• The Journal of the Korea Contents Association
• /
• v.17 no.8
• /
• pp.406-413
• /
• 2017

The purpose of this study is to identify the limits of law on intellectual property generated from dance performance creation. It is based on literature research. It focus the way of dance works protection through current intellectual property laws after 21th century and the limits of them. First, it summarized copyright law, patent, trademark right, and trade secret. Second, it study the choreography of meaning and the process on field of the convergence. At last it summarized the limits of the intellectual property mentioned above. As a result, it is hard to fully protect the right by law whereas performing art create new form of style to communicate with audiences as develop convergence contents. There are significance on this study that summarize the intellectual property law and their limits when they applied to intellectual property from choreography, as a process of dance creation of today.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.61
• /
• pp.29-55
• /
• 2014

Subject matter of international trade are various. They contain not only tangible assets such as goods but also intangible assets including service, technology, and capital etc. Technology, a creation of the human intellect, is important as it is the main creative power to produce goods. It can be divided into Patent, Trademark, Know-how and so on. These Technologies are protected by the national and international laws on regulations for the Intellectual Property Rights(IPR), since technology development is needed a lot of time and effort, and the owner of the technology may have crucial benefits for creating and delivering better goods and services to users and customers. Therefore, any licensee who wants to use the technology which other person(licensor) owns, he(the licensee) and the original owner(the licensor) shall make Technology Transfer Contract. Differently from the International Sales Contract in which seller provides the proprietary rights of goods for buyer, in the case of International Transfer of Technology Contract, the licensor doesn't provide proprietary rights of technologies with the licensee, on the contrary the right of using is only allowed during the contract. The purpose of this paper is to examine the main issues in International Transfer of Technology Contract. This author focused on the main obligations of both parties, namely licensor's obligation to provide the technology and licensee's obligation to pay the royalty. As every country has different local mandatory laws about Intellectual Property Rights(IPR) and these mandatory rules and laws prevails over the contract, the related rules and laws should be examined carefully by both parties in advance. Especially the rules and laws about the competition limitation in the local country of licensee and the economic union(like the EU) should be checked before contracting. In addition, the contract has much more complicate and delicate aspects than other international business contracts, so both parties should review carefully before singing the contract.

• International Commerce and Information Review
• /
• v.16 no.4
• /
• pp.79-102
• /
• 2014

A parallel importation is a non-counterfeit product imported from another country without the permission of the intellectual property owner. It is caused by price differences between countries. Therefore parallel importation are implication in issues of international trade and intellectual property rights(hereafter referred as IPR). This paper provides parallel importation issues of Korea and China under the IPR laws such as patent, trademarks, copyright and analyzes difference between two countries. In China, patent law regulates exhaustion rights which is based theory of a parallel import for the first time unlike trademark law and copyright law. On the other hands, Korea rules parallel importing under Korean customs regulations. In conclusion, two countries have no provisions that advocate a parallel import under IPR laws. This paper suggests some improvements to overcome the limitation of current regulation system and avoid trade friction between two countries. First of all, two countries should clearly make a rule about parallel import in IPR law such as definition of parallel importation, genuine goods, permission conditions, importing proses, penalty and remedy etc. Secondly, two countries should prohibit an abuse of a exclusive import agent's rights and manage a parallel importer not to cause consumer's complain about goods to expansion parallel imports. Finally, two countries should cooperate not to cause disputes about this issue with a communication channel.