3 Queen Mary J. Intell. Prop. 1 (2013)

handle is hein.journals/qmjip3 and id is 1 raw text is: 




Queen Mary  Journal of Intellectual Property, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 1


Editorial


It is with absolute pleasure that I write this editorial as the Queen Mary Journal of
Intellectual Property celebrates its 3rd anniversary with this issue. It has been an excit-
ing journey which could not have been possible without the hard work and dedication
of Professor Johanna Gibson,  Lord Hoffmann   and the General Editor Marc  Mimler.
I thank them for inviting me to act as Guest Editor for this issue.
   In this first issue of the year 2013, Robin Callender Smith looks at how the funda-
mental right protecting personal data has lately been challenged by the regulatory and
litigation issues relating to intellectual property rights. He notes that issues relating to
one's individual personal data are only rarely identified and articulated. Even when
this happens, they are being analysed only by reference to the right of privacy, reducing
Article 8 of the EU Charter of fundamental rights to a mere Article 8 ECHR  privacy
remedy.
   Enrico Bonadio  looks at the relationship between intellectual property and compe-
tition in relation to standardization. He explores the meaning and different forms of
standardization and  analyses the Guidelines on  the applicability of Article 101 of
the Treaty on the Functioning  of the European Union  in relation to standardization
agreements. Bonadio's piece then turns to the question of whether intellectual property
right ownership on standardized technologies can really create market dominance cap-
able of triggering anti-competitive behaviours and proceeds to highlight the solutions
proposed  by various legal scholars.
   Ted Shapiro  and Brigitte Linder provide an analysis of the CJEU Premier League
cases (Joined Cases C-403/08  and C-429/08)  focusing on  the generally less debated
copyright aspect of the cases. The piece argues that the decisions do shed some light
over the scope of the rights of reproduction and communication to the public, as well
as the potential meaning of 'appropriate remuneration'.
   Katie Eckett and Florian Koempel's piece on cloud computing  looks at the various
forms of cloud  services and concludes that the current copyright framework is well
equipped to answer the challenges posed by cloud computing. They claim that licensing
addresses possible questions on the liability of cloud computing services, thus creating
legal clarity for rightholders and services providers, as well as consumers.
   I hope you enjoy  it.

                                                                  The  Guest Editor
                 Dr  Gaetano Dimita, Microsoft-IPI Lecturer in Intellectual Property,
                      Innovation and  Strategy, Centre for Commercial Law  Studies,
                                                 Queen  Mary  University of London











0 2013 The Author                          Journal compilation 0 2013 Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd
                                    The Lypiatts, 15 Lansdown Road, Cheltenham, Glos GL50 2JA, UK
                          and The William Pratt House, 9 Dewey Court, Northampton MA 01060-3815, USA

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing nearly 2,700 academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline with pricing starting as low as $29.95

Access to this content requires a subscription. Please visit the following page to request a quote or trial:

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?