Skip to main content

IP License as an Investment: Insights from Bridgestone v.Panama


IP License as an Investment: Insights from Bridgestone v.Panama

Please find full article here:

ABSTRACT

The relationship between intellectual property (IP)and investment is old, but the debates are new. Recent high profile cases in which intellectual property rights(IPRs) are being sought to be protected by means of international investment law and treaties have generated visible debate and discussion. In the light of the recent decision on expedited objections in Bridgestone Licensing v. Republic of Panama, this article will explore arguments put forwarded by both parties regarding the interaction between IP Licence Agreements and the definition of investment, as well as the Tribunal’s finding on the question whether an IP Licence with a
revenue sharing model qualifies as an investment.

Citation: Pratyush Nath Upreti, IP License as an Investment: Insights from Bridgestone v.Panama (2018)1(1) Stockholm Intellectual Property Review 16
full text of the article is available here and Here

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Intellectual Property Rights in Nepal

Pratyush Nath Upreti

Speaking at a memorial service for Nelson Mandela on Dec 10, 2013, South African President Jacob Zuma said, “There is no one like Madiba. He was one of a kind.” Indeed the South African president’s statement about the world’s greatest liberator who contributed so much to strengthening the values of human rights is very significant. Mandela is an inspiration for all mankind. Unfortunately, a controversy has arisen over the ownership and unauthorised use of the name Mandela since his death.

Nelson Mandela’s image, name and quotations have been registered under the proprietorship of the Nelson Mandela Foundation as per South African trademark laws. They are registered under several classes including jewellery, clothing, books and other products. Furthermore, other proprietors of the Mandela brand include the Nelson Mandela Children’s Hospital Trust, Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University and the Nelson Mandela Children’s Fund. Infringement and unauthorised use of t…

Nepal's First National Intellectual Property Policy-2017

Philip Morris v Uruguay: A Breathing Space for Domestic IP Regulation

Just received a copy of my recent publication.







Citation: Pratyush Nath Upreti, Philip Morris v Uruguay: A Breathing Space for Domestic IP Regulation, European Intellectual Property Review (2018)40(4), 277­
At The Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market (OHIM) of European Union, Alicante, Spain, 2015