Earticle

Home

산업재산권 [Journal of Industrial Property]

간행물 정보
  • 자료유형
    학술지
  • 발행기관
    한국지식재산학회 [Korea Intellectual Property Society]
  • ISSN
    1598-6055
  • 간기
    연3회
  • 수록기간
    1995~2019
  • 등재여부
    KCI 등재
  • 주제분류
    사회과학 > 법학
  • 십진분류
    KDC 360 DDC 340
제22호 (9건)
No

일반논문

1

인간배아줄기세포의 特許性에 관하여

표호건

한국지식재산학회 산업재산권 제22호 2007.04 pp.1-32

※ 기관로그인 시 무료 이용이 가능합니다.

It is important to understand what stern cells are used for and why scientists want to research them as much as they do. Stem cells are unique cells that have the capacity to reproduce themselves for indefinite periods in culture and give rise to specialized cells and tissues of the body. These cells are useful because they have the ability to develop into most of the tissues in the human body. They could eventually be used in curing people with life threatening diseases. These discoveries may provide cures for diseases which have yet to be uncovered by current medical research. Although stem cell research raises religious, moral and ethical concerns, it has far reaching potential for beneficial applications government are trying to address and balance these benefits with the concerns of their respective societies through legislation and regulations. The current patent environment in Korea and the United States is fairly favourable to granting patent rights in most areas of stern cell research while Europe has much more restrictive provisions. In contrast, it is interesting to nate that while the United States has taken the roast expansive position with regard to the granting of patents arising from stem cell research, it has taken are of the more restrictive positions with regard to funding of this research. The opposite is true in certain European countries such as the United Kingdom.

7,300원

2

대학교수 직무발명제도의 비판적 검토

정성찬

한국지식재산학회 산업재산권 제22호 2007.04 pp.33-68

※ 기관로그인 시 무료 이용이 가능합니다.

This study reviews the system of employees' inventions by university professors focusing an the boundary of employees' inventions, the reversion of the rights, the financial incentives and so an. The results are as follows: First, traditionally, university professors' inventions has been considered as free inventions, while this study suggests that university professors' research results should be taken as employees' inventions. Second, the industry-university cooperation foundation should have the intellectual property rights of the inventions since university professors' inventions fall under the employees' inventions when the funding of their research comes from the government or enterpcises individually ar cooperatively. Third, the comparisons show that professors, civil servants and researchers at research institutes are ranked in order of the amount of incentive paid to them and that the ratio of the incentive paid to professors is almost up to double than that of advanced countries. It suggests that the ratio should be readjusted to the level of those other countries. Finally, since the employees' inventions applied for patents at present are considered remarkable, the incentive income should be regarded non- taxable income and legal and systematic complementary measures are required in order far a temporal tax credit applied to the incentive income to be a regular tax credit article.

7,900원

3

특허권의 남용과 이에 대한 방안 : Patent Troll을 중심으로

정연덕

한국지식재산학회 산업재산권 제22호 2007.04 pp.69-100

※ 기관로그인 시 무료 이용이 가능합니다.

A patent troll is "somebody who tries to make a lot of money off a patent that they are not practicing and have no intention of practicing and in most cases never practiced." The topic of patten trolls has boosted up same important discussion in the recent year. Trolls tend to target internet retailers, service, information and news providers who are the end users of the patented technology. In May, 2006, the U.S. Supreme Court said in its unanimous verdict in eBay Inc, et al. v. MercExchange, No. 05-130. There is no such rule, patent owners do not have an automatic right to an injunction that could cripple the business of an infringer. The proper approach to the question of whether to award a permanent injunction is to apply a four-paint test. In Korea, controlling patent abuse is also an emerging issue. To regulate patent abuse in patent trolling, we can rely an the principle of faith or Trust Act Article 7. Just acquisition of patent for litigation would not be allowed. Also, PIT(Patent Investment Trust) PUBPAT(Public Patent Roundation) would be helpful to salve these patent troll problem.

7,300원

4

디자인보호법에 의한 화상디자인의 보호

육소영

한국지식재산학회 산업재산권 제22호 2007.04 pp.101-130

※ 기관로그인 시 무료 이용이 가능합니다.

Under Korean Design Protection Act, a design is defined as the shape, pattern, color or combination of these in an article that produces an aesthetic impression in the sense of sight. Accordingly, aesthetic factor must be incorporated into an article to be protected as a design. Besides an aesthetic element, the obstacle for design protection of computer generated icon is whether the icon can be an article. In general, an article means whatever is apprehended as having actual, distinct, and demonstrable existence. However, the icon does not have actual and distinct existence and then, is not an article. Despite that, many countries such as the U.S. and Japan protect an icon as design pursuant to design act. Korea also protects a computer-generated icon under design law. The U.S. protects the icon as design patent based on U.S. Manual of Patent Examining Procedure(MPEP) and common law rather than patent law itself. Likewise, Japan has protected the icon under examination guidelines for design, but recent amendment to design law includes a computer generated icon into protected article. However, Korea still protects a computer generated icon pursuant to the examination guidelines. In roy opinion, protection of the icon under the guidelines improperly expands the meaning of article under Design Protection Act and will destroy existence of design protection in itself. Therefore, if the protection of a computer generated icon is demanded under design law, proper amendment to Design Protection Act must be accomplished. Moreover, such amendment must be reviewed cautiously considering overall structure of intellectual property law.

7,000원

5

상표법에 의한 동작상표의 보호

김병일

한국지식재산학회 산업재산권 제22호 2007.04 pp.131-172

※ 기관로그인 시 무료 이용이 가능합니다.

This study reviews the protection system of motion marks. A trademark may identify and distinguish goods by using images in motion, perhaps on a television, movie or computer screen. These marks are typically the closest to traditional logo marks of all the nontraditional trademarks, they just add the dimension of movement. Furthermore, enforcing motion marks in infringement should be much like enforcing traditional ward and logo marks. The very distinctive marks will be more likely to prevail in a likelihood of confusion claim. This study focuses on where the law is heading with respect to nontraditional trademarks, especially motion trademarks.

8,800원

6

부정경쟁방지법에 의한 퍼블리시티의 보호 : 유명인의 유사물(類似物)을 이용한 광고를 중심으로

박준우

한국지식재산학회 산업재산권 제22호 2007.04 pp.173-194

※ 기관로그인 시 무료 이용이 가능합니다.

The purpose of this article is to provide the most appropriate form of legal protection far publicity in Korea. One of the most frequent uses of publicity occurs in commercials. However, due to expensive guarantees for celebrities, and to attract more of consumers' attention, companies employ celebrity look-alikes in their commercials, and celebrities bring suits against those companies for the infringement of right of publicity. Several court decisions admitted celebrities' clams without express statutory provisions granting right of publicity, which, together with the necessity to protect right of publicity, initiated the legislative action for inserting provisions for right of publicity into Korea Copyright Act. This article argues that such a property approach for the protection of publicity does not fit for the current situation of high information cost of legislation. Instead, this article argues for a liability approach, which is taken by section 43(a) of the Lanham Act of the U.S., which makes liable the use of publicity which results in likelihood of confusion. However, this article explains why the U.S. approach is not suitable for Korean situation, and proposes an improper enrichment approach' for the protection of publicity.

5,800원

7

우리나라에서의 지적재산권 남용에 대한 독점규제법의 적용 : 미국의 판례를 중심으로

홍봉규

한국지식재산학회 산업재산권 제22호 2007.04 pp.195-230

※ 기관로그인 시 무료 이용이 가능합니다.

The conclusion of international contracts concerning licensing of intellectual property rights gradually increases and thus, it is necessary to study anti-trust laws, principles and policies in foreign countries and Korea, so as not to include unfair provisions ar the contents conspiracy for trust in such contracts. An object of this study is to provide a licensor ar licensee with a fair opportunity to grant or use various licenses under the circumstances which Intellectual Property Law match with the fair Trade Law. The antitrust institution is in the complementary relation with the patent institution in the regards that through encouraging innovation and economic development, both are alimed at increasing consumer welfare in the ultimate dimension in Korea, The Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Law Prescribes Article 59. This Article does not indicate that The monopoly Regulation and fair Trade Law shall not apply to any exercise of the intellectual property with no exception patents do not necessarily confer monopolistic power on their owners. sometimes owners or acquirers of intellectual property can monopolize the relevant market, using the intellectual property as a leverage. In such situation, the Antitrust Law shall apply to and unfair or unjust exercise of the intellectual property laws until recently, there has been no case where court or the fair Trade Commission decided intellectual property owners conduct as illegal under Antitrust Law. In this paper, we observed the U.S. antitrust cases involving intellectual property issues. In so doing, we can learn some useful lessons in solving similar case that we can encounter sooner or later in the future.

7,900원

8

GPL의 主要內容과 改正動向에 관한 硏究

이철남

한국지식재산학회 산업재산권 제22호 2007.04 pp.231-262

※ 기관로그인 시 무료 이용이 가능합니다.

GPL is the license which Richard Stallman and Free Software Foundation (FSF) made with the intention of achieving the principles of 'Free Software'. It also refers to Code of Conduct that should be observed in the Free/Open Software community and Constitution of Free Software Movement as well. The most salient feature of GPL is that derivative programs must be distributed in GPL. However, the specific criteria have not been set yet. In addition, several issues such as dealing of patent and compatibility with other free/open source licenses are left to be solve. After occasional discussion about problems and revision of GPL, FSF called a serious attention to the first discussion draft of 'GPL version 3' in January 2006. Then, the second discussion draft was announced in July 2006 fran suggestions through the Internet and discussions through international conferences. The discussion has continued (as of February, 2007) in order to announce the final draft at the beginning of 2007. The second draft includes the followings: (1) the threat of software patents and countermeasures against it, (2) the problems caused from increased. DRM technology and solutions, and (3) the ways to ensure the flexibility of GPL by allowing licensees to add new permission or requests. However, there exist not a few opposite views on concrete issues such as DRM related matters, which is mainly resulted from different views on ideology and goals of Free/Open source software. Therefore, narrowing and overcoming the gap of differences will smooth the path to conversion to 'GPL version 3' and lead to the development of Free/Open source Software.

7,300원

9

방송ㆍ통신의 융합과 저작권법의 과제 : 방송과 전송의 새로운 개념정립

정진근

한국지식재산학회 산업재산권 제22호 2007.04 pp.263-294

※ 기관로그인 시 무료 이용이 가능합니다.

As IT technologies grow, digital convergence between broadcasting area and telecommunication area have an effect in our life. For example, we can enjoy movies and musics via the internet based VOD services. Moreover, IPTV service is granting us to enjoy the television contents in the manner of just like traditional TV services. This digital convergence can be existed because of internet protocol based network technologies and these technologies are making the border of broadcasting and telecommunication ambiguous. Therefore, IPTV have characteristics of IP-based networks and multimedia services at the same time. IPTV have something in common with telecommunication and also have something in common with broadcasting. However, Copyright Act makes an distinction between broadcasting and telecommunication(exactly 'communication') on the basis of simultaneousness test. Under the rule of simultaneousness test, IPTV and Web-Casting belongs to telecommunication area. And we can not apply special provisions of Copyright Act into IPTV and Web-Casting services these special provisions for broadcasting are essential to IPTV and Web-Casting services, also. I think we can not differentiate the broadcasting and telecommunication on the basis of simultaneousness test anymore because IP technologies will make all services same in the view of simultaneousness test Therefore we should make another test standard and I suggest the public good test to sort. It means that the focus of test should be changed from the physical infra layer to contents layer.

7,300원

 
페이지 저장