• 정보학연구
• /
• 제5권3호
• /
• pp.181-195
• /
• 2002

인터넷상에서 롱런을 하기 위한 브랜드 관리 전략에는 다양한 내용이 있다. 인터넷 브랜드, 닷컴(.com) 브랜드, 넷(Net) 브랜드, 온라인(On-line) 브랜드, 최근 미국 유명 경영지에 화두로 떠오르는 단어들이다. 인터넷에서도 브랜드가 중요해지고 있다는 것을 의미한다. 더구나 인터넷기업 주가의 거품론이 확산되고 있는 시점에서 강력한 브랜드의 중요성은 더욱 커져 간다고 본다.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제15권3호
• /
• pp.139-174
• /
• 2005

Since a declaration between North and South Korea was adopted, North and South Korea has strengthened the interchange and cooperation between each other in many fields. Especially, the interchange and cooperation in the field of industrial property right, such as patent and trademark, are required to keep up with the age of the knowledge industry. But, until a recent date, there has been little interchange or cooperation in the field of industrial property right, and a few major companies were attempt to apply for the patent in North Korea through the Third country The system of industrial property laws in North and South Korea are very different because of time and political ideology barriers. To unify the system of industrial property laws in North and South Korea, firstly, North and South Korea must try to recognize and understand the dissimilarity between them. In this article, I compared the system of industrial property law of South Korea with that of North Korea to search commonalities and dissimilarities. Furthermore, it is needed to establish systematic devices for understanding of between North and South Korea, for instance, conducting a interdisciplinary seminar or dispatching a judge mutually. Finally, it is necessary to phase in a practical plan for unification. In the short run, mutual application and registration have to be authorized, and in the long view, unifying the practice of industrial property law service is needed. At the conclusion, the industrial property laws in North and South Korea can be unified systematically. In other words , to unify system of industrial property laws in North and South Korea, it is prerequisite that mutual understanding of industrial property laws and performance of the unify plan. The interchange and cooperation in this field will not only promote technical development but also create common interests of North and South Korea by expanding an opportunity for creating and utilizing industrial property.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제17권2호
• /
• pp.167-187
• /
• 2007

As Korea has reached a free trade agreement with the United States of America, it is required to provide an appropriate procedure to ".kr" domain name disputes based on the principles established in the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy(UDRP). Currently, Internet address Dispute Resolution Committee(IDRC) established under Article 16 of the Act on Internet Address Resources provides the dispute resolution proceedings to resolve ".kr" domain name disputes. While the IDRC's proceeding is similar to the UDRP administrative proceeding in procedural aspects, the Domain Name Dispute Mediation Policy that is established by the IDRC and that applies to disputes involving ".kr" domain names is very different from the UDRP for generic Top Level Domain (gTLD) in substantial aspects. Under the Korea-U.S. Free Trade Agreement(KORUS FTA), it is expected that either the Domain Name Dispute Mediation Policy to be amended to adopt the UDRP or the IDRC to examine the Domain Name Dispute Mediation Policy in order to harmonize it with the principles established in the UDRP. It is a common practice of cybersquatters to warehouse a number of domain names without any active use of these domain names after their registration. The Domain Name Dispute Mediation Policy provides that the complainant may request to transfer or delete the registration of the disputed domain name if the registrant registered, holds or uses the disputed domain name in bad faith. This provision lifts the complainant's burden of proof to show the respondent's bad faith because the complainant is only required to prove one of the three bad faiths which are registration in bad faith, holding in bad faith, or use in bad faith. The aforementioned resolution procedure is different from the UDRP regime which requires the complainant, in compliance with paragraph 4(b) of the UDRP, to prove that the disputed domain name has been registered in bad faith and is being used in bad faith. Therefore, the complainant carries heavy burden of proof under the UDRP. The IDRC should deny the complaint if the respondent has legitimate rights or interests in the domain names. Under the UDRP, the complainant must show that the respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name. The UDRP sets out three illustrative circumstances, any one of which if proved by the respondent, shall be evidence of the respondent's rights to or legitimate interests in the domain name. As the Domain Name Dispute Mediation Policy provides only a general provision regarding the respondent's legitimate rights or interests, the respondent can be placed in a very week foundation to be protected under the Policy. It is therefore recommended for the IDRC to adopt the three UDRP circumstances to guide how the respondent can demonstrate his/her legitimate rights or interests in the disputed domain name. In accordance with the KORUS FTA, the Korean Government is required to provide online publication to a reliable and accurate database of contact information concerning domain name registrants. Cybersquatters often provide inaccurate contact information or willfully conceal their identity to avoid objection by trademark owners. It may cause unnecessary and unwarranted delay of the administrative proceedings. The respondent may loss the opportunity to assert his/her rights or legitimate interests in the domain name due to inability to submit the response effectively and timely. The respondent could breach a registration agreement with a registrar which requires the registrant to submit and update accurate contact information. The respondent who is reluctant to disclose his/her contact information on the Internet citing for privacy rights and protection. This is however debatable as the respondent may use the proxy registration service provided by the registrar to protect the respondent's privacy.

• 한국실내디자인학회논문집
• /
• 제23권3호
• /
• pp.134-143
• /
• 2014

The protection of Design is very important issues in these days. Even though Interior Design is also one of important design sections, it is relatively unprotected by formal intellectual property laws, yet creativity and innovation flourish. The needs for protection of Interior Design have been creased. The aim of this study is to suggest the weakness of the system for protection of Interior Design. The proposed research is comprised of two themes. One is to research Acts related to protection of Interior Design. The second is to study the registered cases under the Design Protection Acts. These two theme is generated by the comparative review between ROK and U.S.A. Through these comparative results, this study propose some considerations for an effective protection for Interior Design. Design need to be registered in the hole image of the space not a partial element. The concept needs to be protected because it is more effective way to respond the copying. Exterior for facade and Interior Design need to be registered in one registration to use the protection system actively.

• 한국IT서비스학회지
• /
• 제13권3호
• /
• pp.129-148
• /
• 2014

Generally, the Internet Address Resources Act is intended to protect the public from acts of Internet "cybersquatting", a term used to describe the bad faith, abusive registration of Internet domain names. In determining whether a person has a bad faith intent, a court may consider factors such as, (1) the trademark or other intellectual property rights of the person, if any, in the domain name, (2) the extent to which the domain name consists of the legal name of the person or a name that is otherwise commonly used to identify that person, (3) the person's prior use, if any, of the domain name in connection with the bona fide offering of any goods or services, (4) the person's bona fide noncommercial or fair use of the mark in a site accessible under the domain name, (5) the person's intent to divert consumers from the mark owner's online location to a site accessible under the domain name that could harm the goodwill represented by the mark, either for commercial gain or with the intent to tarnish or disparage the mark, by creating a likelihood of confusion as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of the site, (6) the person's offer to transfer, sell, or otherwise assign the domain name to the mark owner or any third party for financial gain without having used, or having an intent to use, the domain name in the bona fide offering of any goods or services, or the person's prior conduct indicating a pattern of such conduct.

• 디자인학연구
• /
• 제17권4호
• /
• pp.27-36
• /
• 2004

지적재산권보호를 위한 국제협약은 범세계적이거나 지역적차원에서 이미 한 세기 전부터 존재하여 왔다. 우리나라도 국제협약에 적극적으로 가입하고 있다. 이후 국제협약을 어기고 모방사례가 계속 발생시 국가 신인도 문제뿐만 아니라 국제 무역 시장에서 활동하는데 어려움을 겪게 될 상황이 예견된다. 이에 따라 포장디자인의 지적재산권제도의 국내외 현황조사와 모방사례를 분석하고 지적재산권제도의 이해도와 관심도 연구조사를 통하여 포장디자인의 지적재산권 보호제도의 중요성을 인식시키고 WTO체제하에서의 패키지디자인 지적재산권 보호 방안을 연구하는데 본 논문은 주력하고 있다. 본 연구에서는 인트라넷을 이용한 기업의 디자인 정보공유시스템 디자인 구축과정을 롯데백화점 디자인실의 사례를 통해 살펴보았다. 기업의 인트라넷의 온라인시스템을 구축할 때의 요구사항과 필요기능을 제시하였고, 핵심기능에 대한 구현을 제시하였다. 본 연구의 목적은 새로운 개념의 정립이나 기반의 발견에 있는 것이 아니라, 개방성에 의해 사용이 편리한 인터넷 환경을 조직의 기반 디자인 정보공유시스템 구축에 적용하는 인트라넷 개념을 사례를 통하여 구현의 효과와 구축방법을 제안함에 있다. 이를 위해 본 논문에서는 패키지디자인의 지적재산권보호제도의 보호방안을 마련하기 위한 보호제도 현황분석과 분쟁사례연구를 통한 분석과 각종 통계자료 제시, 국내외 패키지디자인의 지적재산권 침해 모방사례 분석 및 소비들과 관련 패키지디자인 업무 종사자들의 실증적 설문조사 분석을 통하여 실질적인 보호 방안을 연구하고 제시하고 있다.