On Limitation Of Intellectual Property

The thorough study on the limitation of intellectual property rights could further clarify its range of protection, and prevent the abuse of IPR. The study also does help to resolve the conflict between rights and the problems in balance of advantage. Moreover, it may reduce the bulwark of IPR against developing countries as well.Chapter 1 gives an introduction to the basic category of limitation of IPR. Limitation of IPR could be essentially attributed to the correspondence in rights and obligations of the obligee and the needs to balance the public interest. There are four rules that limitation of IPR should obey. They are prohibiting abuse of rights, preventing absolutization of monopoly, realizing balance of interests, using legal and finite limitation. On the other hand, limitation of IPR includes fair use, compulsory license, statutory license, exhaustion of rights, prior use, reservation of public order, etc. In the legal system of intellectual property, limitation of rights obviously shows characteristic of public law.Chapter 2 is about the Legal philosophy of Limitation. From the perspective about the theory of labour for intellectual property, the other rights interfering with IPR also bears considerable value of labour. Has been expatiated the rationality of IPR, the theory of the social contract may used to testify the justice of the limitation on rights. The conflict between the value and the balance of law is the substantial reason to restrict rights, which concerns freedom, equality, human rights and efficiency, etc. The limitation plays a quite important function on adjusting the complicated relations.Chapter 3 discusses the justification of the limitation of IPR by political economics. As far as political economics is concerned, IPR is closely related to the capital. Monopolization, the peculiarity of IPR is easily used as a tool against competition, resulting in the new imparity and unbalance of interest. Nevertheless, limitation of rights brings in adjustment in between.Chapter 4 functionally analyses the limitation of IPR by using the theory of Sociology of Law from the perspective of the balance of interests. The Intellectual Property Law and its limitation have the function of impelling as well as the adjustment and control over expression, balancing and re-arrangement of interest. The legal functions of the limitation of IPR have particular significance which involves public life and the realm of political and economy. Through the limitation of IPR, the law achieves the interest balance between the owners of intellectual property rights and those of competitors and users as well as the public interests.Chapter 5 examines the significance that limitation of IPR brings to the antimonopoly and the competition by economic law. Being one of the core parts in economic law, antimonopoly law could uniquely regulate the abuse of IPR. Antimonopoly and limitation of IPR are the interventions in economic law that the government use to ensure the fair use of IPR. This is the significance of economic law.Chapter 6 is about the fair use of copyright. It's the most complicated and controversial mode in limitation of rights. However, its legitimacy is undoubted. Fair use is in accord with the heritage and development regularity of knowledge, while achieving the basic function of transmitting ideas of works, which conforms to the public interest that copyright protects. The fair use realizes equality of related subject, justice of the system content and fair distribution of benefit, also manifests the value of freedom, order, security, etc.Chapter 7 discusses compulsory licensing of patent, which is typical in limitation of IPR. The basic reasons of compulsory licensing of patent relate to conservation priority of basic human rights and public interest. The systematic drawback of patent should be remedied by limitation of rights. The legitimacy of compulsory licensing of patent lies in two ways: normal and cross licensing. A regular market competition is badly in need. It concerns the basic human rights of the people. As a matter of fact, tackling this humanism issue is a game theory to every country.Chapter 8 ponders over the justification of limitation on trademark. Preserving the advantage of the competitors, consumers and public, limitation of right on trademark protects the freedom of press, speech, which plays an important part in commodity circulation, integration of market and balancing the commodity price. The non-commercial use of trademark shows the freedom that constitution law endows. Moreover, limitation of right to trademark is legitimate. It promotes reasonable distribution of social wealth,better morale and credibility in market.