24 – See, in particular, European Max-Planck Group on Conflict of Laws in Intellectual Property (CLIP), Intellectual Property and the Reform of Private International Law: Sparks from a Difficult Relationship, IPRax, 2007, No 4, p. 284; points 78 to 85, and the case-law cited in point 78 of the Opinion delivered by Advocate General Trstenjak in Painer; see also Muir Watt, H., ‘Article 6’, in Magnus, U. and Mankowski, P., Brussels I Regulation, 2nd ed., Sellier, European Law Publishers, 2012, p. 313, No 25a; Noorgård, M., ‘A Spider without a Web?
24 – Ks. erityisesti European Max-Planck Group on Conflict of Laws in Intellectual Property (CLIP), Intellectual Property and the Reform of Private International Law: Sparks from a Difficult Relationship, IPRax, 2007, nro 4, s. 284; julkisasiamies Trstenjakin em. asiassa Painer 12.4.2011 antaman ratkaisuehdotuksen 78–85 kohta sekä kyseisen ratkaisuehdotuksen 78 kohdassa mainittu oikeuskäytäntö; ks. lisäksi Muir Watt H., ”Article 6”, teoksessa Magnus, U. ja Mankowski, P, Brussels I Regulation, 2. painos, Sellier, European Law Publishers, 2012, s. 313, nro 25a; Noorgård M., ”A, Spider without a Web?EurLex-2 EurLex-2