Table of Contents

Criminal Enforcement of Intellectual Property

Criminal Enforcement of Intellectual Property

A Handbook of Contemporary Research

Research Handbooks in Intellectual Property series

Edited by Christophe Geiger

This wide-ranging Research Handbook is the first to offer a stimulating and systematic review of the framework for criminal enforcement of intellectual property rights. If counterfeiting constitutes an ever-growing international phenomenon with major economic and social repercussions, potentially affecting consumer safety and public health, the question of which are the appropriate instruments to enforce IP rights is a complex and sensitive one. Although criminal penalties can constitute strong and effective means of enforcement, serious doubts exist as to whether criminal sanctions are appropriate in every infringement situation. Drawing on legal, economic, historical and judicial perspectives, this book provides a differentiated sector-by-sector approach to the question of enforcement, and draws useful conclusions for future legislative initiatives at European, international and national levels.

Chapter 15: Criminalizing IP use in the UK: from trademark use to illicit downloads

Guido Westkamp

Subjects: law - academic, criminal law and justice, intellectual property law

Extract

UK intellectual property law makes it a crime to infringe IP rights in certain limited circumstances. These pertain only to the infringement of a third party’s copyright or trademark right. It is a general condition that an infringement occurs on a commercial scale. It is the intention of the legislator to prevent piracy. However, in many cases the question of piracy is not as clear cut as appears, and often the term ‘infringement’ – which is as such not further defined in any of the statutory texts – causes doctrinal problems that put the legislative decision to apply criminal law to the test. This chapter will tentatively argue that – outside of salient examples of large scale counterfeiting – criminal norms prohibiting an infringement of IP rights are counter-productive, principally because the effect of deterrence diminishes a reasonable evolution of IP law, and in a similar vein because – for good reason – it is not possible to unequivocally determine what, from an ontological perspective, an IP right actually is. In other words, it is the fluctuation in normative IP assessment that necessarily determines the boundaries, time and again, irrespective of whether these boundaries are expanded or limited. In order to demonstrate this, this Chapter will identify salient examples under trademark and copyright law: the expansion of trademark rights on the one hand, and the notion of ‘copyright infringement’ as now established under the UK Digital Economy Act 2010.

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.

Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Further information