CIPIL Intellectual Property Seminar Series

CIPIL Spring Conference 2023: Intellectual Property Rights as Allied Rights: Bill Cornish and the Making of Today’s Intellectual Property System In 1981, Professor Bill Cornish published the first student textbook on “Intellectual Property”. The book was to prove hugely influential, as academic courses on the subject proliferated around the country. In turn, it spawned a host of imitators, all of whom stuck doggedly with the template Cornish had provided (of treating patents, copyright and trade marks together). However, now in its 9th edition, and curated and updated by Professors David Llewelyn and Tanya Aplin, the text has never been surpassed. One of the most significant aspects of the book was its very categorisation. Entitled “Intellectual Property: Patents, Copyright, Trade Marks and Allied Rights”, the textbook presented the distinct legal regimes as “allied” in important respects. Previously, practitioner texts had treated the fields of copyright, patent, trade marks and designs as deserving of separate treatment (in Copinger; Terrell; Kerly and Russell-Clarke; while, at the international level, the Paris and Berne Conventions had instilled a dichotomy between “industrial property”, on the one hand, and copyright and neighbouring rights on the other. Although it would be inaccurate to attribute the shift in thinking to the Cornish textbook (and certainly there were important precursors, not least establishment of WIPO in 1967), forty years on from the publication of Cornish’s seminal text, “intellectual property” has been cemented as a foundational legal concept. The term is deployed in international treaties (e.g. TRIPs, but as a chapter in the vast majority of free trade agreements), in regional instruments (Article 17 of the EU Charter, the EU’s Enforcement Directive), in national constitutions, in domestic legislation; the term is used to denominate governmental and non-governmental organisations, not least the World Intellectual Property Organisation, and the now numerous “intellectual property offices” around the world (including the UKIPO and EUIPO). In the UK, the notion of “intellectual property” serves to define the field of operation of distinct civil procedure rules, as well as the remedies available to litigators. Moreover, the concept figures in the names, and to define the operational fields of, professorial chairs (Bill was the Herchel Smith Professor of Intellectual Property between 1995 and 2004); institutes (such as CIPIL, which was conceived under Bill’s watch and founded to coincide with Bill’s retirement), journals (such as the E.I.P.R. and I.P.Q.) and scholarly organisations (such as A.T.R.I.P., to which Bill gave strong support during his career, including as president from 1985-7). Of course, the concept of “intellectual property” has not gone uncriticised, and its usefulness unchallenged. Some institutes and journals have, of late, abandoned the term: the Max Planck Institute is now an institute for “innovation and competition law”, and UCL has an “Institute of Brands and Innovation Law.” The UK Intellectual Property Office has recently been located within the new Department for Science, Innovation and Technology. At this conference, we bring together scholars and practitioners, many of whom had a first hand relationship with Bill, to consider critically the origin, history, and utility of the notion of “intellectual property”, and more generally of thinking of trade marks, patents and copyright as “allied rights.” Reflecting Bill’s origins (in Australia), his cosmopolitanism (in particular his connection, as external academic member (from 1989) at the Max Planck Institute in Munich), and internationalism (as well as being President of A.T.R.I.P. from 1985-7 and Vice-President of A.L.A.I. from 1990), as well as the links he forged between university and practice (as a door tenant at 8 New Square), the conference will bring together a range of perspectives on the question of intellectual property as “allied rights.” This item provides an audio source for iTunes.

CIPIL Spring Conference 2023: Intellectual Property Rights as Allied Rights: Bill Cornish and the Making of Today’s Intellectual Property System In 1981, Professor Bill Cornish published the first student textbook on “Intellectual Property”. The book was to prove hugely influential, as academic courses on the subject proliferated around the country. In turn, it spawned a host of imitators, all of whom stuck doggedly with the template Cornish had provided (of treating patents, copyright and trade marks together). However, now in its 9th edition, and curated and updated by Professors David Llewelyn and Tanya Aplin, the text has never been surpassed. One of the most significant aspects of the book was its very categorisation. Entitled “Intellectual Property: Patents, Copyright, Trade Marks and Allied Rights”, the textbook presented the distinct legal regimes as “allied” in important respects. Previously, practitioner texts had treated the fields of copyright, patent, trade marks and designs as deserving of separate treatment (in Copinger; Terrell; Kerly and Russell-Clarke; while, at the international level, the Paris and Berne Conventions had instilled a dichotomy between “industrial property”, on the one hand, and copyright and neighbouring rights on the other. Although it would be inaccurate to attribute the shift in thinking to the Cornish textbook (and certainly there were important precursors, not least establishment of WIPO in 1967), forty years on from the publication of Cornish’s seminal text, “intellectual property” has been cemented as a foundational legal concept. The term is deployed in international treaties (e.g. TRIPs, but as a chapter in the vast majority of free trade agreements), in regional instruments (Article 17 of the EU Charter, the EU’s Enforcement Directive), in national constitutions, in domestic legislation; the term is used to denominate governmental and non-governmental organisations, not least the World Intellectual Property Organisation, and the now numerous “intellectual property offices” around the world (including the UKIPO and EUIPO). In the UK, the notion of “intellectual property” serves to define the field of operation of distinct civil procedure rules, as well as the remedies available to litigators. Moreover, the concept figures in the names, and to define the operational fields of, professorial chairs (Bill was the Herchel Smith Professor of Intellectual Property between 1995 and 2004); institutes (such as CIPIL, which was conceived under Bill’s watch and founded to coincide with Bill’s retirement), journals (such as the E.I.P.R. and I.P.Q.) and scholarly organisations (such as A.T.R.I.P., to which Bill gave strong support during his career, including as president from 1985-7). Of course, the concept of “intellectual property” has not gone uncriticised, and its usefulness unchallenged. Some institutes and journals have, of late, abandoned the term: the Max Planck Institute is now an institute for “innovation and competition law”, and UCL has an “Institute of Brands and Innovation Law.” The UK Intellectual Property Office has recently been located within the new Department for Science, Innovation and Technology. At this conference, we bring together scholars and practitioners, many of whom had a first hand relationship with Bill, to consider critically the origin, history, and utility of the notion of “intellectual property”, and more generally of thinking of trade marks, patents and copyright as “allied rights.” Reflecting Bill’s origins (in Australia), his cosmopolitanism (in particular his connection, as external academic member (from 1989) at the Max Planck Institute in Munich), and internationalism (as well as being President of A.T.R.I.P. from 1985-7 and Vice-President of A.L.A.I. from 1990), as well as the links he forged between university and practice (as a door tenant at 8 New Square), the conference will bring together a range of perspectives on the question of intellectual property as “allied rights.” This item provides an audio source for iTunes.

CIPIL Spring Conference 2023: Intellectual Property Rights as Allied Rights: Bill Cornish and the Making of Today’s Intellectual Property System In 1981, Professor Bill Cornish published the first student textbook on “Intellectual Property”. The book was to prove hugely influential, as academic courses on the subject proliferated around the country. In turn, it spawned a host of imitators, all of whom stuck doggedly with the template Cornish had provided (of treating patents, copyright and trade marks together). However, now in its 9th edition, and curated and updated by Professors David Llewelyn and Tanya Aplin, the text has never been surpassed. One of the most significant aspects of the book was its very categorisation. Entitled “Intellectual Property: Patents, Copyright, Trade Marks and Allied Rights”, the textbook presented the distinct legal regimes as “allied” in important respects. Previously, practitioner texts had treated the fields of copyright, patent, trade marks and designs as deserving of separate treatment (in Copinger; Terrell; Kerly and Russell-Clarke; while, at the international level, the Paris and Berne Conventions had instilled a dichotomy between “industrial property”, on the one hand, and copyright and neighbouring rights on the other. Although it would be inaccurate to attribute the shift in thinking to the Cornish textbook (and certainly there were important precursors, not least establishment of WIPO in 1967), forty years on from the publication of Cornish’s seminal text, “intellectual property” has been cemented as a foundational legal concept. The term is deployed in international treaties (e.g. TRIPs, but as a chapter in the vast majority of free trade agreements), in regional instruments (Article 17 of the EU Charter, the EU’s Enforcement Directive), in national constitutions, in domestic legislation; the term is used to denominate governmental and non-governmental organisations, not least the World Intellectual Property Organisation, and the now numerous “intellectual property offices” around the world (including the UKIPO and EUIPO). In the UK, the notion of “intellectual property” serves to define the field of operation of distinct civil procedure rules, as well as the remedies available to litigators. Moreover, the concept figures in the names, and to define the operational fields of, professorial chairs (Bill was the Herchel Smith Professor of Intellectual Property between 1995 and 2004); institutes (such as CIPIL, which was conceived under Bill’s watch and founded to coincide with Bill’s retirement), journals (such as the E.I.P.R. and I.P.Q.) and scholarly organisations (such as A.T.R.I.P., to which Bill gave strong support during his career, including as president from 1985-7). Of course, the concept of “intellectual property” has not gone uncriticised, and its usefulness unchallenged. Some institutes and journals have, of late, abandoned the term: the Max Planck Institute is now an institute for “innovation and competition law”, and UCL has an “Institute of Brands and Innovation Law.” The UK Intellectual Property Office has recently been located within the new Department for Science, Innovation and Technology. At this conference, we bring together scholars and practitioners, many of whom had a first hand relationship with Bill, to consider critically the origin, history, and utility of the notion of “intellectual property”, and more generally of thinking of trade marks, patents and copyright as “allied rights.” Reflecting Bill’s origins (in Australia), his cosmopolitanism (in particular his connection, as external academic member (from 1989) at the Max Planck Institute in Munich), and internationalism (as well as being President of A.T.R.I.P. from 1985-7 and Vice-President of A.L.A.I. from 1990), as well as the links he forged between university and practice (as a door tenant at 8 New Square), the conference will bring together a range of perspectives on the question of intellectual property as “allied rights.” This item provides an audio source for iTunes.

CIPIL Spring Conference 2023: Intellectual Property Rights as Allied Rights: Bill Cornish and the Making of Today’s Intellectual Property System In 1981, Professor Bill Cornish published the first student textbook on “Intellectual Property”. The book was to prove hugely influential, as academic courses on the subject proliferated around the country. In turn, it spawned a host of imitators, all of whom stuck doggedly with the template Cornish had provided (of treating patents, copyright and trade marks together). However, now in its 9th edition, and curated and updated by Professors David Llewelyn and Tanya Aplin, the text has never been surpassed. One of the most significant aspects of the book was its very categorisation. Entitled “Intellectual Property: Patents, Copyright, Trade Marks and Allied Rights”, the textbook presented the distinct legal regimes as “allied” in important respects. Previously, practitioner texts had treated the fields of copyright, patent, trade marks and designs as deserving of separate treatment (in Copinger; Terrell; Kerly and Russell-Clarke; while, at the international level, the Paris and Berne Conventions had instilled a dichotomy between “industrial property”, on the one hand, and copyright and neighbouring rights on the other. Although it would be inaccurate to attribute the shift in thinking to the Cornish textbook (and certainly there were important precursors, not least establishment of WIPO in 1967), forty years on from the publication of Cornish’s seminal text, “intellectual property” has been cemented as a foundational legal concept. The term is deployed in international treaties (e.g. TRIPs, but as a chapter in the vast majority of free trade agreements), in regional instruments (Article 17 of the EU Charter, the EU’s Enforcement Directive), in national constitutions, in domestic legislation; the term is used to denominate governmental and non-governmental organisations, not least the World Intellectual Property Organisation, and the now numerous “intellectual property offices” around the world (including the UKIPO and EUIPO). In the UK, the notion of “intellectual property” serves to define the field of operation of distinct civil procedure rules, as well as the remedies available to litigators. Moreover, the concept figures in the names, and to define the operational fields of, professorial chairs (Bill was the Herchel Smith Professor of Intellectual Property between 1995 and 2004); institutes (such as CIPIL, which was conceived under Bill’s watch and founded to coincide with Bill’s retirement), journals (such as the E.I.P.R. and I.P.Q.) and scholarly organisations (such as A.T.R.I.P., to which Bill gave strong support during his career, including as president from 1985-7). Of course, the concept of “intellectual property” has not gone uncriticised, and its usefulness unchallenged. Some institutes and journals have, of late, abandoned the term: the Max Planck Institute is now an institute for “innovation and competition law”, and UCL has an “Institute of Brands and Innovation Law.” The UK Intellectual Property Office has recently been located within the new Department for Science, Innovation and Technology. At this conference, we bring together scholars and practitioners, many of whom had a first hand relationship with Bill, to consider critically the origin, history, and utility of the notion of “intellectual property”, and more generally of thinking of trade marks, patents and copyright as “allied rights.” Reflecting Bill’s origins (in Australia), his cosmopolitanism (in particular his connection, as external academic member (from 1989) at the Max Planck Institute in Munich), and internationalism (as well as being President of A.T.R.I.P. from 1985-7 and Vice-President of A.L.A.I. from 1990), as well as the links he forged between university and practice (as a door tenant at 8 New Square), the conference will bring together a range of perspectives on the question of intellectual property as “allied rights.” This item provides an audio source for iTunes.

Professor Jeanne Fromer (Vice Dean and Walter J. Derenberg Professor of Intellectual Property Law, New York University School of Law and Faculty Co-Director of the Engelberg Center on Innovation Law & Policy) delivered the 2023 International Intellectual Property Lecture on "First in Intellectual Property Law" on 14 March 2023 as a guest of CIPIL (the Centre for Intellectual Property and Information Law). Professor Jeanne Fromer specializes in intellectual property, including copyright, patent, trademark, trade secret, and design protection laws. She is a faculty co-director of the Engelberg Center on Innovation Law & Policy. Fromer is the co-author, with Chris Sprigman, of a free copyright textbook, Copyright Law: Cases and Materials, which is in use at over 65 law schools around the world. In 2011, she was awarded the American Law Institute’s inaugural Young Scholars Medal for her scholarship in intellectual property. Before coming to NYU, Fromer served as a law clerk to Justice David H. Souter of the US Supreme Court and to Judge Robert D. Sack of the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. She also worked at Hale and Dorr (now WilmerHale) in the area of intellectual property. Fromer received her JD magna cum laude from Harvard Law School, serving as articles and commentaries editor of the Harvard Law Review and as editor of the Harvard Journal of Law and Technology. Fromer earned her BA summa cum laude in computer science from Barnard College, Columbia University. She received her SM in electrical engineering and computer science from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology for research work in artificial intelligence and computational linguistics and worked at AT&T (Bell) Laboratories in those same areas. Fromer was a visiting professor at Harvard Law School and Stanford Law School, and she also previously taught at Fordham Law School. For more information see the CIPIL website at http://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk

Professor Jeanne Fromer (Vice Dean and Walter J. Derenberg Professor of Intellectual Property Law, New York University School of Law and Faculty Co-Director of the Engelberg Center on Innovation Law & Policy) delivered the 2023 International Intellectual Property Lecture on "First in Intellectual Property Law" on 14 March 2023 as a guest of CIPIL (the Centre for Intellectual Property and Information Law). Professor Jeanne Fromer specializes in intellectual property, including copyright, patent, trademark, trade secret, and design protection laws. She is a faculty co-director of the Engelberg Center on Innovation Law & Policy. Fromer is the co-author, with Chris Sprigman, of a free copyright textbook, Copyright Law: Cases and Materials, which is in use at over 65 law schools around the world. In 2011, she was awarded the American Law Institute’s inaugural Young Scholars Medal for her scholarship in intellectual property. Before coming to NYU, Fromer served as a law clerk to Justice David H. Souter of the US Supreme Court and to Judge Robert D. Sack of the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. She also worked at Hale and Dorr (now WilmerHale) in the area of intellectual property. Fromer received her JD magna cum laude from Harvard Law School, serving as articles and commentaries editor of the Harvard Law Review and as editor of the Harvard Journal of Law and Technology. Fromer earned her BA summa cum laude in computer science from Barnard College, Columbia University. She received her SM in electrical engineering and computer science from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology for research work in artificial intelligence and computational linguistics and worked at AT&T (Bell) Laboratories in those same areas. Fromer was a visiting professor at Harvard Law School and Stanford Law School, and she also previously taught at Fordham Law School. For more information see the CIPIL website at http://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk This entry provides an audio source for iTunes.

Speaker: Dr Emmanuel Oke, Edinburgh Law School Biography: Emmanuel Oke is a Senior Lecturer in International Intellectual Property Law at Edinburgh Law School. His research interests include international and comparative aspects of intellectual property law. Specifically, his research explores the interface between intellectual property and other branches of international law such as international trade law, international investment law, and international human rights law. He is equally interested in the relationship between intellectual property and development. For more information see the CIPIL website at http://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk

Speaker: Dr Emmanuel Oke, Edinburgh Law School Biography: Emmanuel Oke is a Senior Lecturer in International Intellectual Property Law at Edinburgh Law School. His research interests include international and comparative aspects of intellectual property law. Specifically, his research explores the interface between intellectual property and other branches of international law such as international trade law, international investment law, and international human rights law. He is equally interested in the relationship between intellectual property and development. For more information see the CIPIL website at http://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk This entry provides an audio source for iTunes.

Speaker: Jade Kouletakis, Abertay University, Dundee Biography: Jade is currently a lecturer at Albertay University Law School. Abstract: International intellectual property frameworks conceive of copyright exclusivity as a largely individualistic, westernised and capitalistic benefit which must be balanced against and limited by the non-commercial, competing public interest. This is expressed primarily by way of limitations to and exceptions from the norm of exclusivity recognised within these frameworks. This presentation argues for an alternative interpretation of copyright exclusivity as being justified by the public interest. However, unlike the works of Geiger et al., this interpretation is not premised upon the constitutional and quasi-constitutional patterns accounting for the public interest foundations of IP. Instead, it is premised upon the conceptualisations of indigenous communities within the Global South relating to exclusivity over intangible property for the communal benefit. This presentation argues that a paradigm shift in the international community at a supranational level is needed in order to better reflect the norms and values of the Global South. By reassessing the nature of copyright exclusivity rather than delegating conversations about non-commercial communal needs to limitations and exceptions, the Global South is no longer seen as mere passive receptors of Western norms and values, but as active participants with inherent value in the creation of a truly global IP framework. For more information see: https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/seminars-and-events/cipil-seminars This entry provides an audio source for iTunes.

Speaker: Jade Kouletakis, Abertay University, Dundee Biography: Jade is currently a lecturer at Albertay University Law School. Abstract: International intellectual property frameworks conceive of copyright exclusivity as a largely individualistic, westernised and capitalistic benefit which must be balanced against and limited by the non-commercial, competing public interest. This is expressed primarily by way of limitations to and exceptions from the norm of exclusivity recognised within these frameworks. This presentation argues for an alternative interpretation of copyright exclusivity as being justified by the public interest. However, unlike the works of Geiger et al., this interpretation is not premised upon the constitutional and quasi-constitutional patterns accounting for the public interest foundations of IP. Instead, it is premised upon the conceptualisations of indigenous communities within the Global South relating to exclusivity over intangible property for the communal benefit. This presentation argues that a paradigm shift in the international community at a supranational level is needed in order to better reflect the norms and values of the Global South. By reassessing the nature of copyright exclusivity rather than delegating conversations about non-commercial communal needs to limitations and exceptions, the Global South is no longer seen as mere passive receptors of Western norms and values, but as active participants with inherent value in the creation of a truly global IP framework. For more information see: https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/seminars-and-events/cipil-seminars

Speaker: Dr Luminita Olteanu, London School of Economics Biography: Luminita qualified as a lawyer in Romania in 2011 and has been practicing for more than 8 years across a variety of legal areas including Intellectual Property Law, International Arbitration, European Law, and Commercial Law. She recently gained her PhD at UCL and currently teaches Intellectual Property Law at the LSE. For more information see: https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/seminars-and-events/cipil-seminars

Speaker: Dr Luminita Olteanu, London School of Economics Biography: Luminita qualified as a lawyer in Romania in 2011 and has been practicing for more than 8 years across a variety of legal areas including Intellectual Property Law, International Arbitration, European Law, and Commercial Law. She recently gained her PhD at UCL and currently teaches Intellectual Property Law at the LSE. For more information see: https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/seminars-and-events/cipil-seminars This entry provides an audio source for iTunes.

Speaker: Professor Haochen Sun Biography: Haochen Sun is Associate Professor of Law at the University of Hong Kong. His recent scholarship has focused on the theoretical and policy foundations of intellectual property, Chinese intellectual property law, and technology law and the public interest. He has published numerous articles and co-edited books published by Cambridge University Press and Oxford University Press. His opinions about intellectual property and technology law have appeared in many media outlets such as Forbes, The Los Angeles Times, The New York Times, South China Morning Post, and The Wall Street Journal. Abstract: In this seminar, Haochen Sun will discuss his groundbreaking work that analyzes the ethical crisis unfolding at the intersection of technology and the public interest. He examines technology companies' growing power and their increasing disregard for the public good. To tackle this asymmetry of power and responsibility, he argues that we must reexamine the nature and scope of the right to technology and dynamically protect it as a human right under international law, a collective right under domestic civil rights law, and potentially a fundamental right under domestic constitutional law. He also develops the concept of fundamental corporate responsibility requiring technology companies to compensate users for their contributions, assume an active role responsibility in upholding the public interest, and counter injustices caused by technological developments. For more information see: https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/seminars-and-events/cipil-seminars This entry provides an audio source for iTunes.

Speaker: Professor Haochen Sun Biography: Haochen Sun is Associate Professor of Law at the University of Hong Kong. His recent scholarship has focused on the theoretical and policy foundations of intellectual property, Chinese intellectual property law, and technology law and the public interest. He has published numerous articles and co-edited books published by Cambridge University Press and Oxford University Press. His opinions about intellectual property and technology law have appeared in many media outlets such as Forbes, The Los Angeles Times, The New York Times, South China Morning Post, and The Wall Street Journal. Abstract: In this seminar, Haochen Sun will discuss his groundbreaking work that analyzes the ethical crisis unfolding at the intersection of technology and the public interest. He examines technology companies' growing power and their increasing disregard for the public good. To tackle this asymmetry of power and responsibility, he argues that we must reexamine the nature and scope of the right to technology and dynamically protect it as a human right under international law, a collective right under domestic civil rights law, and potentially a fundamental right under domestic constitutional law. He also develops the concept of fundamental corporate responsibility requiring technology companies to compensate users for their contributions, assume an active role responsibility in upholding the public interest, and counter injustices caused by technological developments. For more information see: https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/seminars-and-events/cipil-seminars

Speaker: Professor Rochelle Dreyfuss, NYW Law School Biography: Rochelle Cooper Dreyfuss is Pauline Newman Professor of Law at NYU Law School and a Co-Director of the Engelberg Center on Innovation Law & Policy. She is a leading scholar of intellectual property law as well as other science and technology topics. She was a research chemist prior to law school, and later clerked for Chief Justice Warren Burger of the US Supreme Court. Among her works on international intellectual property issues are A Neofederalist Vision of TRIPS: Building a Resilient International Intellectual Property System(2012, with Graeme Dinwoodie), and several co-edited books, including Framing Intellectual Property Law in the 21st century: Integrating Incentives, Trade, Development, Culture, and Human Rights (2018, with Elizabeth Siew Kuan Ng); and the IILJ Project volume Balancing Wealth and Health: The Battle Over Intellectual Property and Access to Medicines in Latin America (2014, with César Rodríguez-Garavito). She was the Arthur Goodhart Visiting Professor in Legal Science at Cambridge University for 2019–20. Abstract: Many countries have responded (or have considered responding) to the COVID pandemic by modifying their intellectual property laws to ensure the availability of vaccines, medicines, diagnostics, and related information. Some have asked the World Trade Organization (WTO) for a waiver to excuse any steps they might take that are inconsistent with obligations under the TRIPS Agreement. Although a waiver would protect WTO members from challenges in the WTO’s Dispute Settlement Body, a state that is a party to an international investment agreement (IIA) that includes investor-state dispute resolution has something else to worry about. Investors could claim that its actions amount to an indirect expropriation or a denial fair and equitable treatment in violation of the obligations in the IIA. In this piece, I conduct a thought experiment on how such suits might unfold. The first part describes how states sought or may seek to exercise control over the knowledge and products needed to protect public health during the global pandemic. The second part considers the challenges that investors might lodge and how they might be resolved. I identify the places where safeguards in IIAs that are intended to protect sovereign authority over healthcare may fall short. For more information see: https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/seminars-and-events/cipil-seminars This entry provides an audio source for iTunes.

Speaker: Professor Rochelle Dreyfuss, NYW Law School Biography: Rochelle Cooper Dreyfuss is Pauline Newman Professor of Law at NYU Law School and a Co-Director of the Engelberg Center on Innovation Law & Policy. She is a leading scholar of intellectual property law as well as other science and technology topics. She was a research chemist prior to law school, and later clerked for Chief Justice Warren Burger of the US Supreme Court. Among her works on international intellectual property issues are A Neofederalist Vision of TRIPS: Building a Resilient International Intellectual Property System(2012, with Graeme Dinwoodie), and several co-edited books, including Framing Intellectual Property Law in the 21st century: Integrating Incentives, Trade, Development, Culture, and Human Rights (2018, with Elizabeth Siew Kuan Ng); and the IILJ Project volume Balancing Wealth and Health: The Battle Over Intellectual Property and Access to Medicines in Latin America (2014, with César Rodríguez-Garavito). She was the Arthur Goodhart Visiting Professor in Legal Science at Cambridge University for 2019–20. Abstract: Many countries have responded (or have considered responding) to the COVID pandemic by modifying their intellectual property laws to ensure the availability of vaccines, medicines, diagnostics, and related information. Some have asked the World Trade Organization (WTO) for a waiver to excuse any steps they might take that are inconsistent with obligations under the TRIPS Agreement. Although a waiver would protect WTO members from challenges in the WTO’s Dispute Settlement Body, a state that is a party to an international investment agreement (IIA) that includes investor-state dispute resolution has something else to worry about. Investors could claim that its actions amount to an indirect expropriation or a denial fair and equitable treatment in violation of the obligations in the IIA. In this piece, I conduct a thought experiment on how such suits might unfold. The first part describes how states sought or may seek to exercise control over the knowledge and products needed to protect public health during the global pandemic. The second part considers the challenges that investors might lodge and how they might be resolved. I identify the places where safeguards in IIAs that are intended to protect sovereign authority over healthcare may fall short. For more information see: https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/seminars-and-events/cipil-seminars

Dr Peter Coe (University of Reading) gave an evening seminar entitled "Media Freedom in the Age of Citizen Journalism" on 11 March 2022 as a guest of CIPIL (the Centre for Intellectual Property and Information Law). Biography: Dr Peter Coe has been a Lecturer in Law specialising in Media Law and Criminal Law at the University of Reading since September 2019. Prior to this, he was a practising barrister specialising in privacy, defamation and reputation management, having been Called to Bar by Lincoln's Inn in 2007 as a Lord Denning Scholar and Hardwicke Entrance Scholar. He has also held a Senior Lectureship in Law at Aston University, where he taught Media Law and Criminal Law. His primary research interests are: (i) citizen journalism's impact on free speech, media freedom and regulation, and the concepts of privacy and reputation; (ii) defamation, including the protection of corporate reputation; (iii) media power and plurality, the role the media plays within society and its impact on democracy. His work in these areas has been published in leading journals such as Legal Studies, the University of Melbourne's Media & Arts Law Review, the Journal of Business Law and Northern Ireland Legal Quarterly. Peter is also co-editor (with Professor Paul Wragg) of "Landmark Cases in Privacy Law" which will be published by Hart Publishing in 2022. In 2021, his research led him to be invited to join the Institute of Advanced Legal Studies and Information Law and Policy Centre as an Associate Research Fellow, having been a Research Associate at the ILPC since 2018. In 2020 he was also appointed as an Advisor to the University of East London's Online Harms and Cyber Crime Unit. For more information see: https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/seminars-and-events/cipil-seminars

Dr Peter Coe (University of Reading) gave an evening seminar entitled "Media Freedom in the Age of Citizen Journalism" on 11 March 2022 as a guest of CIPIL (the Centre for Intellectual Property and Information Law). Biography: Dr Peter Coe has been a Lecturer in Law specialising in Media Law and Criminal Law at the University of Reading since September 2019. Prior to this, he was a practising barrister specialising in privacy, defamation and reputation management, having been Called to Bar by Lincoln's Inn in 2007 as a Lord Denning Scholar and Hardwicke Entrance Scholar. He has also held a Senior Lectureship in Law at Aston University, where he taught Media Law and Criminal Law. His primary research interests are: (i) citizen journalism's impact on free speech, media freedom and regulation, and the concepts of privacy and reputation; (ii) defamation, including the protection of corporate reputation; (iii) media power and plurality, the role the media plays within society and its impact on democracy. His work in these areas has been published in leading journals such as Legal Studies, the University of Melbourne's Media & Arts Law Review, the Journal of Business Law and Northern Ireland Legal Quarterly. Peter is also co-editor (with Professor Paul Wragg) of "Landmark Cases in Privacy Law" which will be published by Hart Publishing in 2022. In 2021, his research led him to be invited to join the Institute of Advanced Legal Studies and Information Law and Policy Centre as an Associate Research Fellow, having been a Research Associate at the ILPC since 2018. In 2020 he was also appointed as an Advisor to the University of East London's Online Harms and Cyber Crime Unit. This entry provides an audio source for iTunes. For more information see: https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/seminars-and-events/cipil-seminars

Speaker: Professor Herbert Zech, Humboldt University, Berlin Biography: Professor Dr. Herbert Zech is Chair of Civil Law, Technology Law and IT Law at Humboldt University, Berlin and Director at the Weizenbaum Institute for the Networked Society. Abstract: In the discussion about the regulation of artificial intelligence (AI) on the one hand and access to data for training purposes on the other hand, one aspect has so far been neglected: the liability of data providers. AI training data have a different damage potential than data that are only used in "conventional" big data analyses. This raises the question of how existing liability rules apply and whether these rules should be changed. From a regulatory point of view, the parallel between intellectual property protection and civil liability should also be considered. For more information see: https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/seminars-and-events/cipil-seminars

Speaker: Professor Herbert Zech, Humboldt University, Berlin Biography: Professor Dr. Herbert Zech is Chair of Civil Law, Technology Law and IT Law at Humboldt University, Berlin and Director at the Weizenbaum Institute for the Networked Society. Abstract: In the discussion about the regulation of artificial intelligence (AI) on the one hand and access to data for training purposes on the other hand, one aspect has so far been neglected: the liability of data providers. AI training data have a different damage potential than data that are only used in "conventional" big data analyses. This raises the question of how existing liability rules apply and whether these rules should be changed. From a regulatory point of view, the parallel between intellectual property protection and civil liability should also be considered. This entry provides an audio source for iTunes. For more information see: https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/seminars-and-events/cipil-seminars