The Battle for Cheburashka: Films by Jove, Inc. v. Berov and Copyright in Soviet Animated Films

2014 ◽  
Vol 39 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 343-367
Author(s):  
Sergey Budylin
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
International Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
Corporate Law ◽  
Legal Issues ◽  
Private International Law ◽  
Animated Films ◽  
Russian Law

In this essay, I discuss in some detail an extraordinarily instructive US case from the early 2000s: the Soiuzmul’tfil’m controversy, formally known as Films by Jove, Inc. v. Berov. More precisely, this essay is about a series of related cases in the United States and Russia concerning the rights to Soviet animated films. In their decisions, the courts discuss—and, to some extent, resolve—a number of complex legal issues of Soviet, post-Soviet, and current Russian law, including those related to intellectual property, corporate law, and private international law.

Różne perspektywy dotyczące skutków art. 95 CISG

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Małgorzata Danuta Pohl-Michałek
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
United States Of America ◽  
Democratic Republic ◽  
The United States ◽  
Private International Law ◽  
United Nations Convention ◽  
International Sale Of Goods ◽  
Conflict Of Law

The 1980 United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG) was adopted in order to provide uniform rules governing the international sale of goods. It has already been ratified by an impressive number of 92 Contracting States, with the major trading countries taking the lead. The CISG applies to contracts for the sale of goods between parties whose places of business are in different States, where the States are CISG Contracting States (Article 1(1)(a)). Moreover, it applies to contracts for the sale of goods when the contracting parties have their places of business in different States and when the rules of private international law lead to the application of the law of a CISG Contracting State (Article 1(1)(b)). However, at the time of ratification, the prospective Contracting States are given the possibility of making additional reservations, including one set out in Article 95 CISG, which limits the application of Article 1(1)(b) of the Convention. Although there are some CISG Contracting States that initially applied the reservation but have since withdrawn it, there are still a few Contracting States where the reservation remains[1], including the two largest trading countries – China and the United States. The paper presents various approaches regarding the interpretation of the effects of the reservation set out in Article 95 CISG, which in fact challenge the principle of the uniform interpretation and application of the Convention’s provisions. The author argues that the Article 95 CISG reservation leads to increased confusion and problematic conflict of law issues that bring more chaos than benefits.   [1] The remaining Article 95 CISG Reservatory States are: Armenia, China, the Lao People's Democratic Republic, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Singapore, Slovakia and the United States of America. Information is based on the official website: https://treaties.un.org/pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=X-10&chapter=10 (accessed: 9.12.2019).

scholarly journals Legal substantiation of retaliatory measures of the Russian Federation to economic sanctions of the United States, European Union, and their allies

2020 ◽  
pp. 24-37
Author(s):  
Larisa Yur'evna Dobrynina ◽  
Anna Viktorovna Gubareva
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
European Union ◽  
International Law ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Economic Activity ◽  
Economic Sanctions ◽  
The United States ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Private International Law ◽  
The Russian Federation

The authors examine the economic sanctions introduced nu the U.S., EU and their allies against the Russian Federation, as well as the legal mechanism of retaliatory measures taken by Russia on the nationwide scale. The changes in the international legal regulation derailed the vector of global development, which was bringing real freedom of economic activity. Establishment of the sanction regime by the aforementioned parties signifies a struggle for own influence, weakening of the positive trade and economic ties, as well as an attempt to institute a regime of protectionism within the international trade turnover exclusively for their own benefit. Based on the analysis of the normative-legal documents, an assessment is made on the legal legitimacy of the introduced discriminatory measures of the allies from the perspective of the norms of international law. This article presents the analysis of the positions of federal laws and other legislative bills of the Russian Federation, establishing gradual constraining countermeasures for foreign subjects in various spheres of activity. The authors substantiate the fact that introduction of retaliatory economic sanctions by the Russian Federation with regards to the United States, European Union, and their allies is directly related to the implementation of the principle of reciprocity, currently existing within private international law. It is noted that all these actions on protection from illegitimate sanctions are realized by Russia practically without participation of UN, WTO and other reputable international organizations in regulation of the “sanctions” issue. The extraterritorial measures introduced by the United States and the European Union justifies the movement of Russian into a new stage of evolution of legal regulation of the foreign economic activity, and in foreign trade – establishment of new markets in Asia, Africa and Latin America.

Part IX International Environmental Law in National/Regional Courts, Ch.65 North America

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Affolder Natasha
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
North America ◽  
International Law ◽  
Environmental Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
Private International Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Environmental Law ◽  
Indigenous Law

This chapter assesses international environmental law in the courts of North America. In particular, it explores the minimal engagement of US, Canadian, and Mexican courts with international environmental law. Environmental law cases in Canada, Mexico, and the United States are not immune to international law and international norms. However, international environmental lawyers may be forced to look to some unlikely and unusual places to find international environmental law's normative influence. Environmental law cases in North America seem poised to engage most significantly with international law not in the ‘bright lights’ but rather on the side-lines, where environmental law norms interface with climate law, private international law, Indigenous law, and human rights law.

scholarly journals PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW IN BRAZIL: A BRIEF OVERVIEW

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 11-37
Author(s):  
Carmen Tiburcio
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
International Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
Private International Law ◽  
The Status ◽  
Rules And Principles ◽  
The Subject

The paper is intended to provide an overview of Private International Law in Brazil. With this purpose, it presents in broad lines the subject matters of the discipline, undertaking, whenever possible, comparisons with the contours given to it in the United States. In sum, the text deals with the acquisition of Brazilian nationality, the status of aliens, the determination of the applicable legislation to legal relationships with international connections – which includes the exam of Brazilian connecting rules and principles of Private International Law – and the exercise of Brazilian jurisdiction.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document