Search

Freedom of expression can take many forms. Tattooing is one of these, which has recently become a common and widely accepted practice. When tattoos are original works and are „worn" by famous people, whose image is frequently used in commercial advertising, a conflict may arise between the tattoo artist's copyright in his work (of the tattoo) and the right to the tattooed person's own image. If the tattoos are not original, being taken from images, photos, drawings, protected by copyright or, in certain cases, by trademark rights, the tattoo artist can be held liable for the violation of intellectual property rights. After placing the practice of tattooing in the Internet era (1), the legal aspects of tattooing at the intersection of art and law are analyzed (2) establishing, first, whether the tattoo is a work of art and whether a copyright can be recognized on the tattoo (2.1.). A „reconciliation" is then attempted between the copyright of the tattoo and the personality rights of the tattooed person (2.2.). Finally, the problem of the violation of the rights of third parties by tattooing is briefly addressed (2.3.). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Romanian Case Law Review / Revista Română de Jurisprudenţă is the property of Universul Juridic Publishing House and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The trademark counterfeit action must not be confused with the trademark action for annulment. The two actions have a different purpose. The problem identified by the doctrine is that of the initiation of the trademark counterfeit action against somebody who already has a registered trademark. At European level it is considered that one can initiate a trademark counterfeit action against somebody who has a registered trademark, without it being canceled first. The Romanian jurisprudence considers that the trademark must first be canceled and only afterwards can a trademark counterfeit action be initiated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present paper tries to summarize the most important changed brought by the new Trademark Directive. The new directive regulates in more detail both substantive and procedural aspects, being considered part of the biggest reform since the introduction of the since the introduction of the CTM system. Thus, the new Directive continues the harmonisation efforts of the previous directives, adding new layers of harmonisation based on the rulings of the Court of Justice of the European Union and on the common experience of EUIPO and the national trademark offices. The Directive is comprised of more articles than the previous ones, with additional provision regarding the trademark filing, absolute and relative ground for refusal, trademark infringement (with a significant number of articles regulating this aspect), trademark use or procedural aspects. Where appropriate, the article also contains comments with respect to the present national trademarks law, and whether the new Directive will determine further changes of the same or the current provisions are in line with those of the new Directive. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Author's rights are protected by copyright law without recurring to any form of registration or formality, so that the work of an author is protected since the moment of creation. The purpose of this article is to analyse the cases in which a person register a sign as trade mark which is the property of another person and is protected by the copyright laws. In this analysis the focus is made on the practical issue, of how the author of the protected sign can take action so as to get trademark invalidation. Expressly provided by article 47 of the trademark Romanian Law no. 84/1998, trademark invalidation in the case of infringement of previous copyrights is left to the appreciation of the owner. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The possibility to use the alternative dispute resolution for litigation concerning breach of trademark rights by registration of .ro domain name is analysed, with a special view on the procedure provided by the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) which was applied with regard to the litigation on .ro domain names and organised by WIPO and NAF. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Within this present article we refer to the modalities by which the intellectual property rights are flagrantly violated, leading to important injuries for the beneficial owners, the State , and the consumers of these rights too. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]