work is original if it reflects the author's own intellectual creation. Although the CJEU played a pivotal role in filling this gap through a string of decisions, national judges are still uncertain on the relevant factors for the originality assessment, as witnessed by three new references for preliminary rulings. The different approaches to the originality requirement could be problematic for the well-functioning of the artistic and cultural markets considering the potential heterogeneous legal status of the same creation, which might be under copyright protection in one Member State while in the public domain in another one. This could prejudice rights clearance processes, including the latest one regarding text and data mining for machine learning purposes advocated by a line of scholars. By elaborating on settled European and national case-law, this paper extracts some metrics for ensuring legal certainty on the interpretation of the originality requirement. These coordinates could be incorporated in a wider European intervention harmonizing copyright law, keen to the Wittem Group project. Finally, it argues that the idea of introducing copyright formalities would also ensure more legal certainty on the status of intellectual works since the computational analysis of voluntary registrations could become a useful tool for predicting the originality of future works.

由版权私有化的艺术和文学遗产与公共领域之间的分界线仅取决于一个与传统法律术语完全陌生的词:独创性。似乎这还不够,版权的本质要求是高度多义性的,因为它的含义也对特定的时间和地理背景敏感。例如,化妆品店的室内设计在意大利被认为是原创的,但在法国和葡萄牙却不是。欧洲立法者对版权的几个方面进行了深入的监管,但矛盾的是,它对触发专有权的基本要素却很简洁:如果一件作品反映了作者自己的智力创造,那么它就是原创的。虽然欧洲法院通过一系列裁决在填补这一空白方面发挥了关键作用,但各国法官对原创性评估的有关因素仍然不确定,三个新的初步裁决参考就是明证。考虑到同一创作可能具有不同的法律地位,对原创性要求采取不同的做法可能会对艺术和文化市场的良好运作造成问题,这些创作可能在一个会员国受到版权保护,而在另一个会员国则属于公共领域。这可能会影响权利清除过程,包括最近由一系列学者倡导的关于机器学习目的的文本和数据挖掘的过程。本文通过对欧洲和各国判例法的阐述,提炼出一些确保原创性要求解释的法律确定性的指标。这些协调可以被纳入一个更广泛的欧洲干预协调版权法,热衷于Wittem集团的项目。最后,它认为,引入版权手续的想法也将确保对智力作品的地位有更多的法律确定性,因为自愿登记的计算分析可以成为预测未来作品独创性的有用工具。
{"title":"The elephant in the room of EU copyright originality: Time to unpack and harmonize the essential requirement of copyright","authors":"Vincenzo Iaia","doi":"10.1111/jwip.12343","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jwip.12343","url":null,"abstract":"<p>The dividing line between the artistic and literary heritage privatized by copyright and the public domain depends on just one word which is completely alien to the traditional legal jargon: originality. As if it were not enough the essential requirement of copyright is highly polysemic, being its meaning also sensitive to the specific temporal and geographical context. For instance, the same interior design for make-up stores has been reputed original in Italy but not in France and Portugal. The European legislator has deeply regulated several aspects of copyright, but paradoxically it is laconic on the fundamental element triggering the exclusive right: a work is original if it reflects the author's own intellectual creation. Although the CJEU played a pivotal role in filling this gap through a string of decisions, national judges are still uncertain on the relevant factors for the originality assessment, as witnessed by three new references for preliminary rulings. The different approaches to the originality requirement could be problematic for the well-functioning of the artistic and cultural markets considering the potential heterogeneous legal status of the same creation, which might be under copyright protection in one Member State while in the public domain in another one. This could prejudice rights clearance processes, including the latest one regarding text and data mining for machine learning purposes advocated by a line of scholars. By elaborating on settled European and national case-law, this paper extracts some metrics for ensuring legal certainty on the interpretation of the originality requirement. These coordinates could be incorporated in a wider European intervention harmonizing copyright law, keen to the Wittem Group project. Finally, it argues that the idea of introducing copyright formalities would also ensure more legal certainty on the status of intellectual works since the computational analysis of voluntary registrations could become a useful tool for predicting the originality of future works.</p>","PeriodicalId":54129,"journal":{"name":"Journal of World Intellectual Property","volume":"28 2","pages":"471-490"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2024-12-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jwip.12343","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144615498","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
The role of Intellectual Property as a tool for business development in the informal economy of Ghana 知识产权在加纳非正式经济中作为商业发展工具的作用
IF 0.7 Q2 LAW Pub Date : 2024-12-22 DOI: 10.1111/jwip.12338
Nancy Ama Sackey, Eunice Adu Boahen, Emmanuel Sackey

Innovation has become one of the main drivers of economic growth and development making its protection the focus of contemporary economic strategies. Intellectual Property (IP) protects and promotes innovation. The IP system strives to create an environment where creativity and innovation thrive by finding a suitable equilibrium between the interests of innovators and the broader public interest. Although IP has been shown to play a particularly important role in formal-economy innovation, its role in the informal economy (IE) has been less explored. This study therefore sought to interrogate the utilisation of IP in the IE of Ghana and the role it plays in business development and competitiveness. This was achieved by determining innovative capacity, IP knowledge uptake/awareness, utilisation and challenges as well as discussing the policy approaches and institutional mechanisms necessary to promote growth and development of the IE for national gain. A qualitative research design was adopted and using the purposive sampling method, a sample of 100 respondents from two metropolitan districts in Ghana was selected. The findings revealed that 72% of the informal businesses studied had developed new products, processes or methods. Although 53% of the respondents had heard of or were conscious of the existence of some words relating to IP such as ‘copyright’ and ‘trademarks’, the respondents had little practical understanding of IP as a subject matter relevant for business. Only 19% out of the total number of respondents had acquired formal IP rights while most of the businesses employed other appropriation mechanisms outside of the use of conventional IP tools in protecting knowledge and innovation. Challenges to IP acquisition identified include financial constraints, lack of appreciation for the value of IP for business and the difficulty in meeting registration requirements. The study concluded that the IE is innovative and the utilisation of various IP tools such as trademarks, industrial designs, copyright and utility models were identified to be desirable to be employed in the pursuit for business development. It is recommended that decision making bodies such as the national IP office must establish effective policies aimed at promoting awareness and utilisation of IP rights in the IE. The government should also institute incentives such as cost waivers that are needed to stimulate innovation and creativity and create an enabling environment that supports the acquisition of IP for development and growth of the IE.

创新已成为经济增长和发展的主要动力之一,对创新的保护成为当代经济战略的重点。知识产权保护和促进创新。知识产权制度通过在创新者的利益和更广泛的公众利益之间找到适当的平衡,努力创造一个创造和创新蓬勃发展的环境。虽然知识产权已被证明在正规经济创新中发挥着特别重要的作用,但它在非正规经济(IE)中的作用却很少被探索。因此,本研究试图询问加纳工业企业中知识产权的利用情况及其在商业发展和竞争力中所起的作用。这是通过确定创新能力、知识产权知识的吸收/意识、利用和挑战,以及讨论促进工业工业增长和发展以实现国家利益所需的政策方法和体制机制来实现的。采用定性研究设计,并使用有目的的抽样方法,从加纳两个大都市区选出100名受访者的样本。调查结果显示,被调查的非正式企业中有72%开发了新产品、新流程或新方法。虽然53%的受访者听说过或意识到一些与知识产权有关的词汇,如“版权”和“商标”,但受访者对知识产权作为与商业相关的主题几乎没有实际的了解。只有19%的受访者获得了正式的知识产权,而大多数企业在保护知识和创新方面采用了传统知识产权工具之外的其他占有机制。已确定的获取知识产权的挑战包括财政限制、对知识产权的商业价值缺乏认识以及难以满足注册要求。研究的结论是,工业工程具有创新精神,而利用各种知识产权工具,例如商标、工业设计、版权和实用新型,是推动业务发展的理想选择。建议诸如国家知识产权局之类的决策机构必须制定有效的政策,旨在提高对工业领域知识产权的认识和利用。政府还应制定诸如成本减免等激励措施,以刺激创新和创造力,并创造一个有利的环境,支持获取知识产权以促进工业企业的发展和增长。
{"title":"The role of Intellectual Property as a tool for business development in the informal economy of Ghana","authors":"Nancy Ama Sackey,&nbsp;Eunice Adu Boahen,&nbsp;Emmanuel Sackey","doi":"10.1111/jwip.12338","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jwip.12338","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Innovation has become one of the main drivers of economic growth and development making its protection the focus of contemporary economic strategies. Intellectual Property (IP) protects and promotes innovation. The IP system strives to create an environment where creativity and innovation thrive by finding a suitable equilibrium between the interests of innovators and the broader public interest. Although IP has been shown to play a particularly important role in formal-economy innovation, its role in the informal economy (IE) has been less explored. This study therefore sought to interrogate the utilisation of IP in the IE of Ghana and the role it plays in business development and competitiveness. This was achieved by determining innovative capacity, IP knowledge uptake/awareness, utilisation and challenges as well as discussing the policy approaches and institutional mechanisms necessary to promote growth and development of the IE for national gain. A qualitative research design was adopted and using the purposive sampling method, a sample of 100 respondents from two metropolitan districts in Ghana was selected. The findings revealed that 72% of the informal businesses studied had developed new products, processes or methods. Although 53% of the respondents had heard of or were conscious of the existence of some words relating to IP such as ‘copyright’ and ‘trademarks’, the respondents had little practical understanding of IP as a subject matter relevant for business. Only 19% out of the total number of respondents had acquired formal IP rights while most of the businesses employed other appropriation mechanisms outside of the use of conventional IP tools in protecting knowledge and innovation. Challenges to IP acquisition identified include financial constraints, lack of appreciation for the value of IP for business and the difficulty in meeting registration requirements. The study concluded that the IE is innovative and the utilisation of various IP tools such as trademarks, industrial designs, copyright and utility models were identified to be desirable to be employed in the pursuit for business development. It is recommended that decision making bodies such as the national IP office must establish effective policies aimed at promoting awareness and utilisation of IP rights in the IE. The government should also institute incentives such as cost waivers that are needed to stimulate innovation and creativity and create an enabling environment that supports the acquisition of IP for development and growth of the IE.</p>","PeriodicalId":54129,"journal":{"name":"Journal of World Intellectual Property","volume":"28 2","pages":"406-427"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2024-12-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144615278","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Revisiting the public versus private debate on model statutes for collective copyright management organisations in China 重新审视中国集体版权管理组织示范法规的公共与私人辩论
IF 0.7 Q2 LAW Pub Date : 2024-12-20 DOI: 10.1111/jwip.12340
Jie Liu

China received the collective copyright management concept during a period of economic transition and constructed collective management organisations (CMOs) as social organisations exhibiting a discernible inclination towards a public administrative objective rather than one concerned with market considerations. Consequently, CMOs in China have manifested behavioural patterns distinct from those of other private entities. This paper revisits the problem of CMOs in China with a focus on organisational structure issues. The contention posited in this paper is that the correct focal point for current debate should not concern the feasibility of multiple CMOs coexisting, but rather should revolve around the essential discussion between public versus private legal model statutes for CMOs in China, and thereafter on the regulatory architecture governing the coexistence of CMOs alongside alternative independent rights-clearing entities.

中国在经济转型期间接受了集体版权管理的概念,并将集体管理组织(cmo)构建为社会组织,表现出明显的公共行政目标倾向,而不是关注市场因素。因此,中国的cmo表现出不同于其他私营实体的行为模式。本文以组织结构问题为重点,重新审视了中国的首席营销官问题。本文提出的论点是,当前辩论的正确焦点不应关注多个cmo共存的可行性,而应围绕中国cmo的公共与私人法律模式法规之间的基本讨论,以及此后管理cmo与其他独立权利清算实体共存的监管架构。
{"title":"Revisiting the public versus private debate on model statutes for collective copyright management organisations in China","authors":"Jie Liu","doi":"10.1111/jwip.12340","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jwip.12340","url":null,"abstract":"<p>China received the collective copyright management concept during a period of economic transition and constructed collective management organisations (CMOs) as social organisations exhibiting a discernible inclination towards a public administrative objective rather than one concerned with market considerations. Consequently, CMOs in China have manifested behavioural patterns distinct from those of other private entities. This paper revisits the problem of CMOs in China with a focus on organisational structure issues. The contention posited in this paper is that the correct focal point for current debate should not concern the feasibility of multiple CMOs coexisting, but rather should revolve around the essential discussion between public versus private legal model statutes for CMOs in China, and thereafter on the regulatory architecture governing the coexistence of CMOs alongside alternative independent rights-clearing entities.</p>","PeriodicalId":54129,"journal":{"name":"Journal of World Intellectual Property","volume":"28 2","pages":"385-405"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2024-12-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144615464","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
An analysis of green trademarks vis-à-vis Indian trademark law 绿色商标与-à-vis印度商标法之分析
IF 0.7 Q2 LAW Pub Date : 2024-12-11 DOI: 10.1111/jwip.12337
Nikhil Mishra, Digvijay Singh

Businesses have a huge impact on the environment in the present economic era. The market is full of noneco-friendly products. In the epic struggle between the profit-oriented mode of production and environmental protection, green branding acts as a ray of hope for change, satisfying the needs and objectives of both, the capitalists as well as the environment. Green branding is a method to demonstrate the products as eco-friendly through a green trademark which implies that the mode of production, constituents, packaging, final output and/or the disposing of the products is eco-friendly. However, there is no evidence suggesting recognition of green trademarks across the jurisdictions. Authors argue that the global challenge of environmental protection cannot be neglected by the reason of varying laws or their absence at all. Further, there has been continuous efforts by businesses to harness the profit by marketing numerous noneco-friendly products as eco-friendly by misutilising the concept of green branding in absence of any stringent laws constituting the greenwashing. Such practices must be curtailed to protect consumers from misleading information while promoting genuine environmental responsibility and encouraging sustainable business practices. This article analyses the statutory standing of green trademarks in India and the existing and potential measures, including legislative changes, which are and can be potentially taken for recognition, registration and promotion of green trademarks and to curb any existing or potential misutilisation of the same.

在当今经济时代,企业对环境有着巨大的影响。市场上到处都是不环保的产品。在以利润为导向的生产方式与环境保护之间的史诗般的斗争中,绿色品牌作为改变的希望之光,满足了资本家和环境双方的需求和目标。绿色品牌是一种通过绿色商标来证明产品是环保的方法,这意味着产品的生产方式、成分、包装、最终产出和/或处置都是环保的。然而,没有证据表明在各个司法管辖区都承认绿色商标。作者认为,环境保护的全球挑战不能因为法律的不同或根本没有法律而被忽视。此外,在没有任何严格的法律构成“漂绿”的情况下,企业一直在努力利用绿色品牌的概念,通过将许多非环保产品营销为环保产品,从而利用利润。必须限制这种做法,以保护消费者不受误导信息的影响,同时促进真正的环境责任和鼓励可持续的商业做法。本文分析了印度绿色商标的法定地位,以及现有的和潜在的措施,包括立法改革,这些措施是和可以潜在地采取,以承认,注册和推广绿色商标,并遏制任何现有的或潜在的滥用。
{"title":"An analysis of green trademarks vis-à-vis Indian trademark law","authors":"Nikhil Mishra,&nbsp;Digvijay Singh","doi":"10.1111/jwip.12337","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jwip.12337","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Businesses have a huge impact on the environment in the present economic era. The market is full of noneco-friendly products. In the epic struggle between the profit-oriented mode of production and environmental protection, green branding acts as a ray of hope for change, satisfying the needs and objectives of both, the capitalists as well as the environment. Green branding is a method to demonstrate the products as eco-friendly through a green trademark which implies that the mode of production, constituents, packaging, final output and/or the disposing of the products is eco-friendly. However, there is no evidence suggesting recognition of green trademarks across the jurisdictions. Authors argue that the global challenge of environmental protection cannot be neglected by the reason of varying laws or their absence at all. Further, there has been continuous efforts by businesses to harness the profit by marketing numerous noneco-friendly products as eco-friendly by misutilising the concept of green branding in absence of any stringent laws constituting the greenwashing. Such practices must be curtailed to protect consumers from misleading information while promoting genuine environmental responsibility and encouraging sustainable business practices. This article analyses the statutory standing of green trademarks in India and the existing and potential measures, including legislative changes, which are and can be potentially taken for recognition, registration and promotion of green trademarks and to curb any existing or potential misutilisation of the same.</p>","PeriodicalId":54129,"journal":{"name":"Journal of World Intellectual Property","volume":"28 2","pages":"375-384"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2024-12-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144615419","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Japan's legal framework for copyright protection of AI-generated works: A comparative law analysis exploring the possibility of Japan's adoption of the UK legislative approach 日本人工智能作品版权保护的法律框架:以比较法分析探讨日本采用英国立法方法的可能性
IF 0.7 Q2 LAW Pub Date : 2024-11-30 DOI: 10.1111/jwip.12333
Seiya S. Takeuchi

This paper examines the legal policy for copyright protection of artificial intelligence (AI) generated-works that are autonomously created by AI models without a human's creative process in Japan from the perspective of a comparative law analysis between Japan and the United Kingdom. In summary, this paper concludes that the legal policy-making approach for copyright protection of AI-generated works within the framework of Japanese copyright law should involve: (a) addressing concerns about legal consistency through careful selection of a legislative measure; and, therefore, (b) directing the focus of legal policy discussions towards considerations of legal eligibility, moving beyond discussions on legal consistency. This entails an analysis of the strict necessity for copyright protection of AI-generated works within the prevailing social environment in Japan. First, the focal point of the legal eligibility discussions should focus on a possible loss of market demand for human creations and necessity of social defence to human creations (social defence function for human creations logic) in Japan. In addition, based on the social incentive protection theory, it should be emphasised that the second purpose of incorporation of copyright protection for AI-generated works under Japanese copyright law is to promote future Japanese industry's investment in AI technologies (AI industry's investment promotion logic), which will indirectly contribute to the cultural advancement in society (Berne Convention's cultural advancement logic). The author expects that the conclusion presented in this paper will accelerate more intensive social scientific analysis work on legal eligibility of the legal policy for copyright protection of AI generated-works.

本文从日本与英国的比较法分析的角度,考察了日本人工智能(AI)模型在没有人类创作过程的情况下自主创作的人工智能作品的版权保护法律政策。综上所述,本文的结论是,在日本版权法框架内,人工智能生成作品的版权保护的法律决策方法应包括:(a)通过仔细选择立法措施来解决法律一致性的问题;因此,(b)将法律政策讨论的重点转向对法律资格的考虑,超越对法律一致性的讨论。这需要分析在日本当前的社会环境下对人工智能生成的作品进行版权保护的严格必要性。首先,法律资格讨论的焦点应该集中在日本对人类创造的市场需求的可能丧失和对人类创造的社会防御的必要性(人类创造逻辑的社会防御功能)。此外,基于社会激励保护理论,需要强调的是,日本版权法将人工智能作品纳入版权保护的第二个目的是促进未来日本产业对人工智能技术的投资(人工智能产业的投资促进逻辑),这将间接促进社会的文化进步(伯尔尼公约的文化进步逻辑)。笔者希望本文的结论能够促进对人工智能生成作品版权保护法律政策法律资格的更深入的社会科学分析工作。
{"title":"Japan's legal framework for copyright protection of AI-generated works: A comparative law analysis exploring the possibility of Japan's adoption of the UK legislative approach","authors":"Seiya S. Takeuchi","doi":"10.1111/jwip.12333","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jwip.12333","url":null,"abstract":"<p>This paper examines the legal policy for copyright protection of artificial intelligence (AI) generated-works that are autonomously created by AI models without a human's creative process in Japan from the perspective of a comparative law analysis between Japan and the United Kingdom. In summary, this paper concludes that the legal policy-making approach for copyright protection of AI-generated works within the framework of Japanese copyright law should involve: (a) addressing concerns about legal consistency through careful selection of a legislative measure; and, therefore, (b) directing the focus of legal policy discussions towards considerations of legal eligibility, moving beyond discussions on legal consistency. This entails an analysis of the strict necessity for copyright protection of AI-generated works within the prevailing social environment in Japan. First, the focal point of the legal eligibility discussions should focus on a possible loss of market demand for human creations and necessity of social defence to human creations (social defence function for human creations logic) in Japan. In addition, based on the social incentive protection theory, it should be emphasised that the second purpose of incorporation of copyright protection for AI-generated works under Japanese copyright law is to promote future Japanese industry's investment in AI technologies (AI industry's investment promotion logic), which will indirectly contribute to the cultural advancement in society (Berne Convention's cultural advancement logic). The author expects that the conclusion presented in this paper will accelerate more intensive social scientific analysis work on legal eligibility of the legal policy for copyright protection of AI generated-works.</p>","PeriodicalId":54129,"journal":{"name":"Journal of World Intellectual Property","volume":"28 2","pages":"323-343"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2024-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144615388","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Generative artificial intelligence is not a mere tool: Revisiting Indonesian Copyright Law 生成式人工智能不仅仅是一种工具:重新审视印尼版权法
IF 0.7 Q2 LAW Pub Date : 2024-11-30 DOI: 10.1111/jwip.12335
Ghazali Hasan Nasakti, Rianda Dirkareshza

Generative artificial intelligence (GAI) is capable of creating original works with such a remarkable degree of autonomy that it makes no sense to be considered or analogized to traditional technologies that are merely used by humans. The human who provides the initial input (prompt) to the GAI does not make sense to be considered as the author of the GAI's self-created works. The internal characteristics of GAI that enable it to create its own works and the works per se challenge the four prevailing justifications in Indonesian Copyright Law: the biological humans, the idea-expression dichotomy, the Hegelian, and the Lockean justifications. This research finds the problem that there is a legal vacuum in the copyright regime in Indonesia regarding the legal status of GAI's self- created works. The research uses normative legal research method; with theoretical, symbolic logic legal interpretation––which assists in logical modeling of new legal provisions, comparative law, and conceptual approaches; this research aims to answer the legal lacuna which can be addressed with the proposed solution of placing GAI's self-created works as sui generis and should be put into the public domain with attribution given to GAI which is logically coherent, efficient, and in line with existing justifications and principles of copyright. However, this research also found that the Indonesian copyright regime itself does not formally acknowledge the concept of public domain, which complicates it compared to the United States Copyright Law, hence the urgency to revise it by adopting and adding a concrete formulation of public domain––as elaborated in this article––which is different from public domain in the informal sense, and then adding the formulation of attribution provisions to GAI.

生成式人工智能(GAI)能够创造出具有高度自主性的原创作品,因此将其与仅由人类使用的传统技术相提并论是没有意义的。向GAI提供初始输入(提示)的人不应该被视为GAI自创作品的作者。GAI的内部特征使其能够创作自己的作品,作品本身挑战了印度尼西亚版权法中流行的四种理由:生物人类,思想-表达二分法,黑格尔主义和洛克主义。本研究发现,在印尼的版权制度中,关于GAI自创作品的法律地位存在法律真空。本研究采用规范法学研究方法;与理论,符号逻辑法律解释-这有助于新的法律条款,比较法和概念方法的逻辑建模;本研究旨在回答法律上的空白,这可以通过提出的解决方案来解决,即将GAI的自创作品作为自创作品,并将其归入公共领域,并赋予GAI所有权,这在逻辑上是连贯的,有效的,并且符合现有的理由和版权原则。然而,本研究还发现,印度尼西亚版权制度本身并没有正式承认公共领域的概念,这与美国版权法相比使其复杂化,因此迫切需要通过采用和添加公共领域的具体表述(如本文所述)来修改它,这与非正式意义上的公共领域不同,然后将归属条款的表述添加到GAI中。
{"title":"Generative artificial intelligence is not a mere tool: Revisiting Indonesian Copyright Law","authors":"Ghazali Hasan Nasakti,&nbsp;Rianda Dirkareshza","doi":"10.1111/jwip.12335","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jwip.12335","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Generative artificial intelligence (GAI) is capable of creating original works with such a remarkable degree of autonomy that it makes no sense to be considered or analogized to traditional technologies that are merely used by humans. The human who provides the initial input (prompt) to the GAI does not make sense to be considered as the author of the GAI's self-created works. The internal characteristics of GAI that enable it to create its own works and the works per se challenge the four prevailing justifications in Indonesian Copyright Law: the biological humans, the idea-expression dichotomy, the Hegelian, and the Lockean justifications. This research finds the problem that there is a legal vacuum in the copyright regime in Indonesia regarding the legal status of GAI's self- created works. The research uses normative legal research method; with theoretical, symbolic logic legal interpretation––which assists in logical modeling of new legal provisions, comparative law, and conceptual approaches; this research aims to answer the legal lacuna which can be addressed with the proposed solution of placing GAI's self-created works as <i>sui generis</i> and should be put into the public domain with attribution given to GAI which is logically coherent, efficient, and in line with existing justifications and principles of copyright. However, this research also found that the Indonesian copyright regime itself does not formally acknowledge the concept of public domain, which complicates it compared to the United States Copyright Law, hence the urgency to revise it by adopting and adding a concrete formulation of public domain––as elaborated in this article––which is different from public domain in the informal sense, and then adding the formulation of attribution provisions to GAI.</p>","PeriodicalId":54129,"journal":{"name":"Journal of World Intellectual Property","volume":"28 2","pages":"344-374"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2024-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144615398","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
A case against enforcement of patent rights in transit: Resolving the unresolved controversy 专利权在途强制执行一案:未决争议的解决
IF 0.7 Q2 LAW Pub Date : 2024-11-29 DOI: 10.1111/jwip.12336
Siddhant Pengoriya

This paper delves into the complex legal landscape surrounding the enforcement of intellectual property (IP) rights on goods in transit, using the contentious EU–India–Brazil dispute as a case study. The dispute centers on the seizure of generic pharmaceutical shipments transiting through the Netherlands, leading to patent infringement complaints by Dutch patent holders. The heart of the matter lies in the interpretation of Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights Agreement (TRIPS) Agreement provisions, specifically Articles 51, 52, and Footnote 13, in conjunction with General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 (GATT) Article V and XX(d), which addresses the freedom of transit. Since the dispute was never conclusively decided by World Trade Organisation Dispute Settlement Body, the concerns are still alive and merit discussion.

The author contends that enforcing patent rights on goods in transit contradicts the principles of territoriality and commerciality inherent in patent laws and infringes upon the freedom of transit articulated in the GATT. Drawing from the perspectives of scholars and legal experts, this paper presents a nuanced argument that seeks to reconcile the seemingly contradictory provisions. It proposes Footnote 13, of TRIPS be read down to allow enforcement only when there is a risk of diversion into the transit country's commercial channels.

Moreover, the paper argues normatively, emphasizing the adverse impact of transit enforcement on international trade, especially for developing and least developed countries. In conclusion, it underscores the urgency of addressing this issue to protect global trade interests while safeguarding the rights of developing nations and promoting equitable access to essential goods.

本文以有争议的欧盟-印度-巴西争端为例,深入研究了围绕过境货物知识产权执法的复杂法律环境。争议的焦点是扣押通过荷兰运输的仿制药,导致荷兰专利持有人提出专利侵权投诉。问题的核心在于对《与贸易有关的知识产权协定》(TRIPS)条款的解释,特别是第51条、第52条和脚注13条,以及《1994年关税与贸易总协定》(GATT)第5条和第20条(d)项的解释,这些条款涉及过境自由。由于世界贸易组织(wto)争端解决机构(dispute Settlement Body)从未就该争端作出最终裁决,这些担忧仍然存在,值得讨论。发件人认为,对过境货物实施专利权违反了专利法固有的地域性和商业性原则,并侵犯了关贸总协定所阐明的过境自由。从学者和法律专家的角度出发,本文提出了一个微妙的论点,试图调和看似矛盾的条款。它建议对《与贸易有关的知识产权协定》的脚注13进行解读,以便只有在存在转移到过境国商业渠道的风险时才允许强制执行。此外,本文还进行了规范性论证,强调过境执法对国际贸易的不利影响,特别是对发展中国家和最不发达国家的不利影响。总之,它强调了解决这一问题的紧迫性,以保护全球贸易利益,同时维护发展中国家的权利,促进公平获得基本商品。
{"title":"A case against enforcement of patent rights in transit: Resolving the unresolved controversy","authors":"Siddhant Pengoriya","doi":"10.1111/jwip.12336","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jwip.12336","url":null,"abstract":"<p>This paper delves into the complex legal landscape surrounding the enforcement of intellectual property (IP) rights on goods in transit, using the contentious EU–India–Brazil dispute as a case study. The dispute centers on the seizure of generic pharmaceutical shipments transiting through the Netherlands, leading to patent infringement complaints by Dutch patent holders. The heart of the matter lies in the interpretation of Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights Agreement (TRIPS) Agreement provisions, specifically Articles 51, 52, and Footnote 13, in conjunction with General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 (GATT) Article V and XX(d), which addresses the freedom of transit. Since the dispute was never conclusively decided by World Trade Organisation Dispute Settlement Body, the concerns are still alive and merit discussion.</p><p>The author contends that enforcing patent rights on goods in transit contradicts the principles of territoriality and commerciality inherent in patent laws and infringes upon the freedom of transit articulated in the GATT. Drawing from the perspectives of scholars and legal experts, this paper presents a nuanced argument that seeks to reconcile the seemingly contradictory provisions. It proposes Footnote 13, of TRIPS be read down to allow enforcement only when there is a risk of diversion into the transit country's commercial channels.</p><p>Moreover, the paper argues normatively, emphasizing the adverse impact of transit enforcement on international trade, especially for developing and least developed countries. In conclusion, it underscores the urgency of addressing this issue to protect global trade interests while safeguarding the rights of developing nations and promoting equitable access to essential goods.</p>","PeriodicalId":54129,"journal":{"name":"Journal of World Intellectual Property","volume":"28 1","pages":"303-320"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2024-11-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143581979","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Implementation of the EU's geographical indications in CETA and JEFTA: EU-Phoria or GI-mmick? 欧盟地理标志在中欧自由贸易协定和欧洲自由贸易协定中的实施:欧盟的幻觉还是gi的把戏?
IF 0.7 Q2 LAW Pub Date : 2024-11-26 DOI: 10.1111/jwip.12334
Anke Kennis, Anastasia Volkov

Over the last two decades, the EU's foreign trade strategy shifted diametrically from the multilateral World Trade Organization to the bilateral free trade agreements (FTA) route. Accompanying this shift, the EU's regulatory ambitions became more apparent, as can be gleaned from its strategy documents. The main question is whether the EU is succeeding in effectively exporting or promoting its regulations. In this paper, we combine the two disciplines of law and international relations to gauge the EU's success in achieving its external regulatory goals through FTAs. The EU is described in the political science literature as a regulatory power which is trying to promote or export its regulations outside its own jurisdiction. Using two case studies of the recent EU FTAs with Canada and Japan, we conduct a rigorous legal analysis of these FTA texts as well as their implementation in the local jurisdiction by focusing on the area of Geographical Indications (GI). These regulations are compared with the EU's goals mentioned in its strategy documents and from interviews with EU representatives involved in the FTA negotiations. Our results show that the EU has been moderately successful in both FTAs in achieving its general goals such as equal protection for foodstuffs and alcoholic drinks, ex officio protection, and the clawback of some generic names. Overall, the EU was most successful in getting Japan to embrace an EU-inspired sui generis GI system, whereas Canada showed less leniency and favoured its trademark system.

近二十年来,欧盟的对外贸易战略从多边的世界贸易组织直接转向双边自由贸易协定路线。随着这一转变,欧盟的监管野心变得更加明显,这可以从其战略文件中看出。主要问题是,欧盟是否成功地有效出口或推广了其监管规定。在本文中,我们结合法律和国际关系这两个学科来衡量欧盟通过自由贸易协定实现其外部监管目标的成功程度。在政治科学文献中,欧盟被描述为一个监管大国,它试图在自己的管辖范围之外推广或输出其法规。通过对欧盟最近与加拿大和日本签订的自由贸易协定的两个案例研究,我们对这些自由贸易协定文本及其在当地司法管辖范围内的实施情况进行了严格的法律分析,重点关注地理标志(GI)领域。这些规定与欧盟在其战略文件中提到的目标以及对参与自由贸易协定谈判的欧盟代表的采访进行了比较。我们的研究结果表明,欧盟在这两个自由贸易协定中都取得了一定程度的成功,实现了对食品和酒精饮料的平等保护、当然保护和一些通用名称的收回等总体目标。总的来说,欧盟最成功地让日本接受了欧盟启发的独特地理标志体系,而加拿大表现得不那么宽容,更倾向于自己的商标体系。
{"title":"Implementation of the EU's geographical indications in CETA and JEFTA: EU-Phoria or GI-mmick?","authors":"Anke Kennis,&nbsp;Anastasia Volkov","doi":"10.1111/jwip.12334","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jwip.12334","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Over the last two decades, the EU's foreign trade strategy shifted diametrically from the multilateral World Trade Organization to the bilateral free trade agreements (FTA) route. Accompanying this shift, the EU's regulatory ambitions became more apparent, as can be gleaned from its strategy documents. The main question is whether the EU is succeeding in effectively exporting or promoting its regulations. In this paper, we combine the two disciplines of law and international relations to gauge the EU's success in achieving its external regulatory goals through FTAs. The EU is described in the political science literature as a regulatory power which is trying to promote or export its regulations outside its own jurisdiction. Using two case studies of the recent EU FTAs with Canada and Japan, we conduct a rigorous legal analysis of these FTA texts as well as their implementation in the local jurisdiction by focusing on the area of Geographical Indications (GI). These regulations are compared with the EU's goals mentioned in its strategy documents and from interviews with EU representatives involved in the FTA negotiations. Our results show that the EU has been moderately successful in both FTAs in achieving its general goals such as equal protection for foodstuffs and alcoholic drinks, ex officio protection, and the clawback of some generic names. Overall, the EU was most successful in getting Japan to embrace an EU-inspired <i>sui generis</i> GI system, whereas Canada showed less leniency and favoured its trademark system.</p>","PeriodicalId":54129,"journal":{"name":"Journal of World Intellectual Property","volume":"28 1","pages":"286-302"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2024-11-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jwip.12334","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143582016","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Geographical indication in Indonesia: A review on the spatial distribution and classification of geographical indication-registered products and -related publications 印度尼西亚地理标志:地理标志注册产品的空间分布和分类及相关出版物综述
IF 0.7 Q2 LAW Pub Date : 2024-11-26 DOI: 10.1111/jwip.12332
Diana Harding, Kevin Muhamad Lukman, Miranda Risang Ayu Palar, Ryo Kohsaka

The status and trends of geographical indication (GI) registration in Indonesia is presented and analyzed. Indonesia amended the GI-related legal systems in 2019, and despite its increase in registration and policy developments, the extent of coverage and classification of GI-registered products remain unclear. Thus, we analyze the current status and trends of GI registration by mapping the spatial distribution and classification of GI products. We supplemented our analysis by capturing and reviewing GI-related publications in Indonesia. Results showed that GI-registered products are concentrated in Java and Sumatra regions, with agricultural products as leading commodities. The spatial distribution further exhibits that cultural and traditional values play an important role in shaping GI products. Meanwhile, for GI publications, we documented that scientific literatures produced by domestic scholars are more abundant than international publications. Although this is a positive assertion, reviewed publications are mostly focused on the legal aspects. Other aspects such as GI promotion, development, and benefits are lacking. The policy and practical implications of such findings highlighted the critical role of provinces and domestic scholars in promoting GIs of Indonesia to the global arena.

介绍和分析了印度尼西亚地理标志注册的现状和趋势。印度尼西亚于2019年修订了与地理标志相关的法律制度,尽管其注册和政策发展有所增加,但地理标志注册产品的覆盖范围和分类仍然不清楚。因此,我们通过绘制地理标志产品的空间分布和分类来分析地理标志注册的现状和趋势。我们通过收集和审查印度尼西亚与地理信息系统相关的出版物来补充我们的分析。结果表明,地理标志注册产品主要集中在爪哇和苏门答腊地区,农产品为主导商品。空间分布进一步表明,文化和传统价值观对地理标志产品的塑造起着重要作用。同时,对于地理标志出版物,我们发现国内学者发表的科学文献比国际出版物更丰富。虽然这是一个积极的主张,但审查的出版物主要集中在法律方面。其他方面如地理信息系统的推广、发展和效益方面的欠缺。这些研究结果的政策和实际影响突出了各省和国内学者在促进印度尼西亚地理标志走向全球舞台方面的关键作用。
{"title":"Geographical indication in Indonesia: A review on the spatial distribution and classification of geographical indication-registered products and -related publications","authors":"Diana Harding,&nbsp;Kevin Muhamad Lukman,&nbsp;Miranda Risang Ayu Palar,&nbsp;Ryo Kohsaka","doi":"10.1111/jwip.12332","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jwip.12332","url":null,"abstract":"<p>The status and trends of geographical indication (GI) registration in Indonesia is presented and analyzed. Indonesia amended the GI-related legal systems in 2019, and despite its increase in registration and policy developments, the extent of coverage and classification of GI-registered products remain unclear. Thus, we analyze the current status and trends of GI registration by mapping the spatial distribution and classification of GI products. We supplemented our analysis by capturing and reviewing GI-related publications in Indonesia. Results showed that GI-registered products are concentrated in Java and Sumatra regions, with agricultural products as leading commodities. The spatial distribution further exhibits that cultural and traditional values play an important role in shaping GI products. Meanwhile, for GI publications, we documented that scientific literatures produced by domestic scholars are more abundant than international publications. Although this is a positive assertion, reviewed publications are mostly focused on the legal aspects. Other aspects such as GI promotion, development, and benefits are lacking. The policy and practical implications of such findings highlighted the critical role of provinces and domestic scholars in promoting GIs of Indonesia to the global arena.</p>","PeriodicalId":54129,"journal":{"name":"Journal of World Intellectual Property","volume":"28 1","pages":"263-285"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2024-11-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jwip.12332","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143582015","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
期刊
Journal of World Intellectual Property
全部 Acc. Chem. Res. ACS Applied Bio Materials ACS Appl. Electron. Mater. ACS Appl. Energy Mater. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces ACS Appl. Nano Mater. ACS Appl. Polym. Mater. ACS BIOMATER-SCI ENG ACS Catal. ACS Cent. Sci. ACS Chem. Biol. ACS Chemical Health & Safety ACS Chem. Neurosci. ACS Comb. Sci. ACS Earth Space Chem. ACS Energy Lett. ACS Infect. Dis. ACS Macro Lett. ACS Mater. Lett. ACS Med. Chem. Lett. ACS Nano ACS Omega ACS Photonics ACS Sens. ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. ACS Synth. Biol. Anal. Chem. BIOCHEMISTRY-US Bioconjugate Chem. BIOMACROMOLECULES Chem. Res. Toxicol. Chem. Rev. Chem. Mater. CRYST GROWTH DES ENERG FUEL Environ. Sci. Technol. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. Eur. J. Inorg. Chem. IND ENG CHEM RES Inorg. Chem. J. Agric. Food. Chem. J. Chem. Eng. Data J. Chem. Educ. J. Chem. Inf. Model. J. Chem. Theory Comput. J. Med. Chem. J. Nat. Prod. J PROTEOME RES J. Am. Chem. Soc. LANGMUIR MACROMOLECULES Mol. Pharmaceutics Nano Lett. Org. Lett. ORG PROCESS RES DEV ORGANOMETALLICS J. Org. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. A J. Phys. Chem. B J. Phys. Chem. C J. Phys. Chem. Lett. Analyst Anal. Methods Biomater. Sci. Catal. Sci. Technol. Chem. Commun. Chem. Soc. Rev. CHEM EDUC RES PRACT CRYSTENGCOMM Dalton Trans. Energy Environ. Sci. ENVIRON SCI-NANO ENVIRON SCI-PROC IMP ENVIRON SCI-WAT RES Faraday Discuss. Food Funct. Green Chem. Inorg. Chem. Front. Integr. Biol. J. Anal. At. Spectrom. J. Mater. Chem. A J. Mater. Chem. B J. Mater. Chem. C Lab Chip Mater. Chem. Front. Mater. Horiz. MEDCHEMCOMM Metallomics Mol. Biosyst. Mol. Syst. Des. Eng. Nanoscale Nanoscale Horiz. Nat. Prod. Rep. New J. Chem. Org. Biomol. Chem. Org. Chem. Front. PHOTOCH PHOTOBIO SCI PCCP Polym. Chem.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1