Biotechnology and law: biotechnology patents. Special considerations on the inventions with human material.

The EC and the US differ considerably in their ruling on the patentability of biotechnological inventions apart from some exceptions. The most extreme positions in either direction with regard to the individual biotechnological inventions mark the margins of the scope which the WTO members may use for the ratification of Art. 27 TRIPS. Rulings which are not in accordance with Art. 27 TRIPS remain without consideration. In the most important point both WTO member agree: Human beings are not patentable. Other regulations could be considered, but one may assume that no member of the WTO intends to make use thereof. Thus the scope involving this option is only a theoretical one. The situation is different when it comes to the components of the human body. These may, provided they are produced artificially or are separated from the human body, be patented. According to the regulations in the US, this applies to all components with the exception of totipotent stem cells. They may be exempted from patenting entirely or their patenting is linked to far reaching conditions. As an example should be named here the regulation of the EPA for patenting gene sequences. The scope of this area is, thus, very great and allows for many options of applying the regulations of Art. 27 TRIPS. With regard to patenting procedures for cloning human beings, the scope is unlimited. These procedures may either be completely excluded from patenting as in the EC or may be considered patentable independent of their purpose as in the US. The same applies to procedures for gathering human stem cells in the US. Exempting procedures with regard to human genes or DNA sequences are, however, only possible in special cases, as for example in the EC with regard to procedures for altering the genetic identity of the germline of human beings. However, the interpretation of general patentability preconditions allows to influence the patenting of such procedures. This means, though, that the scope for interpretation is only a small one in this area.     

South African Supreme Court rules on copyright in software and computer-generated works

The South African Supreme Court of Appeal considers a numberof fundamental issues concerning copyright protection of computerprograms and computer-generated works; in doing so, the courtanalyses a number of basic copyright principles, notably themeaning of originality and the meaning of ‘substantialtaking’ in infringement cases.     

Labor Regulation,Corporate Governance,and Legal Origin: A Case of Institutional Complementarity?

We explore the influential claim that "legal origin"—the historical origin of a given national legal system in the common law or civil law—accounts for a significant degree of cross-national diversity in economic regulation and development. We show that the claim is undermined by problems in index construction and by a misreading of the implications of the common law/civil law divide for the respective roles of courts and legislatures in law making. We argue that a critical factor, instead, was the timing of industrialization in relation to the emergence of legal institutions associated with the modern business enterprise (the employment relationship and the joint stock company). We also show how distinctive "legal cultures" of the common law and civil law have played a part in setting national systems on separate pathways to economic development.     

Social harm future(s): exploring the potential of the social harm approach

The notion of social harm has sporadically interested critical criminologists as an alternative to the concept of crime. In particular, it has been viewed as a means to widen the rather narrow approach to harm that criminology offers. More recently, the publication of Beyond Criminology: Taking Harm Seriously has renewed interest in the notion of social harm. The book asserted a number of very valid reasons for a social harm approach that provoked a number of interesting critical responses. The article seeks to respond to five recurring questions: Should the social harm perspective move beyond criminology? If so, where should the perspective locate itself? From this position, how will the perspective continue to engage within ‘law and order’ debates and address the concerns of those affected by crime? If the notion of crime is problematic, how will the perspective form an alternative definition of harm? Moreover, without a notion of crime and the accompanying concept of criminal intent, how would the perspective allocate responsibility for harm? The article is not offering definitive answers to these questions, but possible directions for the perspective’s future development.     

Understanding IP enforcement in the United States and beyond

An often neglected topic in the field of IP law is IP borderenforcement. To a large extent, the protection and enforcementof IP rights is the burden of right holders and most discussionsinvolving the protection of these rights centre on (or at leastbegin with) obtaining patent, copyright, and trade mark protection.Additionally, much attention is paid to bringing and defendinginfringement suits. As a result, the importance of border enforcementis usually not given the attention     

Understanding Public Support for British Membership of the Single Currency

There has been much public debate about whether a referendum on British membership of the European single currency could be won despite opinion polls showing a widening gap between those opposed to membership and those in favour. However, academic research provides little insight into why British attitudes towards the Euro vary at an individual level, and hence what factors might be crucial in a referendum campaign. Existing studies suggest, among other things, that British political parties can shape voters' preferences on important public policy issues. We explore this and other explanations using data from recent Eurobarometer and British Elections Study surveys. We find that general evaluations of the EU, British national identity and concerns over the democratic character of EU governance are stronger predictors of support for the single currency than which party a person supports. However, we also find that the influence of these factors varies with a citizen's level of information about the Euro, which suggests that the supply and use of information might be crucial in a referendum campaign.