The Experts below are selected from a list of 201 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

Paroma Basu - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

Dongwook Chun - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Patent Law Harmonization In The Age Of Globalization: The Necessity And Strategy For A Pragmatic Outcome
    2011
    Co-Authors: Dongwook Chun
    Abstract:

    While International Patent Law harmonization has been an issue in progress since the conclusion of the Paris Convention in 1883, it is facing new challenges due to its rising prominence in a knowledge-based economy and the world's growing sensitivity to the Patent system's social and economic role in society. Since their beginning, Patent Laws have been inherently diverse for several reasons: territoriality, and distinct policy goals and cultural backgrounds of each nation. However, as globalization intensified the problem of fragmented Patent Laws, arguments for harmonizing Patents Laws obtained dominant support in International communities. This paper addresses the need to harmonize Patent Laws among countries within the growing trend of globalization. The paper further examines implementing measures that realize the harmonization of Patent Laws. To answer questions regarding the level and order at which harmonization should take place, it is necessary to divide harmonization into four categories according to the procedural-substantive and legislative-administrative standpoint. Even though substantive and legal harmonization might be the final goal of harmonization, it costs too much and takes too long. Rather, as a practically plausible alternative based on cost-benefit analysis, it is worth focusing on a modest harmonization-administrative and substantive harmonization for "Work-sharing." To implement work-sharing with minimum costs and delay, it is necessary to scrutinize several strategies that promote language based cooperation, offshore outsourcing, regional Patent system, and combination with PCT. Within the undeniable trend of globalization, it is essential to find broad and innovative International cooperation that can benefit all participating countries.

  • Patent Law Harmonization in an Open Economy: How Should the Patent System React in the International Arena?
    Asian Journal of Law and Economics, 2011
    Co-Authors: Dongwook Chun, Minwook Kang
    Abstract:

    While International Patent Law harmonization has been an issue in progress since the conclusion of the Paris Convention in 1883, it is facing new challenges due to the increasing dependence on Patents in the knowledge-based economy and the growing sensitivity to the Patent system's social and economic role in society. Inherently, the Patent systems should be country-specific, given the industry-specific character of Patent Law. However, as the problem of fragmented Patent Laws caused by globalization became serious, the arguments for harmonizing Patents Laws obtained dominant support in the International community. This paper addresses the necessities for harmonization among countries by the economic model of game theory and highlights the relationship between the degree of economic openness and the harmonization of Patent Laws. This paper shows that as the world becomes globalized, one country should consider the other country's Patent policy in deciding its Patent policy and the government has an incentive to harmonize their Patent policy with other country's policies.

Minwook Kang - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Patent Law Harmonization in an Open Economy: How Should the Patent System React in the International Arena?
    Asian Journal of Law and Economics, 2011
    Co-Authors: Dongwook Chun, Minwook Kang
    Abstract:

    While International Patent Law harmonization has been an issue in progress since the conclusion of the Paris Convention in 1883, it is facing new challenges due to the increasing dependence on Patents in the knowledge-based economy and the growing sensitivity to the Patent system's social and economic role in society. Inherently, the Patent systems should be country-specific, given the industry-specific character of Patent Law. However, as the problem of fragmented Patent Laws caused by globalization became serious, the arguments for harmonizing Patents Laws obtained dominant support in the International community. This paper addresses the necessities for harmonization among countries by the economic model of game theory and highlights the relationship between the degree of economic openness and the harmonization of Patent Laws. This paper shows that as the world becomes globalized, one country should consider the other country's Patent policy in deciding its Patent policy and the government has an incentive to harmonize their Patent policy with other country's policies.

Antony Taubman - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • The International Patent System and Biomedical Research: Reconciling Aspiration, Policy and Practice
    The AAPS Journal, 2008
    Co-Authors: Antony Taubman
    Abstract:

    This article reviews how the International environment shapes International Patent Law and practice with bearing on biomedical innovation. The cluster of issues is encapsulated in two core paradoxes. The first concerns how public goods, such as new pharmaceuticals, may be produced through the deliberate creation of private rights that exclude material from the public domain. The second paradox concerns how “technological neutrality” and overall policy balance in the application of general Patent Law principles requires technology-specific interventions by regulators. The article illustrates how centrifugal and centripetal trends influence diverse national approaches to applying Patentability criteria for pharmaceutical products.

Sarah R. Wasserman Rajec - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Evaluating Flexibility in International Patent Law
    2013
    Co-Authors: Sarah R. Wasserman Rajec
    Abstract:

    Global Patent Law has raced toward harmonization over the past decades. Countries with vastly different industries, values, and levels of development now offer robust Patent rights with similar contours through membership in the World Trade Organization and consequent adoption of the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (“TRIPS”). However, Patent Law is still far from harmonized among countries or static within countries. Jurisdictions tailor their Patent Laws to accommodate differences between industries, unforeseen inefficiencies, and diverse views of the costs and benefits associated with offering Patent rights to stimulate innovation. Prior scholarly work consists of either doctrinal analyses of relevant governing treaties or utilitarian analyses of the measures’ consistency with an “ideal” level of Patent protection. The first perspective sidesteps normative questions by assuming the balance between harmonization and flexibility embodied in TRIPS and provides little guidance for cases in which TRIPS compliance is unclear. The second adopts assumptions that either impose foreign preferences or tacitly accept local preferences embodied in the measure. Any conclusion thus over-privileges background preferences and predetermines a normative conclusion.This Article puts forth a framework for evaluation of a tailoring measure based on whether it meets the justifications for allowing flexibility while accounting for the concerns that favor uniformity and harmonization. The proposed framework looks to the implementing institution and the adequacy of the stakeholder representation to determine the desirability, from a global perspective, of a given mechanism. Rather than offering a strict formula, I suggest that honoring diversity among regimes requires acceptance of measures that are open to criticism from consequentialists but does not preclude critical analysis of the means of development or implementation. Such an analysis allows for a productive evaluation of tailoring measures that honors differences among jurisdictions while properly accounting for the justifications underlying harmonization.

  • Evaluating Flexibility in International Patent Law
    Hastings Law Journal, 2013
    Co-Authors: Sarah R. Wasserman Rajec
    Abstract:

    Global Patent Law has raced toward harmonization over the past decades. Countries with vastly different industries, values, and levels of development now offer robust Patent rights with similar contours through membership in the World Trade Organization and consequent adoption of the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (“TRIPS”). However, Patent Law is still far from harmonized among countries or static within countries. Jurisdictions tailor their Patent Laws to accommodate differences between industries, unforeseen inefficiencies, and diverse views of the costs and benefits associated with offering Patent rights to stimulate innovation. Prior scholarly work consists of either doctrinal analyses of relevant governing treaties or utilitarian analyses of the measures’ consistency with an “ideal” level of Patent protection. The first perspective sidesteps normative questions by assuming the balance between harmonization and flexibility embodied in TRIPS and provides little guidance for cases in which TRIPS compliance is unclear. The second adopts assumptions that either impose foreign preferences or tacitly accept local preferences embodied in the measure. Any conclusion thus over-privileges background preferences and predetermines a normative conclusion.