ICC’s Intellectual Property Committee
ICC Sweden’s Committee on Intellectual Property Rights currently consists of about 30 members.
In the Committee on Intellectual Property Rights, representatives of Swedish ICC members participate
as leading expertsand experts in intellectual property rights. Twice a year, the committee’s members
are called to a meeting. In addition to the agenda for the Commission meeting, current Swedish issues
of interest to themembers are also discussed, and an opportunity is given to hear initiated speakers
within current issues.
ICC Sweden is represented in the Commission for Intellectual Property Rights and in related working
groups bymembers of the Swedish Committee for Intellectual Property Rights. During the committee’s
two meetings per year, the Swedish position is prepared on various issues that are dealt with by the
Commission and associatedworking groups. Furthermore, it is also the ICC’s committee that is
responsible for arranging seminars and disseminating knowledge about intellectual property rights.
The main task of the ICC is to promote investment opportunities and international
trade, as well as to help companies meet the challenges and opportunities that they face
with globalization. We work in different ways to simplify international trade and
cross- border investments. One factor contributing to the promotion of international trade is the
protection of intellectual property rights. Furthermore, the protection of intellectual property rights is
considered to encourage the development of knowledge-based industries and to generate a favorable
climate for foreign direct investment and technology transfer.
Current
ICC points out in a new discussion paper (see the link to the right of this page) how regulations
for how companies may use their brands and logos affect competition in
consumers ‘buying choices, companies’ investments in innovation and quality, global trade and the
value of the assets for the companies. The ICC urges decision makers to carefully consider
regulatory intervention based on global agreements on how to regulate intellectual property rights
and whether the benefits of new legislative measures actually exceed the negative impact of an
intervention. In the first place, less intervention and less costly measures should be considered
to achieve the purpose of the regulation, ie measures that do not risk or at least as little as
Possibly, the companies’ ability to use their brands as a
means of communication affects the market.
There are many examples of regulations that, for example for health or safety purposes, restrict
companies’ opportunities to freely dispose of a brand. The ICC does not question that in some cases
there may be purposes that justify restrictions on the companies’ use of their rights. The most
noteworthy is plain packaging for cigarettes, which means that cigarette packages must be completely
brand-neutral in their design. Without making any valuation of such regulation in this
or other individual cases or the underlying purpose of restricting the rights of companies, the
ICC wishes to clarify, however, that an intervention in the rights of the companies should be done on the
basis of an approach such as can first be achieved without intervention in the intellectual property
law system. The ICC therefore urges decision makers to carefully consider the intellectual property rights and
other consequences of different regulations in their analysis and to thoroughly analyze whether the measures
are necessary, proportionate and in what way the purpose can be achieved on the basis of taking measures
that cause as little intervention in intellectual property rights as possible.
The ICC has the following advice and requests for decision makers:
- Be clear about what the regulation should achieve, consider which measure is most effective and
base decisions on a scientific basis. - Ensure transparency and stakeholder involvement in the decision-making process.
- Analyze the impact on all stakeholders, try to minimize market distortions and stimulate
investment and innovation. - Use accepted regulations and standards as well as gained experience.
Kommitténs ledamöter
Ordförande: Thomas Lindqvist - Hammarskiöld & Co
| Linn Alfredsson | Hannes Snellman |
| Malin Allard | Advokatfirman Cederquist |
| Stojan Arnerstål | Institutet för immaterial-, marknadsföring- och konkurrensrätt |
| Marcus Ateva | Advokatfirman MarLaw AB |
| Robin Berzelius | AWAPATENT AB |
| Eva Blum | Advokatfirman Vinge KB |
| Christopher Büller | Advokatfirma DLA Piper Sweden KB |
| Karin Cederlund | Sandart & Partners Advokatbyrå |
| Bengt Domeij | Uppsala Universitet |
| Bodil Ehlers | Kastell Advokatbyrå AB |
| Jan Fager | JM Fager juridik & marknadsföring |
| Anette Henrysson | Advokatfirman Vinge KB |
| Ivan Hjertman | IP Interface AB |
| Åsa Johansson | Philip Morris AB |
| Per Josefson | Mannheimer Swartling Advokatbyrå |
| David Leffler | Synch Advokat |
| Richard Lewinson | Tetra Laval |
| Henrik Lindström | Ramberg Advokater |
| Christer Löfgren | BrandNews och PatentEye |
| Katarina Nilsson | Stora Enso |
| Per Jonas Nordell | Stockholms universitet |
| Erik Sandgren | Gernandt & Danielsson |
| Lena Seratelius | Advokatfirman ReklamJuridik i Sverige AB |
| Stina Sjögren Paulsson | Scania |
| Matilda Stenman | Philip Morris AB |
| Sophia Spala | Setterwalls Advokatbyrå |
| Fredrik Ståhl | Time Advokatbyrå KB |
| Carl Wendt | Noréns AB |
| Karin Westerberg | Sandart & Partners Advokatbyrå |
| Stefan Widmark | Kastell Advokatbyrå |
| Henrik Wistam | Advokatfirman Lindahl KB |
| Sanna Wolk | Uppsala Universitet |
| Emil Ödling | DLA Piper |