O2 Muu julkaisu
Trends on the implementation of the EU Customs Regulation – for better or for worse?
Tekijät: Daniel Acquah
Kustantaja: Verlag C.H.Beck oHG
Julkaisuvuosi: 2015
Journal: Gewerblicher Rechtsschutz Und Urheberrecht: Internationaler Teil
Lehden akronyymi: GRUR INT
Vuosikerta: 64
Numero: 10
Aloitussivu: 989
Lopetussivu: 996
eISSN: 1522-2438
Tiivistelmä
Customs enforcement of intellectual property rights
remains the most important means the EU uses to
block the trade in counterfeit goods. As a monitoring
mechanism, the Commission publishes annually a
report on customs action to enforce intellectual property
rights based on its Customs Regulation.
• A new Customs Regulation (Regulation 608/2013)
came into force in January 2014 and serves as the
legal basis for the 2014 customs report.
• Analyzing the content of this new Regulation and
those of the Commission’s annual reports from the
years 2008-2013, and based on recent case law, this
article argues that the new Regulation would more
likely “do a better job” in the fight against counterfeiting
compared to its predecessor, based on: (1) the
novel inclusion of devices which enable circumvention
of technology; (2) a new simplified procedure for
the destruction of small consignments of goods; (3)
an EU-wide simplified procedure for all (other) infringements
of intellectual property rights; and (4) a
non-legislative Union Customs Action Plan(s) to combat
intellectual property rights infringements.
Customs enforcement of intellectual property rights
remains the most important means the EU uses to
block the trade in counterfeit goods. As a monitoring
mechanism, the Commission publishes annually a
report on customs action to enforce intellectual property
rights based on its Customs Regulation.
• A new Customs Regulation (Regulation 608/2013)
came into force in January 2014 and serves as the
legal basis for the 2014 customs report.
• Analyzing the content of this new Regulation and
those of the Commission’s annual reports from the
years 2008-2013, and based on recent case law, this
article argues that the new Regulation would more
likely “do a better job” in the fight against counterfeiting
compared to its predecessor, based on: (1) the
novel inclusion of devices which enable circumvention
of technology; (2) a new simplified procedure for
the destruction of small consignments of goods; (3)
an EU-wide simplified procedure for all (other) infringements
of intellectual property rights; and (4) a
non-legislative Union Customs Action Plan(s) to combat
intellectual property rights infringements.
Turun yliopiston Tutkimustietojärjestelmän portaali