Simple view
Full metadata view
Authors
Statistics
Glosa aprobująca do wyroku Trybunału Sprawiedliwości Unii Europejskiej w sprawie C-172/18 AMS Neve
Commentary to the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union in case C-172/18 AMS Neve
jurysdykcja krajowa
własność intelektualna
naruszenia internetowe
international jurisdiction
intellectual property
internet infringements
Bibliogr. s. 165-166
The AMS Neve judgment presents an important step forward in the classification of the connecting factor of the place of infringement under the EU Trade Mark Regulation. The judgement concerns Article 97 of Regulation 207/2009, which is no longer in force, but is fully in line with the current Article 125 of Regulation 2017/1001. The EU High Court rightly pointed out that the court having jurisdiction over the place where the harmful event occurred is best positioned to decide on the case. This is justified by the proximity to the subject matter of the dispute and the ease of taking evidence. The EU High Court adopted a liberal position. In this judgment, it allowed for a broad access to the courts by the IP right holders. This interpretation appears to stem from the need to increase protection of IP rights in cases of their online infringements. The EU Trade Mark Regulation provides additional arguments for this liberal interpretation. A modification of the existing approach consists in adapting the jurisdictional rules to contemporary, modern forms of exploitation of intangible assets on the Internet. The EU High Court pointed out that adopting a narrow (restrictive) interpretation of the jurisdictional rules would lead to an increased risk that the infringers would operate in the territory of a given country in order to avoid the jurisdiction of the courts. This would mean that the special jurisdiction rules would lose their alternative nature compared to the general jurisdiction rules.
cris.lastimport.wos | 2024-04-09T21:50:26Z | |
dc.abstract.en | The AMS Neve judgment presents an important step forward in the classification of the connecting factor of the place of infringement under the EU Trade Mark Regulation. The judgement concerns Article 97 of Regulation 207/2009, which is no longer in force, but is fully in line with the current Article 125 of Regulation 2017/1001. The EU High Court rightly pointed out that the court having jurisdiction over the place where the harmful event occurred is best positioned to decide on the case. This is justified by the proximity to the subject matter of the dispute and the ease of taking evidence. The EU High Court adopted a liberal position. In this judgment, it allowed for a broad access to the courts by the IP right holders. This interpretation appears to stem from the need to increase protection of IP rights in cases of their online infringements. The EU Trade Mark Regulation provides additional arguments for this liberal interpretation. A modification of the existing approach consists in adapting the jurisdictional rules to contemporary, modern forms of exploitation of intangible assets on the Internet. The EU High Court pointed out that adopting a narrow (restrictive) interpretation of the jurisdictional rules would lead to an increased risk that the infringers would operate in the territory of a given country in order to avoid the jurisdiction of the courts. This would mean that the special jurisdiction rules would lose their alternative nature compared to the general jurisdiction rules. | pl |
dc.contributor.author | Świerczyński, Marek | pl |
dc.date.accession | 2020-04-17 | pl |
dc.date.accessioned | 2020-04-17T15:53:36Z | |
dc.date.available | 2020-04-17T15:53:36Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2020 | pl |
dc.date.openaccess | 0 | |
dc.description.accesstime | w momencie opublikowania | |
dc.description.additional | Bibliogr. s. 165-166 | pl |
dc.description.number | 1 | pl |
dc.description.physical | 157-167 | pl |
dc.description.version | ostateczna wersja wydawcy | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.26106/amkp-fw04 | pl |
dc.identifier.issn | 1641-1609 | pl |
dc.identifier.uri | https://ruj.uj.edu.pl/xmlui/handle/item/154065 | |
dc.identifier.weblink | http://www.transformacje.pl/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/Świerczyński.pdf | pl |
dc.language | pol | pl |
dc.language.container | pol | pl |
dc.rights | Dozwolony użytek utworów chronionych | * |
dc.rights.licence | Inna otwarta licencja | |
dc.rights.uri | http://ruj.uj.edu.pl/4dspace/License/copyright/licencja_copyright.pdf | * |
dc.share.type | otwarte czasopismo | |
dc.subject.en | international jurisdiction | pl |
dc.subject.en | intellectual property | pl |
dc.subject.en | internet infringements | pl |
dc.subject.pl | jurysdykcja krajowa | pl |
dc.subject.pl | własność intelektualna | pl |
dc.subject.pl | naruszenia internetowe | pl |
dc.subtype | Article | pl |
dc.title | Glosa aprobująca do wyroku Trybunału Sprawiedliwości Unii Europejskiej w sprawie C-172/18 AMS Neve | pl |
dc.title.alternative | Commentary to the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union in case C-172/18 AMS Neve | pl |
dc.title.journal | Transformacje Prawa Prywatnego | pl |
dc.type | JournalArticle | pl |
dspace.entity.type | Publication |