剃须刀知识产权战本文帮助企业研究海外知识产权战略.pdf

《剃须刀知识产权战本文帮助企业研究海外知识产权战略.pdf》由会员上传分享，免费在线阅读，更多相关内容在工程资料-天天文库。

1、GÖTEBORGUNIVERSITYLL.MProgrammeSchoolofEconomicsandCommercialLaw20creditsDepartmentofLawSpring2005TheElectricShaverBattle–AcasestudyandanalysisoftheglobaldisputebetweenPhilipsandIzumiconcerningthelegalprotectionoftheshapeofPhilips’electricshaversandanassessmentofPhilips’legalstrategyandit

2、seffectsonthemarketMasterThesisbyCharlotteLellsField:IntellectualPropertyLawUniversitySupervisor:AssociateProfessorUlfPetrussonProfessionalSupervisor:AdvocateHåkanSjöströmAbstractAsthetitle“TheElectricShaverBattle”reveals,thisthesisisaboutagloballegaldisputebetweentwoelectricshavermanufac

3、turers.TheDutchcompanyPhilipswasthesolesupplierintheworldoftriple-headedrotaryshavers,andhadobtainedtrademarkanddesignprotectionfortheshapeofthetoppartoftheshaverinseveraljurisdictions.Izumi,aJapanesecompany,decidedtoenterthetriple-headedrotaryshavermarketwithitsowntriple-headedshavermode

4、ls.Philipsreactedstronglyagainstthisthreattoitsvirtualmonopolyposition,andthe“shaverbattle”wasafact.Thedisputecametospreadtoelevencountriesoverthreecontinents,andisstillongoing.MainlyPhilipshassuedIzumifortrademarkandcompetitionlawinfringement,whileIzumianditsrelatedcompanieshassoughtthec

5、ancellationofPhilips’trademarks.Themaingroundforinvalidationandcancellationofthetrademarkshasbeenthattheshapeofthetrademarksisnecessarytoobtainthetechnicalresult.Inalmostalljurisdictionsthecontestedtrademarkshavebeencancelledonthisground.Nonetheless,Philipshascontinuedtosuecompaniessellin

6、gIzumi-manufacturedshaversevenaftertherepetitiouslossesincourtsofnumerouscountries.InthisthesisIhaveanalyzedanddescribedtwenty-fivejudgmentsanddecisionsofthedispute,whichisveryclosetoanexhaustivepresentationofallthejudgmentsrendered.Ineachjudgment,Ihavedescribedtheparties’claims,theground

7、sandargumentationandthecourt’sreasoninganddecision,andalsocomparedthedifferentjudgmentswitheachother.Thethesisthuscomprisesathoroughempiricalgatheringandpresentationofnearlyallthejudgmentsofthedispute.IhavealsotriedtodetermineandanalyzePhilips’internationallegalIPRe