<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
  <title>NOPR Collection:</title>
  <link rel="alternate" href="http://nopr.niscpr.res.in/handle/123456789/14981" />
  <subtitle />
  <id>http://nopr.niscpr.res.in/handle/123456789/14981</id>
  <updated>2026-10-16T17:07:05Z</updated>
  <dc:date>2026-10-16T17:07:05Z</dc:date>
  <entry>
    <title>Patent Trolls: Legit Enforcers or Harrassers?</title>
    <link rel="alternate" href="http://nopr.niscpr.res.in/handle/123456789/15026" />
    <author>
      <name>Yang, Deli</name>
    </author>
    <id>http://nopr.niscpr.res.in/handle/123456789/15026</id>
    <updated>2016-07-20T04:36:48Z</updated>
    <published>2012-11-01T00:00:00Z</published>
    <summary type="text">Title: Patent Trolls: Legit Enforcers or Harrassers?
Authors: Yang, Deli
Abstract: Since the turn&#xD;
of the century, ‘patent trolls’ have emerged as one of the most topical debates&#xD;
among patent &#xD;
holders. However, nearly ten years later, stakeholders are still unable to&#xD;
reach consensus as to the ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ of ‘trolls’. Against this&#xD;
backdrop, our debates open with the landmark case of Blackberry between RIM and&#xD;
NTP to &#xD;
provide thoughts as to whether NTP is considered a troll. Then there is a focus&#xD;
on some conceptual issues surrounding ‘patent trolls’, and its origin citing&#xD;
relevant mini-cases. This column also lays out the fierce arguments for or&#xD;
against patent trolling among scholars and practitioners and reasoning for the&#xD;
trolling existence. The debates end with some reflections on the implication of&#xD;
patent trolling phenomenon on patent systems, particularly the US structure, subsequently,&#xD;
proposing some relevant solutions.
Page(s): 573-577</summary>
    <dc:date>2012-11-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <title>Has an Agreement been Reached on a Unitary Patent and a Unified Patent Court for Europe, and if so, what is it?</title>
    <link rel="alternate" href="http://nopr.niscpr.res.in/handle/123456789/15025" />
    <author>
      <name>Cook, Trevor</name>
    </author>
    <id>http://nopr.niscpr.res.in/handle/123456789/15025</id>
    <updated>2016-07-20T04:31:30Z</updated>
    <published>2012-11-01T00:00:00Z</published>
    <summary type="text">Title: Has an Agreement been Reached on a Unitary Patent and a Unified Patent Court for Europe, and if so, what is it?
Authors: Cook, Trevor
Abstract: At the end of June 2012 the European&#xD;
Council, consisting on this occasion of the heads of government of EU Member&#xD;
States, agreed on what has been presented as the final step on the long road to&#xD;
a unitary European patent and a court system in which it would be enforced.&#xD;
Although this agreement brings us closer than ever before to a unitary European&#xD;
patent and a single European patent court, the lessons of history are that this&#xD;
will not be the final stage in the process. Several hurdles still remain to be&#xD;
overcome before the new system is up and running.
Page(s): 568-572</summary>
    <dc:date>2012-11-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <title>The Berne Convention and the Iranian Law: Negative Implications of the Differences in the Scope of Application</title>
    <link rel="alternate" href="http://nopr.niscpr.res.in/handle/123456789/15024" />
    <author>
      <name>Manghutay, Ahad Gholizadeh</name>
    </author>
    <id>http://nopr.niscpr.res.in/handle/123456789/15024</id>
    <updated>2016-07-20T04:36:05Z</updated>
    <published>2012-11-01T00:00:00Z</published>
    <summary type="text">Title: The Berne Convention and the Iranian Law: Negative Implications of the Differences in the Scope of Application
Authors: Manghutay, Ahad Gholizadeh
Abstract: This paper compares Article 3 of the Berne&#xD;
Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works, 1886 with the&#xD;
corresponding Iranian provision. The Convention has three criteria for granting&#xD;
protection, i.e. nationality, habitual residence and first publication of the&#xD;
work in the Berne Union countries; whereas the Iranian law has only one&#xD;
criterion, i.e. the first publication of the work in Iran. Further, according to the&#xD;
Convention, the performance of a dramatic, dramatico-musical, cinematographic&#xD;
or musical work, the public recitation of a literary work, the communication by&#xD;
wire or the broadcasting of literary or artistic works and the exhibition of a&#xD;
work of art shall not constitute publication. These exceptions and their&#xD;
origins in the Convention in conjunction with the Iranian criterion leads to a&#xD;
total or partial gap of protection for Iranian authors or artists taking their&#xD;
works for first publication in the Berne Union countries.
Page(s): 559-567</summary>
    <dc:date>2012-11-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <title>Striking a Balance between Intellectual Property Protection of  Traditional Knowledge, Cultural Preservation and Access to Knowledge</title>
    <link rel="alternate" href="http://nopr.niscpr.res.in/handle/123456789/15023" />
    <author>
      <name>Andanda, Pamela</name>
    </author>
    <id>http://nopr.niscpr.res.in/handle/123456789/15023</id>
    <updated>2016-07-20T04:35:15Z</updated>
    <published>2012-11-01T00:00:00Z</published>
    <summary type="text">Title: Striking a Balance between Intellectual Property Protection of  Traditional Knowledge, Cultural Preservation and Access to Knowledge
Authors: Andanda, Pamela
Abstract: Protecting traditional knowledge through the&#xD;
intellectual property (IP) regime performs the important function of preventing&#xD;
third parties from using the knowledge inappropriately. However, apart from&#xD;
being inaccessible to most holders of traditional knowledge (TK), the regime&#xD;
does not necessarily guarantee the preservation or safeguarding the knowledge.&#xD;
These concerns call for a consideration of avenues that can be used,&#xD;
particularly at policy making level, to strike a balance between protecting TK&#xD;
through the IP regime and ensuring cultural preservation and access to&#xD;
knowledge. This paper highlights the main challenges that are involved in&#xD;
striking this balance. Apart from utilizing available literature on these challenges,&#xD;
the main suggestions from the World Intellectual Property Organization,&#xD;
Intergovernmental Committee on Intellectual Property and Genetic Resources,&#xD;
Traditional Knowledge and Folklore (the IGC) are analysed with a view to&#xD;
proposing directions that can help improve the manner in which TK is protected&#xD;
through IP.
Page(s): 547-558</summary>
    <dc:date>2012-11-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
  </entry>
</feed>

