It's Easily Done: The <i>China‐Intellectual Property Rights Enforcement</i> Dispute and the Freedom of Expression

Broude, Tomer

doi:10.1111/j.1747-1796.2010.00403.x

Cited by 9 publications

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

EU Economic Partnership Agreements and International Human Rights

2013

MPI Studies on Intellectual Property and Competition Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This book brings together 14 contributions that developed from presentations and discussions during a workshop organized by the Max Planck Institute for Intellectual Property and Competition Law (MPI) with the title: Economic Partnership Agreements of the EU: A Step Ahead in Reforming International IP Law? The workshop was held in Frauenchiemsee (Germany) in June 2011 and gathered leading academics, practitioners, and trade negotiators from the EU and its trading partners. As the title suggests, the main focus of the workshop and previous research at the MPI concerned a new generation of bilateral and regional agreements pursued by the European Union (EU) which have emerged after the adoption of the European Commission's Strategy for the Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights in Third Countries in 2004 and the launching of the Global Europe Strategy in 2006. Examples are the Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) signed in October 2008 between the then European Community (EC) and the group of CARIFORUM countries (EU-CARIFORUM EPA) and the trade agreement the EU signed with Colombia and Peru in June 2012. At the core has been the question whether the intellectual property (IP) provisions found in this new generation of EU agreements actually live up to the development rhetoric and take into account the specific developmental needs of the EU contracting partners. This question becomes particularly acute in the framework of redefined trade relations between the EU and the group of African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) states which includes a large number of very poor countries in Africa. However, the workshop presentations and discussions indicated a need to go beyond the agreements the EU is negotiating with developing countries. International agreements which include IP and set standards beyond those of the Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) have proliferated since the early nineties. This proliferation has gained such speed in the last five years that the IP standards found in these agreements, the implications for various areas of international law, and the implementation of their IP obligations demand for a broader perspective which goes beyond critically analysing potential elements for reforming the international IP system. v

show abstract

EU Economic Partnership Agreements and International Human Rights

2013

MPI Studies on Intellectual Property and Competition Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Comparison of E-commerce Regulations in Chinese and American FTAs: Converging Approaches, Diverging Contents, and Polycentric Directions?

Huang

2017

Neth Int Law Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Insufficient WTO regulation of cross-border e-commerce confronts China and the US with three legal challenges: ambiguous classification of digital products, inadequate consumer and privacy protection, and weak protection of cross-border flow of information. China and the US have adopted converging approaches to address these challenges: inserting e-commerce chapters into their FTAs. However, the substance of these chapters is diverging. Firstly, US FTAs categorise digital products separately from goods and services and provide national treatment and most favoured nation treatment to products and their suppliers. China's FTAs still offer no solutions to the classification of digital products and their treatment. Secondly, although China's FTAs still provide weak protection for consumers and privacy, Chinese domestic law has converged towards U.S. FTAs to provide better protection. Thirdly, U.S. and China FTAs are significantly divergent in their regulation of the free flow of information. In the post-TPP era, a polycentric direction will emerge in the regulation of the free flow of information between China and the U.S.

show abstract

From Seattle to Occupy: The Shifting Focus of Social Protest

Broude¹

2014

Linking Global Trade and Human Rights

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It's Easily Done: The China‐Intellectual Property Rights Enforcement Dispute and the Freedom of Expression

Cited by 9 publications

References 11 publications

EU Economic Partnership Agreements and International Human Rights

EU Economic Partnership Agreements and International Human Rights

Comparison of E-commerce Regulations in Chinese and American FTAs: Converging Approaches, Diverging Contents, and Polycentric Directions?

From Seattle to Occupy: The Shifting Focus of Social Protest

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About