To Be and Not to Be an IPR – the Protection of Trade Secrets in the EU

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift › Tidsskriftartikel › Forskning › fagfællebedømt

Standard

To Be and Not to Be an IPR – the Protection of Trade Secrets in the EU. / Schovsbo, Jens Hemmingsen; Riis, Thomas.

I: European Intellectual Property Review, Bind 41, Nr. 7, 2019, s. 401-403.

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift › Tidsskriftartikel › Forskning › fagfællebedømt

Harvard

Schovsbo, JH & Riis, T 2019, 'To Be and Not to Be an IPR – the Protection of Trade Secrets in the EU', European Intellectual Property Review, bind 41, nr. 7, s. 401-403.

APA

Schovsbo, J. H., & Riis, T. (2019). To Be and Not to Be an IPR – the Protection of Trade Secrets in the EU. European Intellectual Property Review, 41(7), 401-403.

Vancouver

Schovsbo JH, Riis T. To Be and Not to Be an IPR – the Protection of Trade Secrets in the EU. European Intellectual Property Review. 2019;41(7):401-403.

Author

Schovsbo, Jens Hemmingsen ; Riis, Thomas. / To Be and Not to Be an IPR – the Protection of Trade Secrets in the EU. I: European Intellectual Property Review. 2019 ; Bind 41, Nr. 7. s. 401-403.

Bibtex

@article{b44f7f5f51d1436b8a8b53a0682635db,
title = "To Be and Not to Be an IPR – the Protection of Trade Secrets in the EU",
abstract = "No international consensus has developed regarding the classification of trade secret as an Intellectual Property Right, a piece of property or something different. This article argues that one should not from the abstract classification of the nature of the protection of trade secrets seek to infer legal consequences and that classifying trade secrets could well be a matter of degrees; for some purposes, it might make sense to see trade secrets as an IPR whereas for other it does not. Using the example of the Enforcement Directive and TRIPS it is pointed out how these legal regimes classify trade secrets protection in different ways but also that they do so for the same purpose which is problematic. ",
author = "Schovsbo, {Jens Hemmingsen} and Thomas Riis",
year = "2019",
language = "English",
volume = "41",
pages = "401--403",
journal = "European Intellectual Property Review",
issn = "0142-0461",
publisher = "Sweet & Maxwell Ltd.",
number = "7",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - To Be and Not to Be an IPR – the Protection of Trade Secrets in the EU

AU - Schovsbo, Jens Hemmingsen

AU - Riis, Thomas

PY - 2019

Y1 - 2019

N2 - No international consensus has developed regarding the classification of trade secret as an Intellectual Property Right, a piece of property or something different. This article argues that one should not from the abstract classification of the nature of the protection of trade secrets seek to infer legal consequences and that classifying trade secrets could well be a matter of degrees; for some purposes, it might make sense to see trade secrets as an IPR whereas for other it does not. Using the example of the Enforcement Directive and TRIPS it is pointed out how these legal regimes classify trade secrets protection in different ways but also that they do so for the same purpose which is problematic.

AB - No international consensus has developed regarding the classification of trade secret as an Intellectual Property Right, a piece of property or something different. This article argues that one should not from the abstract classification of the nature of the protection of trade secrets seek to infer legal consequences and that classifying trade secrets could well be a matter of degrees; for some purposes, it might make sense to see trade secrets as an IPR whereas for other it does not. Using the example of the Enforcement Directive and TRIPS it is pointed out how these legal regimes classify trade secrets protection in different ways but also that they do so for the same purpose which is problematic.

M3 - Journal article

VL - 41

SP - 401

EP - 403

JO - European Intellectual Property Review

JF - European Intellectual Property Review

SN - 0142-0461

IS - 7

ER -

ID: 214340962