180 Summary The Su'edish Supreme Court and the Lazv of Intellectual Property The article treats the development of the Swedish law on intellectual property, primarily the role played by the case law developed by the Supreme Court. The emphasis is on the period 1920-1970. During this period important case law, often based on rather outdated legislation, was developed in close contact with the legal literature, primarily the important books by professor Gösta Eberstein of The Law Faculty in Stockholm. Bv 1970 new legislation had been passed in nearly all fields of the intellectual property law, mainly based on the case law that had emerged, and a new period was started, in which the primary role of the Supreme Court is to interpret the modern statutory texts. All areas of intellectual property law are covered by the article but most attention has been given to the areas of copyright and the protection of trade names, surnames, names of associations and trade marks. In these areas the influence of the Supreme Court decisions is most important. Special attention has been paid to the methods of interpretation of statutory texts used bv the Supreme Court, primarily the question to what extent the Court has been willing to use a “free” interpretation, expanding beyond what the text clearly covers, in order to adjust the legal situation to the demands of modern developments. The article deals with areas m which the case law developed bv the Supreme Court, often on the basis of a rather free interpretation of fairlv old statutory texts, has been particularly important. Such areas include copyright protection for applied arts and the transmission of music via new media. In these areas the Supreme Court has often taken a position favourable to extended protection. A well-known case is the Orrefors case (NJA 1931 p. 506) m which the Supreme Court awarded copyright protection to Orretors glassware in modern design. However, when enacting the Design Protection Act in 1970, based on the registration principle, the Copyright Act was amended, in order to recfuce the scope of copyright protection for products of applied art. In the trade names area, the Supreme Court established the principles of substantive, private-law based protection of trade names bv its landmark decision in 1933 in the Savoy case (NJA 1933 p. 558), concerning the StockholmSavov Hotel. The principle of private-law protection of abbreviations of trade names was established in the KI- case (NJA 1941 p. 672). In a similar manner names of non-profit associations were awarded protection by the Supreme Court decision in the Skidframjandet case (NjA 1946 p. 767), reversing a previous decision m the Malmö byggmästarförening case (NJA 1938 p. 232). Also the protection of surnames, at least noble names, has been secured b\' Suprente Court Decisions. The article also discusses important decisions in the trade-marks area, mt. al., concerning the problem of parallel imports. In this field, the Polvcolor decision (NJA 1967 p. 458), is the landmark case m which old case law was reversed and most types of parallel imports made legal fromthe viewpoint of trade mark law. On the other hand, contrarv to the situation m manv other countries, the contribution of the Supreme Court to the development of competition law has been more or less negligible, both in the sense of unfair competition law and restrictive practices law. However, in conclusion the Supreme Court has made most important contributicms to the development during this century of the Swedish intellectual propertc’ law. On nearly all points, except the protection of applied arts, later legislation has confirmed the basic principles developed in the case law of the Supreme Court.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=