CROSS-BORDER TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT IN THE DIGITAL AGE: JURISDICTIONAL CHALLENGES AND HARMONIZATION EFFORTS.
Keywords:Cross-Border, Trademark Infringement, Digital Age, Jurisdictional Challenges, Harmonization Efforts
Within the ever-changing realm of the digital era, the issue of trademark infringement across borders has become a complex obstacle that challenges the traditional limits of safeguarding intellectual property. The research paper explores the intricate relationship between digital technologies, online platforms, and the limitations in enforcing trademark rights across different jurisdictions. The study examines the complex legal challenges that legal systems worldwide face when dealing with the global movement of goods, services, and information. The paper explores how different jurisdictions, like the United States, European Union, and China, tackle the increasing problem of cross-border trademark infringement. Additionally, the study thoroughly analyzes global attempts to achieve harmonization across nations and their effectiveness in resolving conflicts between worldwide trade and local legal systems. This paper aims to contribute to finding practical solutions that align trademark protection with the realities of the digital era. It does so by exploring the details of jurisdictional intricacies and potential pathways for harmonization. This research highlights the importance of countries working together to protect intellectual property rights and promote a global economy in the context of cross-border trademark infringement.
Tushnet, R.. (2015). What's the Harm of Trademark Infringement?. 49(3).
Wong Villanueva, J. L., Kidokoro, T., & Seta, F.. (2020). Cross-Border Integration, Cooperation and Governance: A Systems Approach for Evaluating “Good” Governance in Cross-Border Regions. https://doi.org/10.1080/08865655.2020.1855227
Long, M.. (2010). Cross-border trade. (3922).
Bainbridge, D.. (2003). Trademark Infringement, the Internet and Jurisdiction. 2003.
Karol, T.. (2001). Understanding Cross-Border Privacy Impact Assessments. 29(4). https://doi.org/10.1201/1079/432220.127.116.1111001/31745.1
Zippo Manufacturing Co. v. Zippo Dot Com, Inc.. (1998, December 31). Zippo Manufacturing Co. v. Zippo Dot Com, Inc..
Blumenthal v. Drudge. (1998, January 1). Blumenthal v. Drudge.
Lowe, V.. (1989). International Law and the Effects Doctrine in the European Court of Justice. 48(01). https://doi.org/10.1017/S0008197300108189
Lonegrass, M. T.. (2012). Finding Room for Fairness in Formalism--The Sliding Scale Approach to Unconscionability. 44(1).
How to Cite
Copyright (c) 2023 PAKISTAN ISLAMICUS (An International Journal of Islamic & Social Sciences)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.