AGREEMENTS ON THE DISPOSAL OF PROPERTY RIGHTS TO THE OBJECTS OF PATENT LAW AND «KNOW-HOW»: NEWS OF LEGISLATION

Author(s):  
Juliia Kanaryk ◽  
◽  
Vladyslav Nosinskyi ◽  

The article is devoted to the review of novelties of the legislation in the part of disposition of property rights to objects of patent law and know-how. Based on the analysis of the existing legislation, it is established that there is an exclusive list of the following agreements: license to use the object of intellectual property rights; license agreement; agreement on the creation by order and use of the object of intellectual property rights; agreement on the transfer of exclusive intellectual property rights; another agreement on the disposal of intellectual property rights. It is noted that the agreement on the transfer (use) of «know-how» differs from that for the patent. The basis for granting the right to use «know-how» is not an exclusive right, but a de facto monopoly on the object of the agreement. «Know-how» in contrast to the patented invention can not be used without receiving it from the owner. The consequence of this is the need not only to grant the right of use under the contract, but also the transfer of the «know- how» in full. It is noted that the legislator has significantly simplified the contractual procedures for granting the right to dispose of property rights for pharmaceutical companies due to the need to combat the pandemic. Lists of substances and medical procedures, medical equipment that cannot be the subject of patent protection have been established. It is emphasized that the legislator does not take into account the current level of digitalization, where the right to own or use intellectual property is certified by numerous electronic methods. For example, by confirming electronic licenses, user terms, affiliate programs with a number of intermediaries. Accordingly, it is necessary to expand the list of possible reliable ways of certifying contracts, which could be considered written or be equated to such a way. The bill No5552, which proposes amendments to the law «On Copyright and Related Rights», in terms of combating «patent trolling» was analyzed. The authors of the bill propose a number of administrative procedures that will help to respond quickly to such unfair actions of competitors. At the same time, it is noted that with the expansion of the contractual procedure, some of these cases could be avoided. It is proposed, as part of the fight against the COVID-19 pandemic, to introduce compulsory licensing, in order to reduce the real cost of drugs against the virus, as well as the logistics of specialized hospitals.

Author(s):  
Juliia Kanaryk ◽  
◽  
Vladyslav Nosinskyi ◽  

The article is devoted to the review of novelties of the legislation in the part of disposition of property rights to objects of patent law and know-how. Based on the analysis of the existing legislation, it is established that there is an exclusive list of the following agreements: license to use the object of intellectual property rights; license agreement; agreement on the creation by order and use of the object of intellectual property rights; agreement on the transfer of exclusive intellectual property rights; another agreement on the disposal of intellectual property rights. It is noted that the agreement on the transfer (use) of «know-how» differs from that for the patent. The basis for granting the right to use «know-how» is not an exclusive right, but a de facto monopoly on the object of the agreement. «Know-how» in contrast to the patented invention can not be used without receiving it from the owner. The consequence of this is the need not only to grant the right of use under the contract, but also the transfer of the «knowhow» in full. It is noted that the legislator has significantly simplified the contractual procedures for granting the right to dispose of property rights for pharmaceutical companies due to the need to combat the pandemic. Lists of substances and medical procedures, medical equipment that cannot be the subject of patent protection have been established. It is emphasized that the legislator does not take into account the current level of digitalization, where the right to own or use intellectual property is certified by numerous electronic methods. For example, by confirming electronic licenses, user terms, affiliate programs with a number of intermediaries. Accordingly, it is necessary to expand the list of possible reliable ways of certifying contracts, which could be considered written or be equated to such a way. The bill №5552, which proposes amendments to the law «On Copyright and Related Rights», in terms of combating «patent trolling» was analyzed. The authors of the bill propose a number of administrative procedures that will help to respond quickly to such unfair actions of competitors. At the same time, it is noted that with the expansion of the contractual procedure, some of these cases could be avoided. It is proposed, as part of the fight against the COVID-19 pandemic, to introduce compulsory licensing, in order to reduce the real cost of drugs against the virus, as well as the logistics of specialized hospitals.


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
ega yuliani

AbstractIntellectual Property Rights are rights derived from the work, initiative and creativity in the form of a real man. Intellectual Property rights consist of privately owned property and Industry. Patents are part of Intellectual Property Rights in Industry. Patents are granted the right of the government and is exclusive. Exclusive rights of patent holders is the production of a patented item, usage and sales of goods and deeds relating to the import and sale of such goods store. Legal protection of intellectual property rights in the patent field ketetentuan regulated in Law Number 14 of 2001. In chapter 8, paragraph (1) time protection for 20 years from the date of receipt and can not be extended. And Article 9 set period of patent protection for simple for 10 (ten) years and can not be extended. Protection of intellectual property rights is no guarantee to the public to respect the right of initiative and the reaction and to provide protection will upload their work. The higher appreciation of the intellectual property rights of a nation then the future will be better.


2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
M Fadel Zulkarnain

AbstractIntellectual Property Rights are rights derived from the work, initiative and creativity in the form of a real man. Intellectual Property rights consist of privately owned property and Industry. Patents are part of Intellectual Property Rights in Industry. Patents are granted the right of the government and is exclusive. Exclusive rights of patent holders is the production of a patented item, usage and sales of goods and deeds relating to the import and sale of such goods store. Legal protection of intellectual property rights in the patent field ketetentuan regulated in Law Number 14 of 2001. In chapter 8, paragraph (1) time protection for 20 years from the date of receipt and can not be extended. And Article 9 set period of patent protection for simple for 10 (ten) years and can not be extended. Protection of intellectual property rights is no guarantee to the public to respect the right of initiative and the reaction and to provide protection will upload their work. The higher appreciation of the intellectual property rights of a nation then the future will be better. Keywords: Intellectual Property Rights, Patent Protection


2012 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 137-161 ◽  
Author(s):  
Khorsed ZAMAN

Despite the existence of almost eighty international agreements and legal instruments, there has not been a marked development in the transfer of climate change technologies to poor and the least developing countries. This article investigates the role of intellectual property rights (IPDs) and scrutinizes the effects of the WTO Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) on the transfer of these technologies. It explores the TRIPS patent protection provisions and examines the associated flexibilities like compulsory licensing and parallel import options in the context of the transfer of climate change technologies. It finally concludes that the TRIPS patent protection rules, including the existing flexibilities, are one of the biggest impediments to the transfer of these technologies to poor and least developed countries. New agreements or promises on the transfer of green technologies would be fruitless if these TRIPS rules are not amended.


2005 ◽  
Vol 35 (2) ◽  
pp. 237-256 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joel Lexchin

Patent protection for prescription drugs has a long and contentious history in Canada. Bills C-22 and C-91, passed as part of Canada's commitment to various trade deals, first weakened and then abolished compulsory licensing. In order to decide on a future course of action that Canada should take on intellectual property rights (IPRs), it is useful to review downstream effects that resulted from C-22 and C-91. This article examines changes to employment, Canada's balance of trade in pharmaceuticals, investment in research and development, and drug expenditures. The author then reviews the arguments advanced by the pharmaceutical industry in favor of stronger protection for IPRs, the recent complaints made against Canada at the World Trade Organization regarding pharmaceutical IPRs, and the continuing argument about the “evergreening” of patents. Also discussed are the second-draft text agreement of the Free Trade Area of the Americas, which will, if implemented, have significant repercussions for pharmaceutical IPRs in Canada, and some ways in which patents distort the marketplace for drugs. The article concludes with some alternative recommendations on the future of IPRs.


2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
ega yuliani

AbstractIntellectual Property Rights are rights derived from the work, initiative and creativity in the form of a real man. Intellectual Property rights consist of privately owned property and Industry. Patents are part of Intellectual Property Rights in Industry. Patents are granted the right of the government and is exclusive. Exclusive rights of patent holders is the production of a patented item, usage and sales of goods and deeds relating to the import and sale of such goods store. Legal protection of intellectual property rights in the patent field ketetentuan regulated in Law Number 14 of 2001. In chapter 8, paragraph (1) time protection for 20 years from the date of receipt and can not be extended. And Article 9 set period of patent protection for simple for 10 (ten) years and can not be extended. Protection of intellectual property rights is no guarantee to the public to respect the right of initiative and the reaction and to provide protection will upload their work. The higher appreciation of the intellectual property rights of a nation then the future will be better.


Author(s):  
Miranda Gurgenidze ◽  
◽  
Tamaz Urtmelidze ◽  

This issue is not new in international patent law. However, this institution was abolished in the Georgian legislation in 2010-2017 and its re-formulation has become active after it was put in the agenda in accordance with the provisions of Chapter IV (Intellectual Property Rights) of Chapter 4 (Intellectual Property Rights) between Georgia and the European Union and the European Union and their Member States. The necessity of fulfilling the undertaken liabilities and to bring the Georgian legislation in line with the above-mentioned agreement, as well as the aspects related to the intellectual property rights trade (TRIPS) and the EU legislation. The presented scientific article Aspects of Compulsory Licensing in Patent Law concerns with a topical issue such as mandatory licensing of a patented invention and / or utility model within the territory of Georgia without the permission of patent owner, which combines the principles of compulsory licensing, as well as the mentioned licensing procedures and procedure for issuing the compensation to the patent holder. The authors have studied the issues of compulsory licensing in Georgian patent law in this article, as well as the international agreements related to the issue of compulsory licensing themes. The introduction reviews the exclusive rights of the patent holder and the grounds for restricting those rights. The first chapter provides a legal analysis of the international agreements where we find the regulatory norms for involuntary / compulsory licensing of patents. The authors discuss the issues of compulsory licensing in the Georgian patent system in the second chapter. This problem is very relevant, interesting and innovative from the legal point of view, because with the issue of compulsory licensing, the rule of granting compensation to the patent owner is activated, which in itself is related to his property rights, and finally the main directions of the compulsory license that we find in the international patent and national system are reconciled and summarized.


2019 ◽  
Vol 61 (1) ◽  
pp. 153-182
Author(s):  
Philippe Cullet ◽  
Hu Yuanquiong

The coming into force of the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) in the mid-1990s led to a massive strengthening of intellectual property rights in the global South. This was particularly controversial concerning restrictions on access to medicines and set the stage for spirited debates concerning the impacts of medical patents on the realisation of the right to health in the context of the HIV/AIDS crisis. Efforts to reconcile the right to health and medical patents led to a minor amendment of the TRIPS Agreement that has hardly had any impact on the ground while further strengthening of patent protection was obtained, for instance, through bilateral agreements. In the human rights field, attempts to strengthen the protection afforded by the right to health have been partly diluted by efforts to strengthen the claims of inventors under human rights law. At this juncture, two main elements need to be taken forward. The first is to revisit our understanding of the human right to health to ensure, for instance, that there is no compromise in the liberal promise of universality, in particular access to medicines for every person who needs them. The second element is the need to rethink the way in which legal incentives are given to innovate. In a context where patents are the only recognised legal incentive to innovate in the medical field, this discourages the development of medicines for diseases that may affect mostly poor patients, since companies need to recoup their investments. Further, it militates against giving attention to other systems of medicine whose innovations can usually not be protected under the patent system, even where treatments are effective. Keywords: TRIPS Agreement, Access to Medicines, Right to Health, ICESCR


2008 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ana Celia Castro ◽  
Maria Beatriz Amorim Bohrer

TRIPS as it stands is against the interests of developing countries, and needsreform. In developing their own patent law, developing countries need to recognizethat there is now near consensus among informed observers that patentlaw and practice have, in some cases, overshot, and need to be reformed. Thatis the burden of the recent NAS/NRC report on “A Patent System for the 21stCentury.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document