This very complex area of law includes the following topics:
- Copyright and trademark searches and registration
- Creation and development agreements
- Infringement protection
- Intellectual property licensing
- Non-disclosure agreements
- Trade secret protection
- Service marks
- Industrial designs
- Database rights
- Protection of confidential information, goodwill and corporate know-how
- Freedom of information and related rights and obligations
- Establishing, enforcing and protecting intellectual property rights and related litigation
Our law firm in Italy (Milan, Bologna, Rome) acts in the typical transaction as follows. Intellectual Property encompasses many forms of intangible property, which may include copyrights, patents, trademarks, and trade secrets. We shall protects this intellectual Property, which is often the most valuable and least protected asset of many businesses and creative individuals.
Our area of practice protects the work of creative individuals and businesses and protects such creation from unauthorized use or exploitation by third parties. By utilizing Intellectual Property laws, creators and innovators can fully protect and benefit from their creations. By other side exist a body of law designed to protect and promote the creative efforts of individuals and corporations. This area of law encompasses copyright, trademark, licensing, and entertainment law as well as many other legal areas. Creative law provides for a secure and efficient system of developing, licensing and selling creative works. By utilizing the laws that protect innovation and creation, creators of art and information can protect their creations and obtain its full economic value.
OUR PHILOSOPHICAL VISION
We encourage our clients to defend their interest also making acces to “Mediation” and “Settlement” of their disputes.
By “mediation” we mean amicable and peaceful negotiation of conflicts, but also in general the typical act of each of us, as a social actor, of learning, experimenting and applying social practices in the common civil life.
These practices are the object of our training, of our education to civil life, and to know them, verify their use and use them in a technical sense, is an act of constant “mediation” between our reality of individuals or “groups” and the particular “logic of the situation” of the worldly or earthly reality, to which we are bound every day and that every new day presents itself with constantly renewed characters.
Our engagement has philosophical origins. It implies a certain of idea of Mediation of disputes, an Aesthetics of Works of Art, a Fuzzy Theory of Truth, a certain idea of Ontology and a specific idea of Network Economy.
We think that Aesthetics of Works of Art is for social scientists (i.e. lawyers) a common property, a world heritage (this way, mediaton shall be encouraged, always), due to consideration of the objective beauty, as not only a property of others perceptions. The problem of seeing objective beautiful relations between a work of art and and a user would be solved this way: my perception is partly supporting others beauty, others beauties are partly supporting my perception. Somewhere in the process of aesthetic interaction between object and subject shall take place a perfect convergence of two apparently separated realities. If someone tells to not beat our heads on “Beauty is subjective/Objective”, given that in reality it is both, not only at different places and occasions but simultaneously too, we could reply with that inquiry: What about difference of opinions and average opinions about beauty? Neither precise definition for beauty nor discrete average opinions are possible. It/he/she hits your eyes and our eye experiences a vague resonance which vaguely creates and receives beautiful qualia…somewhere, in a fuzzy centre of interaction of vision/hearing/ tasting/smelling, must exist a crisp core of beauty neither objective nor subjective.
Truth is sometimes fuzzy, in the comparison of works of art, therefore we recommend to mediate cases too much vague. In the case of plagiarism, the concept of similarity is crucial and the formal concept of Fuzzy entropy can help to illustrate, with very clearly a logical theory, or to answer to the problematic inquiry about the evanescent reality of similarity, best called as analogy, within different or opposite objects (no matter if they are tokens, arguments, minds).
The Ontology of works of art is not simply controversial, it is also the very difficult specie of Holistic beings. Beauty of art is such a being. The world doesn’t give explanation or moral explanation about itself or its eventual beauty. This implies for the artist also a very complex challege to the fact that there is no universal meaning against despair and emptiness. Let the things be…they will reveal that all is historical or contingent (things, compasses, inferences about God’s standard, morality, any link between things and good, etc.)…the main frame of space-time (the background of such contingency) will appear contingent as like as energy and matter or the fields of four fundamental forces. So what? How can a artist and his/her work of art survive, spiritually, to this. How much is big and long lasting the entire universe of space-time, the total mass of matter, the entire wind of mortal spirits, all the moral and aesthetic acts, all of all? To what we will compare such big whole?…As Plato in the Dialogue titled “Parmenides” said: To nothing else than the same whole! This paradox OPENS the being to goodness and beauty…Please, consider the great number of paradoxes linked to “a whole universe to be compared to itself”. It will be young as it is young, big as it is big…and, thus, without any clear dimension, quantity, quality, etc. Plato concluded that the being cannot be sensible, but good, beautiful and intelligible as so called “First Idea of Good” (Plato), and Parmenides that the being is unique, indivisible and without real contingent mortal human beings around…Therefore we have to defend the beauty embodied in Human works of art (even if, as Plato, said, they are only a mere copy of the eternal beauty…).
Finally, we live in a Network Economy, and inside such system the beauty of works of arts is special kind of wealth, a relief from poverty, a good. About wealth and poverty, the issue is: are they referred to material sources and goods or to intangible ones? We agree only partially. Poverty regards entire person, so both consciousness, body, social condition, culture, food availability, safety, wellness, sanity. Our conjecture is that a new perspective (network analysis) for law and lawyers should be fighting for copyrights protection against groups of political and economical concentration (hubs), which prevent population from epidemical diffusion of wealth, information, works of art, education and sanitary assistance.
See our sections about that: