dmca-activists
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[DMCA-Activists] Agenda for March 29 Hague Convention Meet


From: Seth Johnson
Subject: [DMCA-Activists] Agenda for March 29 Hague Convention Meet
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 12:07:54 -0500

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [Hague-jur-commercial-law] Agenda for March 29 IP issues
& Hague
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 08:54:57 -0500
From: Manon Ress <address@hidden>
To: address@hidden

SECRETARY OF STATE'S
ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW

DRAFT HAGUE CONVENTION
ON EXCLUSIVE CHOICE OF COURT AGREEMENTS

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ISSUES

U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
Conference Center, Henry Remsen Building
400 Dulany Street
Alexandria, VA 22313-1450

AGENDA

2:00 PM

Welcome and Introduction -- Jeffrey Kovar & Jennifer Ness

2:30 PM - 4:00 PM

Scope of exclusion of IP matters (Art. 2.2.k)

--      what types should be excluded?
--      what types of claims should be included in the convention?
-       validity?
-       infringement?

Scope of inclusion of IP matters (Art. 2.2.k & 2.3)

--      should license and other contract disputes be included?
--      other "incidental questions"?

Drafting

--      can the drafting of these provisions be improved?
--      see drafting suggestion para 45, page 14, of the December 2004
Report by Hartley and Dogauchi

4:00 PM - 4:30 PM

Stay of Proceedings (Art. 6)

--      should the convention permit a court to stay proceedings under
the  choice of court agreement so that a party can pursue a
ruling on an  incidental question?
--      should this provision apply to any matters excluded from scope
under  Article 2?


4:30 - 5:30 PM

Stay or Denial of Enforcement Based on Incidental Ruling (Art.
10)

--      is the effect of paragraph (1) clear; is it desirable?
--      should a court be permitted to deny enforcement of that part
of a  judgment that is inconsistent with a ruling on an
incidental question?  (para. 2)
--      should a court be permitted to stay enforcement proceedings to
permit  parties to litigate an incidental question elsewhere?
(para 3)

5:30 PM - 6:00 PM

Other Issues

--      Validity of the Choice of Court Agreement:
-       should the convention cover click agreements?
-       are the validity rules in Articles 5, 7, and 9 adequate to
protect  vulnerable parties?
--      Other Issues








-- 
Manon Anne Ress
address@hidden,
www.cptech.org

Consumer Project on Technology in Washington, DC PO Box 19367, 
Washington, DC 20036, USA Tel.:  +1.202.387.8030, fax:
+1.202.234.5176

Consumer Project on Technology in Geneva, 1 Route des  Morillons,
CP  2100, 1211 Geneva 2, Switzerland. Tel: +41 22 791 6727

Consumer Project on Technology in London, 24 Highbury Crescent,
London,  N5 1RX, UK. Tel:+44(0)207 226 6663 ex 252. Mob:+44(0)790
386 4642. Fax:  +44(0)207 354 0607


_______________________________________________
Hague-jur-commercial-law mailing list
address@hidden
http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/hague-jur-commercial-law





reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]