DOCSLIB.ORG

Intellectual Property “Common-Law Precedents” in China 1

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Intellectual Property “Common-Law Precedents” in China 1 New Private Law? Intellectual Property “Common-Law Precedents” in China 1 NEW PRIVATE LAW? INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY “COMMON-LAW PRECEDENTS” IN CHINA Runhua Wang Chicago-Kent College of Law China has established a dynamic legal system by using guiding cases to improve adjudicative consistency. The guiding cases are de facto binding as “common-law precedents” and the only binding cases in China. In China’s dynamic legal system, the intellectual property (IP) legal mechanism and the legal rationales for adjudicating IP disputes are notably influenced by the U.S. On the one hand, some amendments to the IP statutes of China are coercive and in response to actions and criticisms by developed countries, especially the U.S. On the other hand, the IP judicial precedents that are selected, compiled, and published by the Supreme People’s Court (SPC) reflect the voluntary development of the IP regimes and the enforcement of the IP statutes in China. The IP regimes in China are on a path being inherently consistent with U.S. IP laws. In the U.S., IP laws are mainly considered as private law, but they do involve some public law characteristics, as shown by the intervention of legislators and the development of statutory interpretation by the courts. These public law characteristics do not transform IP laws into public law, but they evoke the concept of New Private Law in modern IP laws. This study reviews all the twenty-two IP guiding cases (i.e., patent, copyright, trademark, anti-unfair competition, anti-monopoly) in China and compares them with corresponding judicial precedents in the U.S. I urge that Chinese IP guiding cases are not conventional private or public law, rather are considered to be New Private Law. The IP guiding cases follow public policies to be part of governance and, as a result, show their own influence on policymakers and legislators. Consistent with the concerns of American IP holders, these guiding cases show that Chinese courts are instructed to be conservative in awarding both damages and injunctions. It shows that the courts function as a gatekeeper and consider IP quality to prevent over- rewarding IP holders either through the judicial system itself or the market when government agencies liberally or incautiously granted the IP rights. For trademark and unfair competition cases, public apologies are instructed to be expansively given by the courts to substitute economic damages for IP holders. Moreover, the IP guiding cases suggest that the SPC and Chinese judges are inclined towards a utilitarian and realistic/pragmatic judicial philosophy rather than a formalistic approach in their statutory interpretation. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................ 3 I. STRENGTHENING IP PROTECTION IN CHINA ........................................... 7 A. Exogenous Effects ............................................................................ 7 1. Structuring an IP Regime under TRIPS ......................................... 8 2 New Private Law? Intellectual Property “Common-Law Precedents” in China 2. Trade Pressures from the U.S. ..................................................... 11 B. Internalize IPRs through the Guiding Cases ................................... 14 1. A Demand for Precedential Law in the IP Regime ...................... 14 2. The Guiding Case System ........................................................... 15 3. The Purpose of Guidance ............................................................ 17 4. The Compilation of the IP Guiding Cases ................................... 18 5. Enforcement of IP Guiding Cases through Appellate System Reforms ............................................................................................. 20 6. Enforcement through Government Agencies ............................... 22 II. IPRS AS PRIVATE PROPERTY UNDER “NEW PRIVATE LAW” .................. 24 A. Courts: IP Laws as New Private Law ............................................. 25 B. New Private Law for Increased Government Intervention .............. 28 III. ECONOMIC EFFICIENCY OF THE IP GUIDING CASES .............................. 30 A. Subject Matter and Scope of IP Protection ..................................... 30 1. Trademark and Unfair Competition ............................................ 31 2. Copyright ................................................................................... 35 3. Patent and Plant Variety.............................................................. 38 B. Property Rules and Liability Rules ................................................. 40 1. Balance of the Burden of Proof ................................................... 40 2. Remedies for IPRs ...................................................................... 43 IV. GOVERNMENT’S ROLE IN ADJUDICATION ............................................ 50 A. Deference to Administrative Agencies on IP Eligibility................... 51 B. Provide Evidence and Testimony Standards ................................... 52 V. GUIDING AS “COMMON-LAW PRECEDENTS” ........................................ 54 A. The Presumption of “Common-Law Precedents” ........................... 55 B. Guide the Judicial System .............................................................. 56 C. Guide the CNIPA in Issuing IPRs ................................................... 58 D. Guide the Local Governments in IPR Enforcement ......................... 59 CONCLUSION ............................................................................................. 60 APPENDIX ................................................................................................. 62 New Private Law? Intellectual Property “Common-Law Precedents” in China 3 INTRODUCTION The US-China trade war has been a topic undergoing intense public attention since June 2018.1 A large proportion of the negotiations between the two countries focus on intellectual property (IP) protection.2 President Trump complains about the “alleged IP theft” in China 3 and “enjoyed bipartisan support.” 4 Responding to his concerns over IP protection, Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress proposed amendments to the Trademark Law and the Anti-Unfair Competition Law in April 2019 and quickly approved these amendments in three days.5 This is not the first time that China reforms its IP statutes under the trade pressures from the U.S. 6 However, neither the earlier reforms nor the recent two amendments conclusively wipe off Trump’s allegations of IP theft, including but not limited to the issues of counterfeiting, trade secret misappropriations, and IP infringement.7 It is a misunderstanding that a reform of the IP statutes can entirely solve these issues of IP protection in China. The problem that makes the owners of intellectual property rights (IPRs) in the U.S. anxious is whether they can secure and enforce their IPRs in China. Even though China’s IP laws have been reformed several times to broaden the scope of protection and 1 See generally Greg Ip, The Trade Wars of 2018: An Alternate History, WALL ST. J., June 10, 2018, https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-trade-wars-of-2018-an-alternate-history- 1528672886; Ana Swanson, Trump’s Trade War With China Is Officially Underway, N.Y. TIMES, July 5, 2018, https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/05/business/china-us-trade-war- trump-tariffs.html. 2 Lingling Wei & Bob Davis, U.S., China Close In on Trade Deal, WALL ST. J., Mar. 3, 2019, https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-china-close-in-on-trade-deal-11551641540 (“U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer said the provisions involving protecting intellectual property total nearly 30 pages out of a working document of more than 100 pages.”). 3 Grant Clark, What Is Intellectual Property, and Does China Steal It? WASHINGTON POST, Jan. 21, 2019, https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/what- isintellectual-property-anddoes-china-steal-it/2019/01/21/180c3a9e-1d64-11e9-a759- 2b8541bbbe20_story.html?utm_term=.e18875d581d5; But see Interview by Stuart Varney with Max Baucus, the 11th U.S. Ambassador to China (June 18, 2019) (arguing that “IP theft” has been in past tense and the situation of IP protection in China is in a situation much better than the old days). 4 Vivian Salama, Trump Sees China Trade Deal “When the Time Is Right,” WALL ST. J., May 14, 2019, https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-sees-china-trade-deal-when-the- time-is-right-11557839937. 5 Statement on the Drafted Amendments to Eight Laws (Construction of the P.R.C. and Other Laws, etc.) (promulgated by the Nat’l People’s Congress Constitution & Laws Comm., April 20, 2019) (China); Anti-Unfair Competition Law (promulgated by the Standing Comm. Nat’l People’s Cong., Sep. 2, 1993, effective Dec. 1, 1993) Apr. 23, 2019 (China); Trademark Law (promulgated by the Standing Comm. Nat’l People’s Cong., Aug. 23, 1982, effective Mar. 1, 1983) Apr. 23, 2019 (China). 6 See infra Part I. Section A.2. 7 See Dennis C. Blair & Keith Alexander, China’s Intellectual Property Theft Must Stop, N.Y. TIMES, Aug. 15, 2017, https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/15/opinion/china-us- intellectual-property-trump.html (“Intellectual-property theft covers a wide spectrum: counterfeiting American fashion designs, pirating movies and video games, patent infringement and stealing proprietary technology and software.”). 4 New Private Law? Intellectual Property “Common-Law Precedents” in China confirm that the IPR holders are entitled to property rights in China, excessive government intervention and
Load more

Recommended publications
  • INSOL WORLD the Quarterly Journal of INSOL Internationa L
    INSOL WORLD The Quarterly Journal of INSOL Internationa l Fourth Quarter 2012 US$25 Whether serving as trusted business advisors or in interim management roles, Alvarez & Marsal delivers results when you need them most. Operational and Financial Performance Improvement Your Turnaround and Restructuring Interim and Crisis Management Next Business Advisory Services Move Specialized Industry Expertise Matters » 1,900 professionals worldwide » 40 global locations » Ranked among the top crisis managers by The Deal » Frequent award recipient from TMA » Ranked Among the “Best Firms to Work For” by Consulting magazine and Vault LEADERSHIP. PROBLEM SOLVING. VALUE CREATION. www.alvarezandmarsal.comwwww.alvarezandmarsal.com.alvarezandmars.alvarezandmarsal.com Editors’ Column Anyone receiving £1 for each occasion on which he has heard a commentator speculating whether the British economy was entering or leaving a double dip recession would earn a tidy sum. The same would go for the lucky recipient of US$ 1 for each reference made by Joe Bannister Jay Carfagnini the 2012 US presidential candidates to whether or not the US Hogan Lovells Goodmans LLP economy was about to fall off a fiscal cliff. Yet anyone able to predict with certainty the future development of the Chinese economy could International LLP (UK) (Canada) stand to become a millionaire many times over. Day by day, we hear references to difficult economic times in China. The Chinese market continues to produce a number of the most complex fundholder restructurings, Sino Forest being a high profile example. Yet everything is relative. Economists acknowledge that Chinese output has fallen for the past seven quarters and they predict worse to come.
    [Show full text]
  • Private Law and Public Law
    Private Law and Public Law F.J.M. Feldbrugge Emeritus Professor of East European Law University of Leiden, Faculty of Law We talk about private law and public law as if everybody knew what was meant when these words are being used about law. This probably holds true for lawyers and even law students, but not for the general population. Most people will have some sort of idea about labor law, or bankruptcy law, but the distinction between private law and public law, considered as most fundamental by most lawyers, means next to nothing to the man or woman in the street. Is the problem perhaps avoidable, do we actually need the public/ private law distinction? If we do not, the matter could be left to those inclined to such intellectual pastimes. Unfortunately, the distinction between public and private law entails practical consequences, at least in continental legal systems, so it can- not be referred to the convenient and already very large file of problems that do not need a solution. To start at the simplest and most practical level: our law happens to be divided into two boxes; some of it has been put into the box marked “public law”, and the rest into the box marked “private law”, and the contents of these two boxes are treated somewhat differently. For the law student and the humble practitioner this may be enough to know. But the more discerning lawyer would of course like to know why some law goes into one box and some into the other. Two thousand years of jurisprudence—because the distinction goes back at least as far as the Romans—have produced a vast body of literature containing answers to this question.
    [Show full text]
  • Compatibility of Sharia Law with the European Convention on Human Rights: Can States Parties to the Convention Be Signatories to the “Cairo Declaration”?
    http://assembly.coe.int Doc. 14787 03 January 2019 Compatibility of Sharia law with the European Convention on Human Rights: can States Parties to the Convention be signatories to the “Cairo Declaration”? Report1 Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights Rapporteur: Mr Antonio GUTIÉRREZ, Spain, Socialists, Democrats and Greens Group Summary The Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights considers that the 1990 Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam, whilst not legally binding, has symbolic value and political significance in terms of human rights policy under Islam. However, it fails to reconcile Islam with universal human rights, especially insofar as it considers Sharia law as its sole source of reference and does not recognise certain rights. The committee is therefore concerned that three Council of Europe member States – Albania, Azerbaijan and Turkey – are signatories to the 1990 Cairo Declaration, as are Jordan, Kyrgyzstan, Morocco and Palestine, whose parliaments enjoy partner for democracy status with the Parliamentary Assembly. The committee considers that where human rights are concerned there is no room for religious or cultural exceptions. Member States and partners for democracy should bolster religious pluralism, tolerance and equal rights of all. Bridges of understanding between Sharia law and the European Convention on Human Rights should be created, on the prior condition of acceptance that the Convention is an international instrument binding on all States Parties. This report also addresses the actual application of Sharia principles in certain member States and makes country-specific recommendations. 1. Reference to committee: Doc. 13965, Reference 4188 of 4 March 2016. F - 67075 Strasbourg Cedex | [email protected] | Tel: +33 3 88 41 2000 | assembly.coe.int Doc.
    [Show full text]
  • 4.3 Presidential Government
    11 MM VENKATESHWARA COMPARATIVE POLITICAL OPEN UNIVERSITY SYSTEMS www.vou.ac.in COMPARATIVE POLITICAL SYSTEMS POLITICAL COMPARATIVE COMPARATIVE POLITICAL SYSTEMS MA [POLITICAL SCIENCE] [MAPS-105] VENKATESHWARA OPEN UNIVERSITYwww.vou.ac.in COMPARATIVE POLITICAL SYSTEMS MA [Political Science] MAPS 105 BOARD OF STUDIES Prof Lalit Kumar Sagar Vice Chancellor Dr. S. Raman Iyer Director Directorate of Distance Education SUBJECT EXPERT Ms. Puppy Gyadi Assistant Professor CO-ORDINATOR Mr. Tauha Khan Registrar Authors Dr Biswaranjan Mohanty: Units (3.3, 6.2, 7.2-7.3) © Dr Biswaranjan Mohanty, 2019 Vikas Publishing House: Units (1, 2, 3.0-3.2, 3.4-3.10, 4, 5, 6.0-6.1, 6.3-6.9, 7.0-7.1, 7.4-7.9, 8, 9, 10) © Reserved, 2019 All rights reserved. No part of this publication which is material protected by this copyright notice may be reproduced or transmitted or utilized or stored in any form or by any means now known or hereinafter invented, electronic, digital or mechanical, including photocopying, scanning, recording or by any information storage or retrieval system, without prior written permission from the Publisher. Information contained in this book has been published by VIKAS® Publishing House Pvt. Ltd. and has been obtained by its Authors from sources believed to be reliable and are correct to the best of their knowledge. However, the Publisher and its Authors shall in no event be liable for any errors, omissions or damages arising out of use of this information and specifically disclaim any implied warranties or merchantability or fitness for any particular use. Vikas® is the registered trademark of Vikas® Publishing House Pvt.
    [Show full text]
  • The Problem of Delay in the Contract Formation Process: a Comparative Study of Contract Law Mikio Yamaguchi T
    Cornell International Law Journal Volume 37 Article 3 Issue 2 2004 The rP oblem of Delay in the Contract Formation Process: A Comparative Study of Contract Law Mikio Yamaguchi Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/cilj Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Yamaguchi, Mikio (2004) "The rP oblem of Delay in the Contract Formation Process: A Comparative Study of Contract Law," Cornell International Law Journal: Vol. 37: Iss. 2, Article 3. Available at: http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/cilj/vol37/iss2/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at Scholarship@Cornell Law: A Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Cornell International Law Journal by an authorized administrator of Scholarship@Cornell Law: A Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Problem of Delay in the Contract Formation Process: A Comparative Study of Contract Law Mikio Yamaguchi T Introduction ..................................................... 358 I. Law Applicable to the Problem of Delay in the United States .................................................... 3 6 1 A. Structure of Applicable Law ........................... 361 B. Priority of the Applicable Law ........................ 362 II. Comparative Study of the Contract Formation Process ..... 363 A. Legal Structure of the Contract Formation Process ..... 363 1. Structure of the Contract Formation Process Under the Comm on Law ................................. 363 2. Structure of the Contract Formation Process from a Comparative Perspective ........................... 364 B. A Major Function of the Common Law in the Contract Form ation Process .................................... 365 1. Common Law Rules and Principles That Reflect the Balancing Function ................................ 365 2. Balancing Function from a Comparative Perspective .......................................
    [Show full text]
  • Robert P Merges What Kind of Rights Are Intellectual Property Rights?
    Robert P Merges What Kind of Rights Are Intellectual Property Rights? Forthcoming in Rochelle C Dreyfuss & Justine Pila (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Intellectual Property Law © RP Merges 2017 Table of Contents 1. Intellectual Property as a Right 1.1 Intellectual Property Rights Are Property Rights 1.2 The Basic Features of Intellectual Property as Property 1.2.1 The Right to Control Uses 1.2.2 The Right to Transfer 1.2.3 The Special Case of Waiver 1.3 Limitations on Intellectual Property Rights 2. What Kind of Rights? Hohfeld and Intellectual Property 2.1 Claim Right/Duty 2.2 Privilege/No Claim 2.3 Power/Liability 2.4 Immunity/Disability 2.5 Hohfeld: Conclusion 3. Obstacles to Conceiving Intellectual Property as Property 3.1 Intellectual Property Acquisition and Misunderstandings About What it Means to be a Right 3.2 What, No Automatic Injunction? That’s Not Property! 3.3 Why Intellectual Property Rights Are Not ‘Regulation’ 3.3.2 The Second Sense of ‘Regulation’ 3.3.3 Freedom and Permission 3.3.4 Freedoms in Historical Perspective 3.4 Intellectual Property Rights as Property Rights: Summing Up 4. Problems With Conceiving Intellectual Property as Property 4.1 Group Ownership 4.2 Intellectual Property As Constitutional Property: The Takings Problem 5. Conclusion 1. Intellectual Property Rights as Rights Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2959073 The phrase is common enough that it rolls off the tongue: intellectual property rights. It even has a well-known acronym, ‘IPRs.’1 But are they really rights? And if so, what kind of rights? Most importantly, what difference does it make that they are rights – what practical import does this carry? These are the questions I take up here.
    [Show full text]
  • Singapore Convention Series –
    Is Investor-State Mediation An Emerging Practice? A Practitioner’s Perspective Kluwer Mediation Blog October 16, 2019 Ting-Kwok IU (Kwok, Ng & Chan, Solicitors & Notaries) Please refer to this post as: Ting-Kwok IU, ‘Is Investor-State Mediation An Emerging Practice? A Practitioner’s Perspective’, Kluwer Mediation Blog, October 16 2019, http://mediationblog.kluwerarbitration.com/2019/10/16/is-investor-state-mediation-an-emerging-practice-a-pr actitioners-perspective/ I have recently been approached to enrol myself in an investor-state mediation training programme and also to speak at one of the sessions. That triggers off my deeper thoughts on the topic of investor-state mediation and related issues. This blog is an attempt to share my thoughts so that fellow mediation practitioners may consider whether or not investor-state mediation is an area on which they should embark. It is also my hope that my sharing below will also make readers become more aware of the practice of investor-state mediation. While there may not be a universally acceptable definition, investor-state mediation entails the resolution of investment disputes through the process of mediation between one party (or more than one party) being private, and the other party being a sovereign state. Investor-state mediation often includes but is not limited to the following public law dimensions: Changes in investment incentive measures; Termination or interference of a contract by the state; Revocation of licences or permits; and Unexpected tariffs or taxation. Investor-state mediation also involves international investment law issues such as, Expropriation; Alleged breach of the “fair and equitable” provision in the contract between the investor and the state; and Interpretation of investment treaties.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to Law and Legal Reasoning Law Is
    CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION TO LAW AND LEGAL REASONING LAW IS "MAN MADE" IT CHANGES OVER TIME TO ACCOMMODATE SOCIETY'S NEEDS LAW IS MADE BY LEGISLATURE LAW IS INTERPRETED BY COURTS TO DETERMINE 1)WHETHER IT IS "CONSTITUTIONAL" 2)WHO IS RIGHT OR WRONG THERE IS A PROCESS WHICH MUST BE FOLLOWED (CALLED "PROCEDURAL LAW") I. Thomas Jefferson: "The study of the law qualifies a man to be useful to himself, to his neighbors, and to the public." II. Ask Several Students to give their definition of "Law." A. Even after years and thousands of dollars, "LAW" still is not easy to define B. What does law Consist of ? Law consists of enforceable rule governing relationships among individuals and between individuals and their society. 1. Students Need to Understand. a. The law is a set of general ideas b. When these general ideas are applied, a judge cannot fit a case to suit a rule; he must fit (or find) a rule to suit the unique case at hand. c. The judge must also supply legitimate reasons for his decisions. C. So, How was the Law Created. The law considered in this text are "man made" law. This law can (and will) change over time in response to the changes and needs of society. D. Example. Grandma, who is 87 years old, walks into a pawn shop. She wants to sell her ring that has been in the family for 200 years. Grandma asks the dealer, "how much will you give me for this ring." The dealer, in good faith, tells Grandma he doesn't know what kind of metal is in the ring, but he will give her $150.
    [Show full text]
  • Private Law 225 Private Law 226 an ACT Private Law
    A86 PRIVATE LAW 225—AUG. 28, 1951 [65 STAT. Private Law 225 CHAPTER 354 August 28, 1951 AN ACT [S. 630] To suspend until August 15, 1951, the application of certain Federal laws with respect to an attorney employed by the Senate Committee on Labor and Public Welfare. Be it enacted hy the Senate and House of Representatives of the Eay R. Murdock. United States of America in Congress assembled^ That service or employment of Ray R. Murdock as an attorney on a temporary basis prior to August 15,1951, to assist the Senate Committee on Labor and Public Welfare or any of its duly authorized subcommittees shall not be considered as service or employment bringing such person within the provisions of sections 281, 283, or 284, of title 18 of the United States 62 Stat. 697. Code, or of any other Federal law imposing restrictions, requirements, or penalties in relation to the employment of persons, the performance of service, or the payment or receipt of compensation in connection with any claim, proceeding, or matter now pending in court and involving the United States. Approved August 28, 1951. Private Law 226 CHAPTER 358 AN ACT August 29, 1951 [S. 100] To record the lawful admission for permanent residence of certain aliens. Be it enacted hy the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That, for the pur­ poses of the immigration and naturalization laws, Maria Luisa Ajuria Lazpita, Maria Isabel Albizuri Aguirre, Maria Ignacia Arregui Urbieta, Aurora Eduarda Jauregui Gorozarri, Maria Begona Landa- buru Azcue, Josef a Martinez Viqueira, Elvira Echevarria Goicoechea, Pastora Inchausti Susarragui, Jesusa Unzala Eguidazu, Gaudencia Fernandez Carton, Casilda Gomez Martinez, Victoriana Egues Saizar, Maria Blanca Ganchegui Alcorta, Benita Justa Izaguirre Zabalegui, and Teodora Jimenez Buey shall be held and considered to have been lawfully admitted to the United States for permanent residence as of the date of the enactment of this Act, upon payment of the required Quota deductions.
    [Show full text]
  • Private Law: Criminal Law Dale E
    Louisiana Law Review Volume 12 | Number 2 The Work of the Louisiana Supreme Court for the 1950-1951 Term January 1952 Private Law: Criminal Law Dale E. Bennett Repository Citation Dale E. Bennett, Private Law: Criminal Law, 12 La. L. Rev. (1952) Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.lsu.edu/lalrev/vol12/iss2/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Reviews and Journals at LSU Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Louisiana Law Review by an authorized editor of LSU Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. 1952] WORK OF THE SUPREME COURT CRIMINAL LAW Dale E. Bennett* In State v. Mathe' the appeal was from a conviction of indecent behavior with juveniles. The defendant sought to have his conviction set aside on the ground that the repeal of the Criminal Code,2 incidental to its incorporation in the Louisiana Revised Statutes as Chapter 1 of Title 14, "acted as a legislative pardon for all offenses committed before and not tried prior to its effective date of May 1, 1950." 3 The Louisiana Supreme Court squarely rejected this argument, and Justice LeBlanc's opinion accurately states the true nature and effect of the Revised Stat- utes. Justice LeBlanc first examined the general legislative man- date under which the projet of the statutes had been prepared by the Law Institute and then looked at the title of the act adopt- ing the Revised Statutes. These significant criteria of legislative intent clearly indicated that the original statutory provisions, except as necessarily modified to remove incongruities and to organize them according to a logical pattern, were carried for- ward and continued in effect in the Revised Statutes.
    [Show full text]
  • The Methodology of Comparative Law
    Roger Williams University Law Review Volume 16 Issue 1 Symposium: Methodological Approaches to Article 2 Comparative Law Winter 2011 The ethoM dology of Comparative Law Edward J. Eberle Roger Williams University School of Law Follow this and additional works at: http://docs.rwu.edu/rwu_LR Recommended Citation Eberle, Edward J. (2011) "The eM thodology of Comparative Law," Roger Williams University Law Review: Vol. 16: Iss. 1, Article 2. Available at: http://docs.rwu.edu/rwu_LR/vol16/iss1/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at DOCS@RWU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Roger Williams University Law Review by an authorized administrator of DOCS@RWU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Methodology of Comparative Law Edward J. Eberle* I. INTRODUCTION In our increasingly globally linked world, comparative law needs to take on an ever more important role. With the rise of important new developments over the last thirty years, like the proliferation of the computer and the internet, global capital markets which begin in Asia and end in the United States, and the mutual trade in commodities, like oil, foodstuffs or metals, we are linked in important common ways. The computer, and especially its generation of the internet, has made us, in effect, a global village. Still, of course, there are differences among areas of the world and countries, notwithstanding the common linkages that connect us. And so, that brings us to the topic at hand: assessing the role and methodology of comparative law so that we can come up with a sound methodological framework to better understand the role of law in different countries.
    [Show full text]
  • Unification of Private Law and Codification of International Law Sompong Sucharitkul Golden Gate University School of Law, [email protected]
    Golden Gate University School of Law GGU Law Digital Commons Publications Faculty Scholarship 1998 Unification of Private Law and Codification of International Law Sompong Sucharitkul Golden Gate University School of Law, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.ggu.edu/pubs Part of the International Law Commons Recommended Citation 3 Uniform Law Rev. 693 (1998) This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Scholarship at GGU Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Publications by an authorized administrator of GGU Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Unification of Private Law and Codification of International Law Sompong Sucharitkul * I. – INTRODUCTION Unification of private law is principally a task undertaken by the Institute for the Unification of Private Law (UNIDROIT), while the codification and progressive develop- ment of international law constitute the dual function of the International Law Commission (ILC). The purpose of this brief essay is to illustrate how in several areas and in more aspects than one, the activities of UNIDROIT and the achievements of the Commission can be found in the same or similar, if not indeed identical, overlapping areas of study. It is not intended to attempt a comprehensive survey of past performance and ex- perience of the two norm-formulating agencies. Both are inter-governmental in their constitution, while each working group and individual member acts in a personal, independent and expert capacity, not directly under the instruction or control of any Government, nor in any representative function.
    [Show full text]