Fundamental principles of the international protection system of intellectual property rights and the applications

Legal principle, which underlies the value of the legal system, is supposed to be the origin and basis of concrete legal rules. It has also resulted from abstracting and summarizing the value and spirit of these legal rules. In light of the universality and hierarchy of legal principle, the principles of the international protection system of intellectual property rights (IPR) can be divided into the following two types: one is the fundamental principles applied to the what, why and how a legal system shall be constructed, such as principles of sovereignty, equality and mutual benefit, joint development, and international cooperation, which also can be expressed as the principles of sovereignty, international coordination and cooperation, fairness and justice. The other type includes those existing in the legal system and capable of being applied directly, such as the principle of national treatment, principle of minimum standard, principle of independence (for industrial property right), principle of independent protection (for copyright), principle of compulsory implementing patent (for patent right) and doctrine of priority (for industrial property right), etc. In my opinion, the principles of the international protection system of IPR shall follow the latter model, indicating that they shall be provided and written in the international conventions on the grounds that they can be applied directly, and that they can be universally applied to the whole international protection system of IPR instead of exclusive application to one certain system. Hereupon, the author believes that principles concerning the international protection system of IPR should include the principles of national treatment, minimum protection standard and public interest.     

To Wonderland Through the Looking-glass: Conceiving a Critical Legal Argument for Contractual Justice in the South African Law of Contract †

The aim of this paper is to identify the possible substructure (looking glass/es) of a critical legal argument for contractual justice (Wonderland) in the South African law of contract. South African contract law still fails, ten years after the constitutional transformation, to reflect the constitutional ideals of freedom, equality and human dignity in an acceptable manner. I argue that this disposition places a question mark over the legitimacy of contract law and marginalizes opportunities for the social change envisaged by the Constitution. The paper explores Duncan Kennedy’s Form and Substance-argument and indicates that the reluctance to accommodate these values may be attributable to the fact that the majority of role-players position themselves on the individualism/rules side of Kennedy’s continuum – a paradigm that perceives the law of contract as a body of positivistic rules to be applied neutrally and regardless of the social or socio-economic distortions its application may generate. In an attempt to move away from this traditional approach, the privileged paradigm is criticised. A typical CLS-approach is followed which employs sociology, psychological jurisprudence and game theory to criticise the law from outside the restrictive realms of law itself. Simultaneously, I attempt to illuminate the argument for a shift (step through the looking glass) to another paradigm. I conclude that our judiciary finds itself in a position similar to that of Plato’s prisoners in the cave and will not reach the point where they apply relevant (constitutional) values directly to contractual disputes. The State is thus responsible for infusing contract law with contractual justice, by implementing legislation to this effect in order to limit the hegemonic consequences of the judiciary’s obsession with freedom of contract and utopian rules, which fail in reality to further the ideal of justice. Paper presented at the Critical Legal Conference, 4 September 2004, London, UK. This paper is dedicated to the memory of the late Judge of Appeal, Mr. Justice P.J. Olivier. The paper is based on research conducted for the thesis in partial fulfilment of the degree LLD in the Faculty of Law at the University of Pretoria under the title ‘A critical legal argument for contractual justice in the South African law of contract.’ The degree supervisor is Professor Karin van Marle in the Department of Legal History, Comparative Law and Jurisprudence. The author wishes to thank the following persons for valuable deliberations and input: Karin van Marle, Graham Bradfield and Anashri Pillay. In addition, the author wishes to acknowledge and thank the University of Cape Town for financially supporting this research. †Paper presented at the Critical Legal Conference, 4 September 2004, London, UK. This paper is dedicated to the memory of the late Judge of Appeal, Mr. Justice P.J. Olivier. The paper is based on research conducted for the thesis in partial fulfilment of the degree LLD in the Faculty of Law at the University of Pretoria under the title ‘A critical legal argument for contractual justice in the South African law of contract.’ The degree supervisor is Professor Karin van Marle in the Department of Legal History, Comparative Law and Jurisprudence. The author wishes to thank the following persons for valuable deliberations and input: Karin van Marle, Graham Bradfield and Anashri Pillay. In addition, the author wishes to acknowledge and thank the University of Cape Town for financially supporting this research. apply relevant (constitutional) values directly to contractual disputes. The State is thus responsible for infusing contract law with contractual justice, by implementing legislation to this effect in order to limit the hegemonic consequences of the judiciary’s obsession with freedom of contract and utopian rules, which fail in reality to further the ideal of justice.     

电子商务中知识产权的法律保护

电子商务活动对社会的多个方面造成了很大的影响,也对传统的知识产权保护内容、保护方式、具体的原理及制度构建等方面提出了新的要求。在立法尚未完善的情况下,司法为拓宽电子商务领域知识产权保护做了一定的探讨。建立完善的电子商务自律机构和规则、逐渐完善相关的立法、加大对侵权行为的打击力度、协调国际上的知识产权保护,是发展电子商务并充分保护知识产权的有效途径。     

治安状况评价的价值及其原则

治安状况评价是运用社会评价的原理,依据一定的指标体系和统计调查资料对治安秩序状况进行评估的活动。它是准确把握治安状况的基本方法,是确定治安目标、制定治安对策、进行治安控制的重要基础。治安状况评价不能脱离社会发展水平,应以原有治安秩序为基础和参照物,着重考察治安秩序破坏力与控制力的动态平衡状态,将客观现象与主观感受、整体评价与具体分析相结合进行综合测评。     

简论公安院校学管工作中的柔性管理

柔性管理是相对于刚性管理而提出来的。在公安院校警务化管理中,多重视刚性管理而轻柔性管理。其实,柔性管理思想也有其独特的效用。在公安院校学生管理中应亦刚亦柔,刚柔并济。     

宋代公文繁荣原因初探

宋代公无论从数量、名篇还是从作队伍来讲，都达到了登峰造极的地步，对后代产生了深远的影响。宋代公的繁荣，与其崇抑武的国策和科举考试内容的改变、科举考试取士数量的增加密切相关；同时，与人士大夫的精神和整个社会思潮的嬗变也密切相关。北宋和南宋长期存在的竞争和派系斗争，使人以论事的现象非常普遍。这对以化事、长于说理、重实轻虎的公风格的形成和对公的繁荣和发展也是不可忽视的原因。     

大学图书馆电子化及其在互动教学中的作用

本文从当前高校传统图书馆建设的弊端分析入手,从高校网络建设的利弊分析和扬长避短、趋利避害着眼,论述了如何经济可行地在信息化社会将高校图书馆与高校网络建设有机地结合起来,适应信息社会潮流,开展互动式教学,提高办学层次,在市场经济和教育产业化条件下,创造规模效益式的办学优势。     

论我国立法监督机制的完善

立法监督是一国立法工作中不可缺少的一个重要方面 ,也是完善一国法律体系的一项重要内容。如何建立和完善具有中国特色的立法监督机制 ,一直是我国法学界同仁们探索的一个理论与实践问题。文章在揭示我国目前立法监督机制缺陷的基础上 ,提出了由全国政协作为专门立法监督机构和建立立法听证的审查制和立法听证制度的主张。     

Managing commercial risks in open source software licensing

Legal context: The article reviews the commercial risk allocation clauses intypical open source licence terms and discusses their enforceabilityand implications. Key points: The enforceability of warranty disclaimers and limitation ofliability clauses in common open source licence terms is questionable,particularly in a cross-border context, and commercial licensorsshould take additional steps to protect themselves from down-streamrisks. Practical significance: Open source software presents a number of unusual commercialissues, because it is available free of charge and the providerstry to disclaim warranties and liabilities. End users and resellershave to adjust their own in- and out-licensing models to accommodatethis situation.     

A SHORT COMMENTARY ON TIMOTHY M. TIPPINS AND JEFFREY P. WITTMANN'S "EMPIRICAL AND ETHICAL PROBLEMS WITH CUSTODY RECOMMENDATIONS

In this commentary, the call for clinical humility and judicial vigilance in custody recommendations is confirmed as valid and the Australian experience, where the child custody report writer has for some years been permitted to express an opinion on the ultimate issue, is considered. The inherent risks are briefly discussed, and the question of who of the judge and the social scientist might be better placed to decide the exquisitely difficult children's issues after family breakdown is touched upon. It suggests that a combination of the expert's opinion and judicial fact finding probably produces a result that is as good as it gets. But a greater danger is highlighted. It is the impact of the adversary system, and whether it is suitable in any event to these sensitive court decisions.