100%(7)7 out of 7 people found this document helpful
This preview shows page 1 - 3 out of 8 pages.
CHAPTER17LICENSINGAGREEMENTSANDTHEPROTECTIONOFINTELLECTUALPROPERTYRIGHTSCASESINTHISCHAPTERDiamond v. Chakrabarty, p. 532.Mobile Communications Services, Inc. v. WebReg, RN, p. 535.TVBO Production Limited v. Australia Sky Net Pty Limited, p. 537.Comite Interprofessional du Vin de Champagne v. Wineworths Group, Ltd., p. 541.Walt Disney Co. v. Beijing Publishing Press, p. 546.A. Bourjois & Co. v. Katzel, p. 551.TEACHINGSUMMARYThe protection of intellectual property, be it copyrighted materials, trademarks/ tradenames, or technological patents, has become increasingly important in the global marketplace. For example, a patent application or trademark filed in one country will not ensure IPR protection in another country. Many international treaties, such as WIPO, and disputes resolution systems now exist that provide uniform rules, seeking to protect IPR and recognizing divergent national protections of IPR. The most recent incarnation of this issue has been with regard to technologies and domain names.CASESANDQUESTIONSDiamond v. Chakrabarty, p. 532.1.What was the basis for the examiner’s rejection of the bacterium from patent protection?2.What was the primary reason given by the U.S. Supreme Court for rejecting the patent examiner’s opinion?3.Is the patenting of life forms such as the bacterium in this case a positive development?