Volume 9 | Number 2
Volume 9 | Number 2
You may download the Full Edition. Journal content dating from 2005 is available on the Lexis-Nexis database. Content dating from 2006 is available on the HeinOnline database. Journal content, starting with Volume 8, is now available on the Westlaw database. (subscriptions required).
BEYOND THEORIES: INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY DYNAMICS IN THE GLOBAL KNOWLEDGE ECONOMY
9 Wake Forest Intell. Prop. L.J. 104
This Article critically examines the inadequacy of theoretical postulates on intellectual property. It acknowledges that theorizing around intellectual property is an important ongoing but elusive intellectual adventure that is critical for law and policy direction on intellectual property. Perhaps, at no time is this fact more obvious than in the extant post-industrial epoch or the era of Global Knowledge Economy (“GKE”). The latter is spurred by advances in bio- and digital technologies. Both phenomena drive significant shift and transition in intellectual property jurisprudence and in the tide of innovation from physical to life sciences. They also supervise implosions in new and complex domains or sites for knowledge and information generation. As its feature, the global knowledge economic order is supported by an institutional and structural shift in international intellectual property lawmaking and governance provoking a serendipitous counter-regime dynamic and diversification of sites for contestations around intellectual property. The pivotal role of intellectual property in the GKE presents intellectual property as an increasingly multidisciplinary subject with complex issue linkages in virtually all fronts including public health, human rights, biodiversity, biotechnology, biopiracy, the environment, ethics, culture, indigenous knowledge, electronic commerce, and research ethos. Overall, these and many more issue linkages to intellectual property are part of the latter’s open-ended dynamics in the GKE. They are constitutive of a myriad of factors that task and shape policy and theory on intellectual property as the knowledge economy continues to unravel.
FASHION DESIGN: THE WORK OF ART THAT IS STILL UNRECOGNIZED IN THE UNITED STATES
9 Wake Forest Intell. Prop. L.J. 155
The author observes that although increasingly, modern day fashion is perceived as art, the United States currently fails to protect fashion designs as a work of art under its intellectual property laws. The author contends that fashion designs should have protection against design piracy, the practice of copying original fashion designs and selling the apparel under a different label, and not only the practice of counterfeiting articles. Copyright law does not protect “useful articles” and has traditionally denied copyright protection to fashion designs because clothing garments have been viewed as useful articles and not artistic creations. The note proposes that protecting against design piracy will prevent copying and in turn diminish the sale of counterfeit goods. The note reviews and discusses several issues, including: (I) the attempts of fashion pioneers over the past century to establish protection for fashion designs as well as the present protection offered to fashion designers and the types of designs that merit protection; (II) the intellectual property protection provided for fashion designs in other countries; (III) introduces and analyzes the proposed Design Piracy Prohibition Act and the newly passed bill, the Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights Act of 2008; and (IV) the arguments that have been made against and for protection of fashion designs.
DIGITAL TURF WARS: ISSUES AND SOLUTIONS RELATING TO CONCURRENT USE IN A CYBERSPACE CONTEXT
Benjamin Prevas and Xiaoyong Yue
9 Wake Forest Intell. Prop. L.J. 177
The concurrent use doctrine was originally created to protect the good will of two geographically remote, good faith users who happened to be using an identical or confusingly similar trademarks in different parts of the country. While the Lanham Act significantly limits the doctrine, it still creates a statutory framework in which concurrent use and concurrent registration of trademarks may occur. Concurrent use doctrine is grounded in territory, but with increased commercial use of trademarks on the Internet, the viability of the doctrine is brought into question. This note explores the viability of continued concurrent use in light of the Internet and proposes a number of solutions that may help preserve concurrent use.