FINLAND


On the policy level, it is hoped that a centralised court will ultimately assist Finnish companies to stay competitive in international markets and increase investment in IP. Similar measures have been taken elsewhere, and Finland wants to stay abreast of European and international developments.


Will the IP court be able to meet its stated objectives?


T e IP court will start its operations on September 1, 2013, so there are no concrete examples or evidence as to its eff ectiveness or quality of its decisions yet.


T ere is little doubt, however, that the new structure will further improve the handling of IP matters in the Finnish courts. One change that will be of particular interest is the reduction of the number of appeals instances from two to one in civil cases. Up to now, parties have been able to appeal from the district court to the appeals court and then possibly further to the Supreme Court. From now on, the Market Court’s decision in an IP dispute can only be appealed to the Supreme Court directly, if the Supreme Court grants leave to appeal. Only time will tell


“THE INITIATIVE


WOULD REMOVE THE POSSIBILITY FOR RIGHTS HOLDERS TO ASK THE COURTS TO ORDER INTERNET SERVICE PROVIDERS TO DISCLOSE THE ALLEGED INFRINGERS’ IDENTITIES.”


whether the trade-off between speed and legal certainty will produce the desired benefi ts.


Reforming or deforming copyright?


While the Finnish government is busy implementing


the European directives on


orphan works (2012/28/EU) and extended term of protection for sound recordings (2011/77/


EU), and the Ministry of Education and Culture has initiated public consultations on national copyright policy, Internet activists, led by the Finnish Electronic Frontier Foundation (Effi ), have started their own citizens’ initiative (https:// www.kansalaisaloite.fi /fi /aloite/70) to Finnish copyright law.


reform


T e backdrop to this initiative is the law on citizens’ initiatives enacted in 2012 that enables citizens to bring legislative proposals to the parliament for consideration. Provided at least 50,000 adults sign the initiative within six months of launch, the parliament is obliged to debate the matter. T e ‘copyright reform’ initiative managed to reach the threshold during the last days of the six-month period.


It remains to be seen what, if any, impact the initiative will have on Finnish copyright law and policy. Its eff ect will most likely be undermined by the fact that it is not seen as a neutral proposal but as setting a partisan anti-content owner agenda.


T e initiative addresses two areas of copyright in particular, the fi rst being the enforcement of copyright in the online environment.


T e single most important message used


142 World Intellectual Property Review September/October 2013


www.worldipreview.com


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116  |  Page 117  |  Page 118  |  Page 119  |  Page 120  |  Page 121  |  Page 122  |  Page 123  |  Page 124  |  Page 125  |  Page 126  |  Page 127  |  Page 128  |  Page 129  |  Page 130  |  Page 131  |  Page 132  |  Page 133  |  Page 134  |  Page 135  |  Page 136  |  Page 137  |  Page 138  |  Page 139  |  Page 140  |  Page 141  |  Page 142  |  Page 143  |  Page 144  |  Page 145  |  Page 146  |  Page 147  |  Page 148  |  Page 149  |  Page 150  |  Page 151  |  Page 152  |  Page 153  |  Page 154  |  Page 155  |  Page 156  |  Page 157  |  Page 158  |  Page 159  |  Page 160  |  Page 161  |  Page 162  |  Page 163  |  Page 164  |  Page 165  |  Page 166  |  Page 167  |  Page 168  |  Page 169  |  Page 170  |  Page 171  |  Page 172  |  Page 173  |  Page 174  |  Page 175  |  Page 176  |  Page 177  |  Page 178  |  Page 179  |  Page 180  |  Page 181  |  Page 182  |  Page 183  |  Page 184  |  Page 185  |  Page 186  |  Page 187  |  Page 188  |  Page 189  |  Page 190  |  Page 191  |  Page 192  |  Page 193  |  Page 194  |  Page 195  |  Page 196