International Jurisdiction in Intellectual Property Disputes: CLIP, ALI Principles and other Legislative Proposals in a Comparative Perspective (original) (raw)

2012, JIPITEC (2012) pp. 174-226

""The recent controversy between two tech giants, Apple and Samsung, illustrates the practical limitations of multi-state IP litigation: the territorial nature of IP rights virtually means that most of the complex IP disputes have to be adjudicated before the courts of every state for which protection is sought. In order to streamline the adjudication of multi-state disputes, a number of legislative proposals have been prepared (including the ALI Principles, CLIP Principles, Japanese Transparency Proposal, Waseda Proposal and the Korean KOPILA Principles). These proposals contain detailed provisions concerning matters of international jurisdiction, choice of law and recognition and enforcement in IP cases. Moreover, these legislative proposals in one way or another were drafted with a vision to facilitate cooperation between the courts and thus make the adjudication more efficient. However, the actual practices of national courts remain different; moreover, the approaches adopted in the legislative proposals also vary. This paper was presented at the International Law Association 'Intellectual Property and Private International Law' Committee meeting which took place in March 2012 in Lisbon. The paper provides for a comparative study of the abovementioned legislative proposals insofar as matters concerning the competence of courts to adjudicate cross-border IP disputes is concerned. In particular, this paper touches upon the following matters: personal/in personam jurisdiction, jurisdiction to grant provisional or protective measures, jurisdiction in IP-related contract disputes, choice of court agreements, multiple defendants and coordination of parallel proceedings. ""