THE INTERNATIONAL LEGAL FRAMEWORK FOR FIGHT AGAINST THE SALE OF COUNTERFEIT GOODS VIA THE INTERNET
Keywords:
Key words: counterfeit goods, trade, Internet, international legal framework, security.Abstract
The sale of counterfeit goods via the Internet is considered to be a contemporary security challenge. Using e-commerce platforms (such as eBay) allows consumers to globally search, locate and buy goods from anywhere in the world. This new mode of trade has increased opportunities for infringements of Intellectual Property Rights, especially Trademark Rights. Counterfeit products pose threats to the health and safety of consumers and to security. Since internet users have access to websites created and edited abroad, the limits of national regulations have been breached. Therefore, it is an additional challenge for all legislators to agree on international legal framework for fight against the online sale of counterfeit goods. Existing binding sources of international law, treaties and state-to-state agreements (so-called hard international law), have nothing much to say regarding this issue. However, non-binding instruments (so-called soft international law) offer some effective solutions, such as Memorandum of Understanding on the Sale of Counterfeit Goods via the Internet.
References
1. Ćeranić J. (2016). Povreda žiga na sajtovima za aukcijsku prodaju robe. In: D. Popović (Ed.), Intelektualna svojina i Internet (47–73), Belgrade: Faculty of Law of the University of Belgrade.
2. Ćeranić Perišić J. (2019). Prodaja krivotvorene robe na internetu. Aktuelna pitanja savremenog zakonodavstva. Budva. 453–461.
3. Ćeranić Perišić, J. (2020), Odgovornost internet posrednika za povredu žiga, Belgrade: Institute of Comparative Law.
4. Dinwoodie G. (2014). Secondary Liability for Online Trademark Infringement: the International Landscape. Columbia Journal of Law & Arts, 37, 468–469.
5. Dinwoodie G. (2017). A Comparative Analysis of the Secondary Liability of Online Service Providers. In: G. Dinwoodie (Ed.) Secondary Liability of Internet Service Providers (1–72), Springer.
6. Ermert, M. (2010, September 8). Treaty Negotiators Turn To ‘ACTA Lite’ in Hopes of Closure. Intellectual Property Watch. Accessed on July 16, 2020, http://www.ip-watch.org/2020/09/08.
7. Maltzer J. (2015). Maximizing the Opportunities of the Internet for the International Trade. E15 Expert Group on the Digital Economy, Policy Options Paper, E15Initiative. Geneva. Accessed on July 17, 2020, http://www3.weforum.org/docs/E15/WEF_Digital_Trade_report_2015_ 1401.pdf.
8. Marković S. (2012). Trgovinski sporazum protiv krivotvorenja robe (ACTA) – sadržina, ciljevi, značaj. Pravo i privreda, 7–9, 198–217.
9. McBride, J, Chatzky, A. (2019, January 4). What is Trans-Pacific Parnership (TPP)?. Accessed on July 17, 2020. https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/what-trans-pacific-partnership-tpp.
10. Memorandum of Understanding on the Sale of Counterfeit Good via the Internet (2011, May 4). Accessed on July 18, 2020. https://ec.europa.eu/growth/industry/policy/intellectual-property/enforcement/memorandum-understanding-sale-counterfeit-goods-internet_en.
11. Mostert W., Schwimmer M. (2011). Notice and Takedown for Trademarks. Trademark Reporter, 249, 264.
12. Radovanović S. (2015). Građanskopravna odgovornost internet posrednika za povredu autorskog prava – uporednopravni aspekt. In: D. Popović (Ed.), Intelektualna svojina i Internet (83–112), Belgrade: Faculty of Law of the University of Belgrade.
13. Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the Functioning of the Memorandum of Understanding on the Sale of Counterfeit Goods via the Internet (2013, April 18). Accessed on July 18, 2020. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/HR/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52013DC0209.
14. Rimmer M. (2011). ‘Breakfast at Tiffany's': eBay Inc, Trade Mark Law and Counterfeiting. Journal of Law, Information & Science, 1–39.
15. Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement. Accessed on July 17, 2020. https://www.eff.org/issues/tpp.
