scholarly journals Economic and legal prospects of activation of science parks activity on the way to neoeconomics

2021 ◽  
pp. 82-96
Author(s):  
Oleksandr Butnik-Siverskyi
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
The State ◽  
Research Institutions ◽  
Science Parks ◽  
License Agreement ◽  
Science Park ◽  
State Budget

Butnik-Siverskiy О. Economic and legal prospects of activation of science parks activity on the way to neoeconomics. The author researches and substantiates by generalizing the scientific points of view improving the legal regulation of the created science parks on the initiative of higher education institutionsand / or research institutions, taking into account the economic and legal prospect of intensifying their activities. National and foreign experience of science parks activity is considered. The content of using the founding agreement on creation of a science park and the agreement on partnership of business entities witha science park is provided. Problems that have not yet been resolved in the process of creating science parks and using innovative developments are noted. The classical content of entrepreneurship in innovation is provided and considered from the standpoint of clarifying the content of the innovation structure, which is based on the commercialization of intellectual property rights by their types, which is a part of the intellectual capital cycle with a corresponding effective result. There is substantiated the procedure of formation of the statutory capital of the science park, to which higher educational institutions and / or scientific institutions cannot use intellectual property rights to the objects, created at the expense of budgetary funds, but can only under the conclusion of a license agreement with business entity, having non-state and state form of ownership as transferred assets, which does not require the alienation of the object of intellectual property rights as part of intangible assets. It is proposed to use the target budget funds as the initial start-upcapital, which is provided on reverse terms to the state budget in case of closure (liquidation) of the science park by the decision of the founders or on the basis of a court decision. Alternatively, in the absence of target budget funds, it is proposed as a source of money to contribute to the statutory capital of the science park as a start-up capital to send part of the special fund of the state budget. It is justified the creation of a technology transfer office, which will be a structural unit of higher education institutions and / or research institutions, which will deal with the process of filing and reviewing a patent application and subsequent licensing. It isnoted that the science park can be the founder (co-founder) of small innovative enterprises and enter into partnership agreements with them for the implementation of certain innovative projects.Keywords: intellectual and innovation environment, science park, founding agreement, statutory capital, intellectual property rights, license agreement, legal status

scholarly journals ECONOMIC AND LEGAL PROSPECTS OF ACTIVATION OF SCIENCE PARKS ACTIVITY JN THE WAY TO NEOECONOICS

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Олександр Бутнік-Сіверський
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Higher Education Institutions ◽  
Research Institutions ◽  
Science Parks ◽  
Science Park ◽  
State Budget ◽  
Start Up

The author researches and substantiates by generalizing the scientific points of view improving the legal regulation of the created science parks on the initiative of higher education institutions and / or research institutions, taking into account the economic and legal prospect of intensifying their activities. National and foreign experience of scienceparks activity is considered. The content of using the founding agreement on creation of a science park and the agreement on partnership of business entities with a science park is provided. Problems that have not yet been resolved in the process of creating science parks and using innovative developments are noted. The classical content of entrepreneurship in innovation is provided and considered from thestandpoint of clarifying the content of the innovation structure, which is based on the commercialization of intellectual property rights by their types, which is a part of the intellectual capital cycle with a corresponding effective result. There is substantiated the procedure of formation of the statutory capital of the science park, to which higher educational institutions and / or scientific institutions cannot use intellectual property rights to the objects, created at the expense of budgetary funds, but can only under the conclusion of a license agreement with business entity,having non-state and state form of ownership as transferred assets, which does not require the alienation of the object of intellectual property rights as part of intangible assets. It is proposed to use the target budget funds as the initial start-up capital, which is provided on reverse terms to the state budget in case of closure (liquidation) of the science park by the decision of the founders or on the basis of a court decision. Alternatively, in the absence of target budget funds, it is proposed as a source of money to contribute to the statutory capital of the science park as a start-up capital to send part of the special fund of the state budget. It is justified the creation of a technology transfer office, which will be a structural unit of higher education institutions and / or research institutions, which will deal with the process of filing and reviewing a patent application and subsequent licensing. It is noted that the science park can be the founder (co-founder) of small innovative enterprises and enter into partnership agreements with them for the implementation of certain innovative projects.

scholarly journals Directions of legislative regulation of the intellectual property rights distribution in R&D contracts, financed from the state budget, in the newly independent states (NIS)

Legal Ukraine ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 28-33
Author(s):  
Dmytro Makhnovsky
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Research And Development ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
The State ◽  
State Budget ◽  
Legislative Regulation ◽  
Independent States ◽  
Newly Independent States ◽  
Model Agreement

The article analyzes the legislative regulation of the distribution of intellectual property rights in contracts for research and development, which are funded in whole or in part from the state budget, in the newly independent states: Ukraine, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Russia,Areas of legislative regulation in the newly independent states (Ukraine, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Russia) the distribution of intellectual property rights in R&D contracts, funded in whole or in part from the state budget. Settlement of distribution of intellectual property rights in R&D contracts, financed from the state budget, in the NIS countries is carried out through general regulation, covering all subjects of legal relations, and the adoption of special acts — to finance R & D from the budget. At the level of special legislation, there are differences between countries both in the system of legislation and in the presence of model agreements for the implementation of R & D. Also, principle of the Bai-Dole Act and EU regulations on the research Framework Programs, that ownership of IPR rights belongs to the contractor, is fully implemented only in Ukraine. It is important for the Ministry of Education and Science of Ukraine to develop a special model agreement for case, when research and development are being funded in whole or in part from the state budget. This Model agreement should contain options for the distribution of intellectual property rights and shall bring the provisions of model agreements on conducting research and development in accordance with the Art.11 of the Law of Ukraine «On state regulation of activities in the field of technology transfer» and Art. 64 of the Law of Ukraine «On scientific and scientific-technical activities». Key words: contracts for research and developments, intellectual property, rights to results of research developments.

scholarly journals Pentingnya Dalam Mengapresiasi Sebuah Karya Cipta Dengan Meminilimasir Plagiarisme di Bidang Akademik

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
jessica khek
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Scientific Work ◽  
The State ◽  
Legal Subject ◽  
National Education ◽  
Or Groups ◽  
The Republic

Plagiarism is a challenge that every legal subject must take in a particular act. And copyright is one of the intellectual property rights (intellectual property rights) that are automatically protected by the state. In Copyright can also apply an act of plagiarism. Plagiarism is regulated authentically according to the Regulation of the Minister of National Education of the Republic of Indonesia No. 17 of 2010 concerning the Prevention and Eradication of Plagiarism in Higher Education, plagiarism is an act of intentionally or unintentionally in obtaining or trying to obtain credit or value for a scientific work, by quoting part or all of the work and / or scientific work of other parties that are recognized as scientific work. without an appropriate and adequate source. Meanwhile, plagiarists are individuals or groups of plagiarists, each acting for himself, for groups or for and on behalf of a body.

Significant choice-of-law interests and its impact on the formation of choice-of-law regulation in the field of intellectual property

2021 ◽  
pp. 186
Author(s):  
Svetlana I. Krupko
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
The State ◽  
Close Connection ◽  
Choice Of Law ◽  
Applicable Law ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
Special Rules

This article analyzes the choice-of-law interests of specific and potential participants in the relations of intellectual property rights and the state in order to establish the closest connection of the above type of relation with the state, whose law should be applied. Taking into account the directionality of significant choice-of-law interests, advantages and disadvantages of territorial and universal approaches, a theoretically based solution is proposed for the formation of a general choice-of-law rule on the law to be applied to the relation of intellectual property rights. It was revealed in the study that the diversity of the relations of intellectual property rights (their obligatory and non-obligatory, property and personal non-property nature, other differences in legal features) does not automatically generate a multidirectionality of significant choice-of-law interests that should be taken into account when establishing a close connection of the above type of the relation with the state for determination of applicable law, does not prevent the formation of a general choice-of-law rule for the relations of intellectual property rights in general and does not unequivocally testify in favor of the specialization of its binding. However, the diversity of the relations of intellectual property rights should be examined and evaluated for the feasibility and limits of exceptions from the general choice-of-law rule and the development of special rules for resolving certain private of the relations of intellectual property rights.

The state of intellectual property rights (IPRs) in Latin America and its implications for innovation and growth

2020 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 23-42
Author(s):  
Goretti Cabaleiro ◽  
Felipe Salce
Keyword(s):  
Developing Countries ◽  
Latin America ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
The State ◽  
Ipr Protection

This article reviews the primary implications of having strong intellectual property rights (IPRs) for innovation in the context of the situation in Latin America. Specifically, the article reviews the relationships, as found in the literature, between strong IPR protection and important economic and innovation-related variables both for developed and developing countries. Beyond its focus on Latin America, the paper also provides evidence and explains the situation of the different IPR regimes; describes the existing regional and global legislation and initiatives; and looks into the debate regarding the effect of IPRs in developing countries.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document