Ph.d.-studerende på CIIR

With the recent amendment of the EU trade mark rules, the scope of trade mark law was extended as trade marks no longer have to be “represented graphically” to be protectable. This opened the door to new types of marks such as smells and tastes. More or less at the same time, the EFTA Court in Vigeland (E-5/16) found that trade mark protection of works of art previously protected by copyright might violate ordre public or morality. Also it has been argued that courts should seek to limit protection of “cultural significant” trade marks to avoid an over extension of trade mark law. These two seemingly opposing developments are taking place at the same time and requires a rethinking of the scope and role of trade mark law at the intersection between the promotion of fairness in trade and protection of commercial investments and the interests in freedom of expression.

Contact persons:  Professor Jens Schovsbo

Whether or not to protect fashion – such as clothing and accessories – has for long given rise to much debate. According to some, the notion of “fashion” in itself suggest much freeway to imitate other designers. Distinguishing between the fair the unfair following is hard, however, and others argue that some kind of exclusivity to fashion items benefits society. To the EU-countries the protection of designs should be found primarily in copyright and design law. However, following the recent development in the case law of the CJEU ­– Doceram (C-395/16) and Cofemel (C-683/17) – the extent to which fashion items may in fact be protected remains in much doubt. The project should describe the characteristics to the market for fashion and should then investigate the limits to protection of fashion items. Apart from design and copyright law unfair competition and trade mark law could also be relied upon.

Contact persons:  Professor Jens Schovsbo

The freedom to imitate is an integral part of the market economy:  For the law of supply and demand to work, companies should be able to produce the products which the consumers want.  It is also accepted, however, that if unchecked imitation would lead to industrial decline and a lack of innovation. For this reasons the rules of intellectual property rights (IPR) grant exclusive right for limited times. Finding the right boundaries between imitation and exclusion, however, may be hard. Over the past years IPR has expanded its reach and protects more and more. In many countries unfair competition law provides for additional protection to prevent copying. It has often been reported, however, that the combined effect of IPR and supplementary norms may lead to overprotection and limit imitation too much. The project takes a close look at the intersection between IPR and norms such as those in unfair competition law and discusses how to make sure that the freedom to imitate is not limited unreasonably.

Contact persons:  Professor Jens Schovsbo

Med databeskyttelsesforordningen (GDPR) har beskyttelsen af personoplysninger fået en betydelig opmærksomhed, herunder også muligheden for at kræve erstatning og godtgørelse for persondatakrænkelser. Dette skyldes ikke mindst de mange medieeksponerede sager om brud på datasikkerheden og kompromittering af store mængder personoplysninger kombineret med de registreredes mulighed for at anlægge gruppesøgsmål, der potentielt kan føre til meget store krav. Også de mange sager om ulovlig deling af sexvideoer og andre former for privatlivskrænkelser på sociale medier aktualiserer spørgsmålet om godtgørelse for denne type krænkelser. Forordningen indeholder i art. 82 en bestemmelse erstatning for persondatakrænkelser, som langt fra er klar og rejser grundlæggende spørgsmål om ansvarsgrundlag, beregning af godtgørelse, regreskrav m.m. Projektet skal analysere disse spørgsmål med udgangspunkt i den praksis fra EU-Domstolen og medlemsstaterne, der begynder at udmønte sig i disse år. Projektet skal dermed bidrage til den udvikling af et nyt europæisk erstatningsretligt specialområde, der er under udvikling, og som fremover vil få stor praktisk betydning. 

Kontaktperson: Professor Henrik Udsen

En undersøgelse af reglerne om informationssikkerhed og deres indbyrdes samspil med henblik på at identificere ligheder og forskelle samt vurdere, om de forskellige regelsæt hviler på fælles principper, der er forbundet til mere velkendte retlige konstruktioner, f.eks. om ledelsesansvar.

Kontaktperson: Lektor Hanne Marie Motzfeldt

University research is more and more data driven and a vast amount of valuable research data is produced and compiled at publicly funded universities. Many university researchers perceive themselves as holders of rights in the scientific data they have produced etc. but it is not clear if such rights in data are established and if so, who is the owner of the rights. Navigating this web of “rights” (such as intellectual property rights, personal data rights or rights based on research ethics) and “rightsholders” (such as individual researchers, research groups, universities, external partners or donors of tissue and personal data) raises a number of complicated legal issues in terms of the identification of relevant rights and rightsholders. The project can either target specific issues and interests or focus or the interplay between the various rights and actors

Contact persons:  Professor Jens Schovsbo og Professor Thomas Riis 

IPR grant exclusive rights in information, the shape of product or commercial indicators of origin. Without consent from rightsholders third parties cannot copy texts such as computer programs, reproduce patented inventions or market products under a trade mark. But what happens if an information product breaks down and needs to be repaired? Or if the owner of a patented machine needs to replace a part of the machine? Can the repairer reproduce the damaged parts? By the same token: Can trade marked packaging be recycled and used by everyone? In short: Do owners of products which contain or represent IP-rights have a “right to repair”? Or can rightsholders stop the product? The rules of IPR are designed to work in a linear model of consumption, where products are “made” and wasted”. This project should describe how the transition to a circular economy where products are reused, repaired and recycle challenges the traditional norms of IPR and discuss ways to align copyright, patents, trade secrets and trade marks etc. with the circular economy.

Contact persons:  Professor Jens Schovsbo

GDPR includes provisions on administrative fines (art. 83) and liability (art. 82). These provisions give rise to a number of legal questions, including the level of administrative fines, the special arrangement for fines under Danish law, claims for non-economic loss under art. 82 and class action claims. The project should look into the sanction provisions of the GDPR and analyse the legal issues of these provisions.

Contact person: Professor Henrik Udsen