scholarly journals Prosecution of Property Rights of Intellectual Property to the Results of Works under the Contract for Research, Development and Engineering

2021 ◽  
pp. 104-110
Author(s):  
Roman Denysenko
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Subject Matter ◽  
Industrial Design ◽  
Creative Work ◽  
Research Development ◽  
Utility Model ◽  
Research Institution ◽  
The Relationship

Keywords: results of work, subjects of property rights of intellectual property, jointproperty rights of intellectual property The article deals with an issue of allocation of rights to the results ofworks that are intellectual property subject-matter, created during research or developmentand engineering works. It is considered what can be the result of works andin what form.It analyses problematic issues of the multiplicity of subjects of intellectual propertyrights to the results of work under the contract and the relationship between themon the prosecution of the joint intellectual property rights to the results of work. It isdetermined that the subjects of contractual relations of research or development andengineering works in addition to the executor and the customer should also includethe creator (author, inventor) — a specialist working in a research institution or in acompany, whose creative work resulted in the intellectual property subject-matter.Attention is drawn to the joint rights to service subject-matters created as a consequenceof labour-related duties execution.The norms of special legislation on the relationship on the use of an invention(utility model) and an industrial design, the disposal of property rights of each of theholders (owners) of a patent (certificate) are studied.Laid out in the article gives the ground for making conclusion about the need to supplementthe regulation of relations on the prosecution of the joint intellectual propertyrights to the results of work by including general provisions on the procedure for the useof intellectual property subject-matter and disposal of property rights on conditions establishedby the contract for research or development and engineering in Article 896 ofthe Civil Code of Ukraine. The author proposes to supplement Article 896 of the CivilCode of Ukraine with Chapter 3 as follows: «3. If the results of works have features ofintellectual property subject-matter, then special details of prosecution of propertyrights of intellectual property can be provided in the contract».

scholarly journals Subjects of the constitutional right to own, use and dispose

2021 ◽  
pp. 165-169
Author(s):  
А.О. Uvarov
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Industrial Design ◽  
Material Object ◽  
Utility Model ◽  
Related Property ◽  
Intellectual Activity ◽  
Plant Variety ◽  
Constitutional Right

The article is devoted to the study of the subjects of the constitutional right to own, use and dispose of the results of their intellectual activity. It is established that the range of subjects of the constitutional right to own, use and dispose of the results of their intellectual activity are: subjects of copyright (authors of works, their heirs and persons who have acquired the rights to works in accordance with the contract or law); performers of works, their heirs and persons who have acquired related rights in accordance with the contract or the law on performances; producers of phonograms, their heirs (successors) and persons to whom related property rights in relation to phonograms have been legally transferred; videogram producers, their heirs (successors) and persons to whom related property rights in relation to videograms have been legally transferred; broadcasting organizations and their successors (subjects of related rights); author of a scientific discovery; subjects of intellectual property rights to an invention, utility model, industrial design (inventor, author of an industrial design; other persons who have acquired rights to an invention, utility model and industrial design under contract or law); subjects of intellectual property rights to the layout of the semiconductor product (author of the layout of the semiconductor product; other persons who have acquired the rights to the layout of the semiconductor product under the contract or law); subjects of intellectual property rights to the innovation proposal (the author of the innovation proposal and the legal entity to which the proposal is submitted); subjects of intellectual property rights to a plant variety, animal breed (author of a plant variety, animal breed; other persons who have acquired intellectual property rights to a plant variety, animal breed under contract or law; natural and legal persons who are subjects intellectual property rights to a trademark, individuals and legal en-tities that are subjects of intellectual property rights to a commercial name. Emphasis is placed on the independence of copyright and ownership of the material object (material carrier), which is manifested through: 1) the content of personal non-property rights and property rights of the subject of copyright; 2) ownership of a material object (possession, use and disposal).

scholarly journals IPR Law Protection and Enforcement and the Effect on Horizontal Productivity Spillovers from Inward FDI to Domestic Firms: A Meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Danai Christopoulou ◽  
Nikolaos Papageorgiadis ◽  
Chengang Wang ◽  
Georgios Magkonis
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Host Countries ◽  
Productivity Spillovers ◽  
Domestic Firms ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Positive Effect

AbstractWe study the role of the strength of Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) law protection and enforcement in influencing horizontal productivity spillovers from inward FDI to domestic firms in host countries. While most WTO countries adopted strong IPR legislation due to exogenous pressure resulting from the signing of the Trade-Related Aspects of IPR (TRIPS) agreement, public IPR enforcement strength continues to vary significantly between countries. We meta-analyse 49 studies and find that public IPR enforcement strength has a direct positive effect on horizontal productivity spillovers from inward FDI to domestic firms and a negative moderating effect on the relationship between IPR law protection strength and horizontal productivity spillovers from inward FDI to domestic firms.

scholarly journals The Practice of Review of Cases on Challenging Statutory Acts of the Russian Federal Service for Intellectual Property by the Intellectual Property Rights Court: Keeping Going over the Same Ground

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. 16-21
Author(s):  
Ekaterina Yu. Andreeva ◽  
◽  
Moisey I. Lifson ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Utility Model ◽  
Reasonable Time ◽  
The Russian Federation

The article is devoted to the institution of challenging the normative legal acts of Rospatent in the Court on Intellectual Rights on the example of several cases examined by the Court. The authors highlight a number of problems in this area. Since the consideration of a public objection to a patent for a controversial utility model or invention and the decision on the results of the consideration of such an objection is within the competence of Rospatent, and the PIS performs only a supervisory function, it is difficult to solve this problem within a reasonable time. The authors propose: all disputes related to intellectual property after issuing a security document should be resolved not in an administrative - judicial manner, but only in a judicial one, by analogy with the violation of the patent of the Russian Federation for intellectual property objects.

scholarly journals THE RIGHT OF AUTHORSHIP ON A WORK

2014 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 155-160
Author(s):  
Ciprian Raul Romiţan
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Moral Rights ◽  
Economic Rights ◽  
Natural Connection ◽  
Artistic Work ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Relationship

The moral rights represent the legal expression of the relationship between the workand its creator; they precede, survive and exert a permanent influence on the economic rights.Moral rights are independent of economic rights, the author of a work preserving these rightseven after the transfer of its property rights.The right to claim recognition as the author of the work, called in the doctrine as the"right of paternity of the work" is enshrined in art. 10 lit. b) of the law and it is based on theneed to respect the natural connection between the author and his work. The right toauthorship is the most important prerogative that constitutes intellectual property rights ingeneral and consists of recognizing the true author of a scientific, literary or artistic work.

32. Remedies in intellectual property litigation

2019 ◽  
pp. 640-674
Author(s):  
Paul Torremans
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Essential Elements ◽  
Traditional Remedies ◽  
Civil Remedies ◽  
Intellectual Property Infringement ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Full Trial

This chapter discusses the enforcement procedures used in relation to intellectual property rights, the civil remedies that apply, and some issues which arise in relation to the gathering of evidence in intellectual property cases. It identifies three essential elements in the relationship between intellectual property rights and remedies. First, there are the traditional remedies headed by damages that are normally granted at the trial. Second, intellectual property infringement often requires immediate action or a pre-emptive strike. Finally, gathering evidence that is vital for the full trial in an infringement case.

Ch.3 International Exhaustion of Rights

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Correa Carlos Maria
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Subject Matter ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Foreign Market ◽  
Trips Agreement ◽  
Parallel Imports ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Domestic Law

This chapter focuses on the issue of exhaustion of rights. Article 6 disclaims any intent in the Trade-related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) Agreement to limit the Members’ freedom to regulate the issue of exhaustion of rights with regard to all types of intellectual property rights (IPRs). It declares the admissibility of the international exhaustion of rights, that is, the possibility of legally importing into a country a product protected by intellectual property rights, after the product has been legitimately put on the market in a foreign market. These imports—made by a party without the authorization of the title-holder but equally legal—are generally known as ‘parallel imports’. Moreover, Article 6 of the TRIPS Agreement has left Member countries freedom to incorporate the principle of exhaustion of rights into their domestic law with a national, regional, or international reach. The issue as such cannot be the subject matter of a dispute settlement under the Agreement.

Competition and Intellectual Property

2017 ◽  
Vol 62 (4) ◽  
pp. 726-736
Author(s):  
Paulo Burnier da Silveira ◽  
João Felipe Aranha Lacerda
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Competition Policy ◽  
Field Of Study ◽  
The Relationship

The relationship between competition policy and intellectual property has been largely analyzed by the specialized literature. Nonetheless, the competitive impact of the enforcement of intellectual property rights in aftermarkets is still a challenging field of study. This article discusses the interface between intellectual property and competition in light of a case concerning the Brazilian automobile aftermarket.

Part I The Nature of Intangible Property, 7 Intellectual Property

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Smith Marcus ◽  
Leslie Nico
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Industrial Design ◽  
Property Right ◽  
Moral Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Right ◽  
Confidential Information ◽  
The Right

This chapter examines intellectual property. The governing principles relating to intellectual property are very different from the principles that underlie other choses, like rights under contracts or debts. Like shares, intellectual property rights are characterized by specific statutory rules relating to their creation, as well as to their transfer. Intellectual property rights can be divided under six heads: patents; copyright; moral rights; industrial design rights; trademarks; and confidential information. In each case, the holder of the right is able—by virtue of ownership—to prevent others from doing what they otherwise could do. Each of these intellectual property rights has four different aspects: the intellectual property right itself; rights of action for infringement; validity challenges; and licensing.

12. Licensing Agreements and other Agreements Involving Intellectual Property Rights

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alison Jones ◽  
Brenda Sufrin
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Trade Mark ◽  
Transfer Block ◽  
Eu Competition Law ◽  
Eu Competition Policy ◽  
Licensing Agreements ◽  
Movement Rules ◽  
The Relationship

All books in this flagship series contain carefully selected substantial extracts from key cases, legislation, and academic debate, providing able students with a stand-alone resource. This chapter examines some of the different types of intellectual property rights (IPRs) before outlining the relationship between intellectual property and both EU competition law and the EU free movement rules. It focuses, however, on IP licensing agreements and their treatment under Article 101. The chapter is organized as follows. Section 3 traces the development of EU competition policy to IP licensing agreements. Sections 4 and 5 examine the current Technology Transfer Block Exemption, Regulation 772/2004 (TTBER) and the Guidelines in detail (noting where significant changes might occur in 2014). Sections 6, 7, and 8 deal with trade mark licences, trade mark delimitation agreements, and copyright (other than software) licences not covered by the TTBER and Guidelines. Section 9 outlines issues arising in cases involving IPRs under Article 102, while Section 10 concludes.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document