Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Numerous Federal law enforcement agencies were and continue to share responsibility with investigating and prosecuting various intellectual property violations. The NIPRCC was created to promote information sharing, investigative and prosecutorial coordination, to provide a centralized reporting location and information resource for private ...
The Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section (CCIPS) is a section of the Criminal Division of the U.S. Department of Justice in charge of investigating computer crime (hacking, viruses, worms) and intellectual property crime.
The origin of the legislation was the Intellectual Property Rights Enforcement Act, S.1984 introduced on November 9, 2005, in 109th Congress [8] by Senator Evan Bayh (D-IN) and Senator George Voinovich (R-OH), and re-introduced on February 7, 2007, in the 110th Congress as S.522.
According to the Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator (IPEC), which was the position at the White House created by the PRO-IP Act through 15 U.S.C. § 8111 to coordinate U.S. governmental agencies that carry out the law's purpose, [4] several policy rationales informed intellectual property enforcement, including: [2] [5]
The Intellectual Property Enforcement Act of 2007, or S.2317, was a bill proposed in the 110th session of the United States Congress that would strengthen intellectual property laws in the United States by amending titles 17 and 18 of United States Code as well as the Trademark Act of 1946. [1]
Lateef Mtima, director of the Institute for Intellectual Property and Social Justice at Howard University School of Law, expressed concern that users who upload copyrighted content to sites could potentially be held criminally liable themselves, saying, "Perhaps the most dangerous aspect of the bill is that the conduct it would criminalize is ...
later creation of the National Intellectual Property Law Enforcement Coordination Council § 1129: passage of prohibitions against cyberpiracy originally codified here, but now covered by 15 U.S.C. § 8131: IV: The Madrid Protocol §§ 1141–1141n: later passage, in consequence of US accession to the Madrid system
Intellectual property law has been criticized as not recognizing new forms of art such as the remix culture, whose participants often commit what technically constitutes violations of such laws, creation works such as anime music videos and others, or are otherwise subject to unnecessary burdens and limitations which prevent them from fully ...