Overprotection and Protection Overlaps in Intellectual Property Law - the Need for Horizontal Fair Use Defences

Research output: Chapter in Book / Report / Conference proceedingChapterAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

During the last decades, intellectual property protection has been expanded continuously. New technologies were found eligible for patent protection. New types of marks have been recognized in trademark law. Copyright law is no longer confined to the cultural domain. In parallel, the exclusive rights of IP owners have been broadened. The TRIPS Agreement provides for a comprehensive portfolio of patent minimum rights. The WIPO Copyright Treaty added new layers of protection to the standard reached under the Berne Convention. As a result of protection against dilution, trademark rights have become instruments for the exploitation of brand image.

Enhanced protection, however, gives rise to the question of appropriate counterbalances. Flexible rights are likely to require flexible limitations for at least two reasons. On the one hand, flexible limitations facilitate the task of maintaining a proper balance between protection and competing freedoms within individual protection regimes. On the other hand, flexible limitations can be employed to safeguard breathing space for unauthorized use when it comes to overlaps between different forms of IP protection. If an intellectual creation enjoys cumulative protection in different IP protection systems, a network of corresponding, flexible limitations ensures that the freedom offered in one system is not eroded through protection granted in another system.

The flexibility required within and across IP protection regimes may be provided by open-ended fair use provisions that allow the courts to develop and adjust IP limitations case-by-case on the basis of abstract criteria. Against this background, the paper explores the notion of fair use and identifies factors indicating a need for fair use solutions before embarking on a discussion of the situation in copyright, patent and trademark law. Drawing conclusions, protection overlaps will be considered.
LanguageEnglish
Title of host publicationThe Structure of Intellectual Property Law: Can One Size Fit All?
EditorsA. Kur, V. Mizaras
Place of PublicationCheltenham, UK
PublisherEdward Elgar
Pages136-181
Number of pages384
ISBN (Print)9781848448766
Publication statusPublished - 2011

Publication series

NameATRIP Intellectual Property

Fingerprint

parenting style
trademark
intellectual property
patent
Law
patent protection
treaty
exploitation
new technology
flexibility

Cite this

Senftleben, M. R. F. (2011). Overprotection and Protection Overlaps in Intellectual Property Law - the Need for Horizontal Fair Use Defences. In A. Kur, & V. Mizaras (Eds.), The Structure of Intellectual Property Law: Can One Size Fit All? (pp. 136-181). (ATRIP Intellectual Property). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
Senftleben, M.R.F. / Overprotection and Protection Overlaps in Intellectual Property Law - the Need for Horizontal Fair Use Defences. The Structure of Intellectual Property Law: Can One Size Fit All?. editor / A. Kur ; V. Mizaras. Cheltenham, UK : Edward Elgar, 2011. pp. 136-181 (ATRIP Intellectual Property).
@inbook{de6792f1b4f043a3b2168b55bd8d61f6,
title = "Overprotection and Protection Overlaps in Intellectual Property Law - the Need for Horizontal Fair Use Defences",
abstract = "During the last decades, intellectual property protection has been expanded continuously. New technologies were found eligible for patent protection. New types of marks have been recognized in trademark law. Copyright law is no longer confined to the cultural domain. In parallel, the exclusive rights of IP owners have been broadened. The TRIPS Agreement provides for a comprehensive portfolio of patent minimum rights. The WIPO Copyright Treaty added new layers of protection to the standard reached under the Berne Convention. As a result of protection against dilution, trademark rights have become instruments for the exploitation of brand image. Enhanced protection, however, gives rise to the question of appropriate counterbalances. Flexible rights are likely to require flexible limitations for at least two reasons. On the one hand, flexible limitations facilitate the task of maintaining a proper balance between protection and competing freedoms within individual protection regimes. On the other hand, flexible limitations can be employed to safeguard breathing space for unauthorized use when it comes to overlaps between different forms of IP protection. If an intellectual creation enjoys cumulative protection in different IP protection systems, a network of corresponding, flexible limitations ensures that the freedom offered in one system is not eroded through protection granted in another system. The flexibility required within and across IP protection regimes may be provided by open-ended fair use provisions that allow the courts to develop and adjust IP limitations case-by-case on the basis of abstract criteria. Against this background, the paper explores the notion of fair use and identifies factors indicating a need for fair use solutions before embarking on a discussion of the situation in copyright, patent and trademark law. Drawing conclusions, protection overlaps will be considered.",
author = "M.R.F. Senftleben",
year = "2011",
language = "English",
isbn = "9781848448766",
series = "ATRIP Intellectual Property",
publisher = "Edward Elgar",
pages = "136--181",
editor = "A. Kur and V. Mizaras",
booktitle = "The Structure of Intellectual Property Law: Can One Size Fit All?",

}

Senftleben, MRF 2011, Overprotection and Protection Overlaps in Intellectual Property Law - the Need for Horizontal Fair Use Defences. in A Kur & V Mizaras (eds), The Structure of Intellectual Property Law: Can One Size Fit All?. ATRIP Intellectual Property, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK, pp. 136-181.

Overprotection and Protection Overlaps in Intellectual Property Law - the Need for Horizontal Fair Use Defences. / Senftleben, M.R.F.

The Structure of Intellectual Property Law: Can One Size Fit All?. ed. / A. Kur; V. Mizaras. Cheltenham, UK : Edward Elgar, 2011. p. 136-181 (ATRIP Intellectual Property).

Research output: Chapter in Book / Report / Conference proceedingChapterAcademicpeer-review

TY - CHAP

T1 - Overprotection and Protection Overlaps in Intellectual Property Law - the Need for Horizontal Fair Use Defences

AU - Senftleben, M.R.F.

PY - 2011

Y1 - 2011

N2 - During the last decades, intellectual property protection has been expanded continuously. New technologies were found eligible for patent protection. New types of marks have been recognized in trademark law. Copyright law is no longer confined to the cultural domain. In parallel, the exclusive rights of IP owners have been broadened. The TRIPS Agreement provides for a comprehensive portfolio of patent minimum rights. The WIPO Copyright Treaty added new layers of protection to the standard reached under the Berne Convention. As a result of protection against dilution, trademark rights have become instruments for the exploitation of brand image. Enhanced protection, however, gives rise to the question of appropriate counterbalances. Flexible rights are likely to require flexible limitations for at least two reasons. On the one hand, flexible limitations facilitate the task of maintaining a proper balance between protection and competing freedoms within individual protection regimes. On the other hand, flexible limitations can be employed to safeguard breathing space for unauthorized use when it comes to overlaps between different forms of IP protection. If an intellectual creation enjoys cumulative protection in different IP protection systems, a network of corresponding, flexible limitations ensures that the freedom offered in one system is not eroded through protection granted in another system. The flexibility required within and across IP protection regimes may be provided by open-ended fair use provisions that allow the courts to develop and adjust IP limitations case-by-case on the basis of abstract criteria. Against this background, the paper explores the notion of fair use and identifies factors indicating a need for fair use solutions before embarking on a discussion of the situation in copyright, patent and trademark law. Drawing conclusions, protection overlaps will be considered.

AB - During the last decades, intellectual property protection has been expanded continuously. New technologies were found eligible for patent protection. New types of marks have been recognized in trademark law. Copyright law is no longer confined to the cultural domain. In parallel, the exclusive rights of IP owners have been broadened. The TRIPS Agreement provides for a comprehensive portfolio of patent minimum rights. The WIPO Copyright Treaty added new layers of protection to the standard reached under the Berne Convention. As a result of protection against dilution, trademark rights have become instruments for the exploitation of brand image. Enhanced protection, however, gives rise to the question of appropriate counterbalances. Flexible rights are likely to require flexible limitations for at least two reasons. On the one hand, flexible limitations facilitate the task of maintaining a proper balance between protection and competing freedoms within individual protection regimes. On the other hand, flexible limitations can be employed to safeguard breathing space for unauthorized use when it comes to overlaps between different forms of IP protection. If an intellectual creation enjoys cumulative protection in different IP protection systems, a network of corresponding, flexible limitations ensures that the freedom offered in one system is not eroded through protection granted in another system. The flexibility required within and across IP protection regimes may be provided by open-ended fair use provisions that allow the courts to develop and adjust IP limitations case-by-case on the basis of abstract criteria. Against this background, the paper explores the notion of fair use and identifies factors indicating a need for fair use solutions before embarking on a discussion of the situation in copyright, patent and trademark law. Drawing conclusions, protection overlaps will be considered.

M3 - Chapter

SN - 9781848448766

T3 - ATRIP Intellectual Property

SP - 136

EP - 181

BT - The Structure of Intellectual Property Law: Can One Size Fit All?

A2 - Kur, A.

A2 - Mizaras, V.

PB - Edward Elgar

CY - Cheltenham, UK

ER -

Senftleben MRF. Overprotection and Protection Overlaps in Intellectual Property Law - the Need for Horizontal Fair Use Defences. In Kur A, Mizaras V, editors, The Structure of Intellectual Property Law: Can One Size Fit All?. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar. 2011. p. 136-181. (ATRIP Intellectual Property).