REPOZYTORIUM UNIWERSYTETU
W BIAŁYMSTOKU
UwB

Proszę używać tego identyfikatora do cytowań lub wstaw link do tej pozycji: http://hdl.handle.net/11320/12444
Pełny rekord metadanych
Pole DCWartośćJęzyk
dc.contributor.authorLewis, David-
dc.date.accessioned2022-01-21T09:13:07Z-
dc.date.available2022-01-21T09:13:07Z-
dc.date.issued2021-
dc.identifier.citationBiałostockie Studia Prawnicze, Vol. 26 nr 5, 2021, s. 41-62pl
dc.identifier.issn1689-7404-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11320/12444-
dc.description.abstractTh is article, which is intended for arbitration practitioners, demonstrates that international arbitration as a subset of the field of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) off ers a useful toolkit for the expeditious resolution of international intellectual property law disputes. The article demonstrates how the theory and practice of international arbitration is particularly well poised to address some of the specifi c considerations and requirements of paramount concern to the international intellectual property lawyers and their clients. The article will explain how the inherent features of the international arbitration legal landscape combine to indicate that it should be considered as the preferred method of ADR and explain how each of these features can provide both time and cost efficiencies. The article will identify the legal reasoning behind the benefi ts inherent to choosing international arbitration and will also address those circumstances when international arbitration may be precluded or otherwise considered unsuitable for intellectual property matters. Th e article examines several distinct benefi ts that international arbitration uniquely off ers to international intellectual property law users and highlights some areas of the fi eld that require additional caution.pl
dc.language.isoenpl
dc.publisherFaculty of Law, University of Białystok; Temida 2pl
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/deed.pl-
dc.subjectADRpl
dc.subjectarbitrationpl
dc.subjectcommercial lawpl
dc.subjectdispute resolutionpl
dc.subjectintellectual propertypl
dc.titleThe Adoption of International Arbitration as the Preferred ADR Process in the Resolution of International Intellectual Property Disputespl
dc.typeArticlepl
dc.rights.holderUznanie autorstwa-Użycie niekomercyjne-Bez utworów zależnych 3.0 Unportedpl
dc.identifier.doi10.15290/bsp.2021.26.05.03-
dc.description.Emaildavidaglewis@aol.compl
dc.description.BiographicalnoteDavid Lewis is a Ph.D., an ABA Dispute Resolution Section Fellow engaged with research on competence standards for ADR practitioners and the President of the Maryland Council for Dispute Resolution.pl
dc.description.AffiliationInternational Mediation Institute, USApl
dc.description.referencesAbram Landau Real Estate v. Bevonna, 123 F.3d 69, 73 (2d Cir. 1997).pl
dc.description.referencesAT&T Techs., Inc. v. Commc’ns Workers of Am., 475 U.S. 643 (1986).pl
dc.description.referencesBermann G. A., The ‘Gateway’ Problem in International Commercial Arbitration, “Yale Journal of International Law” 2012, vol. 1, 37, no. 1.pl
dc.description.referencesBlackaby R.N. et al., Redfern and Hunter on International Arbitration, Student Edition, Oxford 2009.pl
dc.description.referencesBlanke G., Samsung Electronics off ers arbitration commitment under article 9 of Regulation 1/2003, “Global Competition Litigation Review” 2014, vol. 7, no. 2.pl
dc.description.referencesBorn G.B., International Commercial Arbitration in The United States: Commentary and Materials, New York 1994.pl
dc.description.referencesBuckeye Check Cashing Inc. v. Cardegna, 546 U.S. 440 (2006).pl
dc.description.referencesCertilman S.A., Lutsker J. E., Arbitrability of Intellectual Property Disputes, (in:) T.D. Halket (ed.), Arbitration of Intellectual Property Disputes, Huntington, New York 2012.pl
dc.description.referencesConvention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, 10 June 1958, 21 U.S.T. 2519, 330 U.N.T.S. 3.pl
dc.description.referencesCook T., Garcia A.I., Intellectual Property Arbitration, Netherlands 2010.pl
dc.description.referencesDavid J.L., Harrison S., Edison in the Boardroom: How Leading Companies Realize Value From Their Intellectual Assets, Hoboken 2001.pl
dc.description.referencesThe DuPont Company’s Development of ADR Usage: From Theory to Practice, http://www.americanbar.org/publications/dispute_resolution_magazine/2014/spring/the-dupont-compans-development-of-adr-usage--from-theory-to-pra.html.pl
dc.description.referencesEpstein J. et al., A Practical Guide to International Commercial Arbitration, Dobbs Ferry 2000.pl
dc.description.referencesFirst Options of Chi., Inc. v. Kaplan, 514 U.S. 938 (1995).pl
dc.description.referencesFortune Magazine Global 500 2014, http://fortune.com/global500/dupont-320/.pl
dc.description.referencesFox Jr. W., International Commercial Agreements: A Primer on Drafting, Negotiating, and Resolving Disputes 3rd ed., The Hague 1998.pl
dc.description.referencesGraves J.M., Competence-Competence and Separability – American Style, (in:) S. Kröllet et al. (eds.), International Arbitration and International Commercial Law: Synergy, Convergence and Evolution, Netherlands 2011.pl
dc.description.referencesHarrison S.S., Sullivan Sr.P.H., United Einstein in the Boardroom – Moving Beyond Intellectual Capital to I-Stuff , United States 2006.pl
dc.description.referencesLi X.,Ten Misconceptions About the Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights, (in:) X. Li, C.M. Correa (eds.), Intellectual Property Enforcement: International Perspectives, Northampton, MA 2009.pl
dc.description.referencesLloreda, A., Exploring Alternative Dispute Resolution, (in:) L.G. Bryer et al. (eds.), Intellectual Property Strategies for the 21st Century Corporation: A Shift in Strategic and Financial Management, Hoboken 2011.pl
dc.description.referencesLucasfi lm v. Ainsworth (2011) UKSC 39, (2012) 1 AC 208, (2011) 3 WLR 487 (appeal taken from Eng.).pl
dc.description.referencesMascarenhas V., Using ‘Baseball Arbitration’ to Resolve FRAND Disputes, “Corporate Counsel” 2015, http://www.kslaw.com/imageserver/KSPublic/library/publication/2015articles/2–11-15_CorpCounsel_Mascarenhas.pdf.pl
dc.description.referencesMcSherry C., Who Owns Academic Work?, Cambridge, MA 2001.pl
dc.description.referencesMiller C. et al., The Handbook of Nanotechnology, Hoboken 2005, p. 254.pl
dc.description.referencesMoses M.L., The Principles and Practice of International Commercial Arbitration, Cambridge 2008.pl
dc.description.referencesOther relevant conventions http://www.newyorkconvention.org/other-relevant-conventions.pl
dc.description.referencesPrima Paint Corp. v. Flood & Conklin Mfg. Co., 388 U.S. 395 (1967).pl
dc.description.referencesRent-a-Ctr., W., Inc. v. Jackson, 130 S. Ct. 2772, (2010).pl
dc.description.referencesRiley Mfg. Co. v. Anchor Glass Container Corp., 157 F.3d 775, 779 (10th Cir. 1998).pl
dc.description.referencesRyder R.D., Madhavan A., Intellectual Property and Business: The Power of Intangible Assets, United States 2014.pl
dc.description.referencesSilverman A.E., Intellectual Property Law and the Venture Capital Process, “High Technology Law Journal” 1989, vol. 5, no. 1.pl
dc.description.referencesShaw P.D., Managing Legal and Security Risks in Computing and Communications, Oxford 1998.pl
dc.description.referencesShell G.R., Res Judicata and Collateral Estoppel Effects of Commercial Arbitration, “UCLA Law Review” 1988, vol. 35.pl
dc.description.referencesSmit R.H., General Commentary on the WIPO Arbitration Rules, Recommended Clauses, General Provisions and the WIPO Expedited Arbitration Rules: Articles 1 to 5; Articles 39 and 40, (in:) H. Smit (ed.), WIPO Arbitration Rules: Commentary and Analyses, Huntington, New York 2009.pl
dc.description.referencesStates parties to the New York Convention, http://www.newyorkconvention.org/new-york-convention-countries/contracting-states and http://www.newyorkconvention.org/contracting-states/list-of-contracting-states.pl
dc.description.referencesSullivan P. H., Value-Drive Intellectual Capital: How to Convert Intangible Corporate Assets into Market Value, United States 2000.pl
dc.description.referencesTRIPS: Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights, 15 April 1994, Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, Annex 1C, The Legal Texts: The Results of the Uruguay Round of Multilateral Trade Negotiations 320 (1999), 1869 U.N.T.S. 299, 33 I.L.M. 1197 (1994).pl
dc.description.referencesTroller K., Intellectual Property Disputes in Arbitration, “Arbitration: The International Journal of Arbitration, Mediation and Dispute Management” 2006, vol. 72.pl
dc.description.referencesU.N. Commission on International Trade Law, Report on its 39th Session, 19 June–7 July 2006, U.N. Doc.A/61/17 (14 July 2006), http://www.uncitral.org/uncitral/en/uncitral_texts/arbitration/1985Model_arbitration_status.html.pl
dc.description.referencesUniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy as Approved by ICANN on 24 October 1999, https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/policy-2012–02-25-en.pl
dc.description.referencesU.S. Code > Title 9 Arbitration > CHAPTER 1—GENERAL PROVISIONS (§§ 1–16).pl
dc.description.referencesU.S. Code > Title 9 Arbitration > CHAPTER 1—GENERAL PROVISIONS (§ 4). Failure to arbitrate under agreement; petition to United States court having jurisdiction for order to compel arbitration; notice and service thereof; hearing and determination.pl
dc.description.referencesvan den Berg A.J., The New York Convention of 1958: An Overview, pp. 6–9, http://www.arbitrationicca.org/media/0/12125884227980/new_york_convention_of_1958_overview.pdf.pl
dc.description.referencesWheeler M., The Art of Negotiation: How to Improvise Agreement in a Chaotic World, United States 2013.pl
dc.description.referencesWing J.D., International Arbitration and Mediation – Th e Professional’s Perspective, (in:) A. Alebekova, R. Carrow (eds.), International Arbitration and Mediation: From the Professional’s Perspective, United States 2007.pl
dc.description.referencesWIPO Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) for Intellectual Property Offices, https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/center/specifi c-sectors/ipoffices/.pl
dc.description.referencesWorld Intellectual Property Organization, Why Arbitration in Intellectual Property?, http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/arbitration/why-is-arb.html.pl
dc.identifier.eissn2719–9452-
dc.description.volume26pl
dc.description.number5pl
dc.description.firstpage41pl
dc.description.lastpage62pl
dc.identifier.citation2Białostockie Studia Prawniczepl
Występuje w kolekcji(ach):Białostockie Studia Prawnicze, 2021, Vol. 26 nr 5 (Special Issue)

Pliki w tej pozycji:
Plik Opis RozmiarFormat 
BSP_26_5_D_Lewis_The_Adoption_of_International_Arbitration.pdf231,58 kBAdobe PDFOtwórz
Pokaż uproszczony widok rekordu Zobacz statystyki


Pozycja ta dostępna jest na podstawie licencji Licencja Creative Commons CCL Creative Commons