scholarly journals The specialist’s report as a prerequisite for proving infringement of intellectual property rights in criminal cases

2020 ◽  
pp. 318-323
Author(s):  
Yevhenii Kompanets
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Right ◽  
Use Of Knowledge

The article is devoted to the study of use of the specialist’s knowledge and the results of his participation in criminal proceedings(providing a report) as a means of proving the crimes towards intellectual property rights. The purpose of involvement of the specialistand tasks handled by the specialist during pre-trial investigation and trial have been considered. The legal status of the specialist hasbeen analyzed, vagueness and incompleteness of the specialist’s rights have been emphasized, absence of the mechanism of involvement of the specialist and the procedure of formalizing the results of his/her participation in criminal proceedings has been stated. Ithas been proved why in the majority of cases the specialist of the right holder/official manufacturer serves as the subject of applyingspecial knowledge in the crimes related to infringement of intellectual property rights.The practice of use of the specialist’s knowledge (providing a report) in the course of pre-trial investigation, trial and evaluationof the specialist’s report by the courts, including ECtHR has been provided. Decision of ECtHR stresses the importance of recognitionand evaluation of the specialist’s report as evidence, it is of universal significance for all parties to the criminal proceedings and it willstrengthen their positions. The possibility of use of knowledge of the specialist (right holder/official manufacturer) not only in thecourse of investigative actions has been substantiated.Amendments to the CPC of Ukraine are proposed, which are aimed at simplifying proving and increasing the efficiency of pretrialinvestigation body in crimes of this category, namely to elaborate and expand the rights/the list of actions of the specialist (examinationof items/documents), to determine the mechanism of involving the specialist, to include the specialist’s report in the list of documents,which serve as written evidence.

Specific Notarial Protection of the Testator's Exclusive Rights: Kazakh and International Experience

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 770
Author(s):  
Karlygash Asilkhanovna JUMABAYEVA ◽  
Lola Furkatovna TATARINOVA ◽  
Gulnaz Tursunovna ALAYEVA ◽  
Saule Zhusupbekovna SULEIMENOVA ◽  
Danila Vladimirovich TATARINOV
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
International Experience ◽  
Copyright Holder ◽  
Main Function ◽  
Legal Practice ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Right

This study is concerned with one of the most burning issues of intellectual property rights, namely the notarial protection of the testator's exclusive rights. The article analyzes the Kazakh and international experience in solving this issue. In the course of the study, the authors obtained the following results: - In legal practice, the non-acceptance of inheritance and refusal to inherit exclusive rights have their specific features; - It is proposed to supplement the existing civil legislation on the protection of the testator's copyrights. ‘Kazakhstan Authors' Society’ conducts its activities in the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan. Its main function is to manage the property rights of authors. This management includes the issuance of permits to use deliverables on behalf of authors, as well as the collection, distribution and payment of royalties. It has been established that a notary has the right to apply to ‘Kazakhstan Authors' Society’ to determine one's authorship. The authors have revealed that the current Kazakh legislation does not state the creation time of some deliverable and does not provide for the notarial certification of a web page (in case of copyright infringement). Thus, a notary takes measures to protect the intellectual property rights owned by the copyright holder that might become the subject of succession.

Exercise of economic intellectual property rights to wellknown trademarks.

2021 ◽  
pp. 62-72
Author(s):  
Olena Tverezenko
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
License Agreement ◽  
Legal Entity ◽  
State Register ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right

The exercise of intellectual property rights is the realization bythe subject of intellectual property rights of moral and / or economic intellectual propertyrights, the content of which in relation to certain objects of intellectual propertyrights is determined by the Civil Code of Ukraine and other laws. The exercise of intellectualproperty rights is also the realization of economic intellectual propertyrights by other persons on the basis of the permission of the person who has the rightto allow the use of such object of intellectual property rights.The Law «On Amendments to Certain Legislative Acts of Ukraine ConcerningStrengthening the Protection and Protection of Rights to Trademarks and IndustrialDesigns and Counteraction to Patent Trolling» (which entered into force on August16, 2020) has аmended the Law of Ukraine «On Protection of Rights to Marks forGoods and Services» (hereinafter — the Law). The amendments have removed theprovision that a well-known trademark receives the same legal protection as thetrademark for which the certificate is issued. Such changes have created a gap in thelegislation in part of defining what does the exercising of intellectual property rightsto well-known trademarks include.In this connection the following questions arise: (1) can the right to use a wellknownmark (as well as the mark for which the certificate is issued) be the subject ofa license agreement, a commercial concession agreement; (2) whether it is possible tocontribute economic intellectual property rights to a well-known trademark to the authorizedcapital of a legal entity; (3) whether it is possible to transfer such rights onthe basis of an agreement on the transfer of economic intellectual property rights or to provide as collateral. We believe that these issues should be addressed through theadoption of appropriate amendments to Art. 25 of the Law.In our opinion, the right to use a well-known trademark may be the subject of licenseagreements and commercial concession agreements. According to the currentlegislation of Ukraine, it is impossible to transfer economic intellectual propertyrights to a well-known mark to another person.It is expedient to make changes to Art. 25 of the Law, which would provide necessityof creation and functioning of the State register of Ukraine of well-knowntrade marks.The introduction of the proposed amendments to the legislation of Ukraine in thefield of economic intellectual property will help to improve the relevant legal relationsrelated to the exercise of property rights to well-known trademarks.Key words: trademark, well-known trademark, economic intellectual propertyrights, exercise of economic intellectual property rights, assignment (transfer) of economicrights of intellectual property

scholarly journals HUKUM WAKAF BENDA BERGERAK (UANG) MENURUT FATWA ULAMA DAN UNDANG-UNDANG NOMOR 41 TAHUN 2014 TENTANG WAKAF

Asy-Syari ah ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-14
Author(s):  
Boedi Abdullah
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Precious Metals ◽  
The Right

Penelitian ini menghasilkan dua temuan. Pertama, para ulama madzhab berbeda pendapat tentang hukum wakaf benda bergerak. Para Ulama Hanafiyah, tidak membolehkan wakaf benda bergerak dalam segala bentuknya. Sebaliknya, para Ulama Malikiyah membolehkan wakaf benda bergerak dalam segala bentuknya. Para Ulama Syafi’iyah dan Hanabilah berada di antara kedua pendapat itu, mem­bolehkan wakaf benda bergerak kecuali yang berbentuk uang. Kedua, pasal 16 ayat 2-3 Undang-Undang RI. Nomor 41 Tahun 2004 tentang Wakaf yang menyang­kut wakaf benda berberak yang meliputi uang, logam mulia, surat berharga, ken­daraan, hak atas kekayaan intelektual, hak sewa, dan benda bergerak lain sesuai dengan ketentuan Syariah dan peraturan perundang-undangan yang berlaku sangat dipengaruhi oleh pendapat para ulama Malikiyah.Kata Kunci : wakaf, benda bergerak, Malikiyah, Hanafiyah, Syafi’iyah, Hanabilah AbstractThis research has found two results. First, Moslem scholars have different opinions about the legal status of endowments on movable assets. The Hanafiyah scholars do not allow endowments of movable assets in all forms. Instead, the scholars of Malikiyah allow the endowments of movable assets in all forms. The Shafi'ites scholars and Hanabilah falls somewhere between the two opinions, they allow the endowments of movable assets except in form of money. Secondly, Article 16, paragraph 2-3 of the Act Number 41 of 2004 on Endowments especially concerning endowments of movable assets which includes money, precious metals, securities, vehicles, intellectual property rights, the right to lease and other movable assets is strongly influenced by the Malikiyah scholars’ opinion.Keywords : endowments, movable assets, Hanafiyah, Malikiah, Syafi’iyah, Hanabilah

A reply to: Chorzów Factory – intellectual property and the continuity of international law in investor-state dispute settlement

2022 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 505-510
Author(s):  
Alexander Ferguson
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
International Justice ◽  
Upper Silesia ◽  
The Subject

The case involving the nitrate factory at Chorzów, Upper Silesia has been the subject of much academic commentary. Last year the intellectual property aspects of the case were explored in this journal. In this reply, I express doubts about whether the case involved the expropriation of intellectual property rights (IPRs) for two reasons. First, there are grounds to question the existence of IPRs. Second, even if there were IPRs, the Permanent Court of International Justice does not appear to have found that IPRs were taken. Instead, the case serves as a reminder of the importance of identifying the legal status of an IPR in the relevant territory when seeking to protect it under international law. * My thanks to Martyna Mielniczuk-Skibicka and Kacper Górniak. All errors are my own.

scholarly journals Protection of Intellectual Property Rights by Customs Aythorities

2020 ◽  
pp. 43-46
Author(s):  
L.V. Zolota ◽  
O.V. Ulizko
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Industrial Design ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Counterfeit Goods ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Counterfeit Products ◽  
Simplified Procedure ◽  
The Right

The article deals with the issue of protection of intellectual property rights by customs authorities. The current problems of infringement of intellectual property rights during moving across the customs border of Ukraine are considered, in particular: transportation of counterfeit products, which includes goods that are subject to infringement of intellectual property rights to the trademark and goods that are the subject of infringement of intellectual property rights to a geographical indication in Ukraine and pirated products, which includes goods that are the subject of infringement of copyright and / or related rights or intellectual property rights to a registered industrial design in Ukraine and which are or contain copies made without the consent of the copyright and related rights or intellectual property rights to the industrial design or a person authorized by such right holder in the country of production, as well as moving across the customs border of small consignments of goods with violation of customs legislation and introduction of simplified procedure for destruction of such goods. The article also analyzes issues of novelty of the Ukrainian legislation – “original goods”, that is, those that were made with the consent of the right holder, as a basis for the existence of the international principle of exhaustion of intellectual property rights. It has been established that national legislation does not sufficiently protect intellectual property rights and that Ukraine remains one of the four points of transit and transit of counterfeit goods to the European Union. The mechanism of regulation of compensation of costs in connection with storage of goods suspected of violation of intellectual property rights after all, the owner of the rights has the opportunity to demand compensation for these costs from the owner of goods that violate his intellectual property rights, as well as the destruction of such goods by the owner of intellectual property rights. Key words: intellectual property rights, customs border, promotion of protection of intellectual property rights, procedure for destruction of goods, counterfeit goods.

scholarly journals KEEPING THE NATION'S ASSETS THROUGH THE LEGAL PROTECTION OF COPYRIGHT WORKS OF CULTURE

2016 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 55-71
Author(s):  
Zulkifli Makkawaru
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Literature And Science ◽  
Community Rights ◽  
Art And Culture ◽  
The Right

Indonesia positioned copyright art and culture based on its strength as a nation or community rights over an Alliance grouping of the society which can give the effect of distortions in its protection. Which institution can be megurus and oversee the interests between countriesCultivate ideas/ideas in the fields of art, literature and science in the context of intellectual property rights (HKI) categorized into areas of HKI named Copyright (Copyright). The scope of the rights provided for the protection of copyright in the context of this very broad following elements known in several countries. There is a different understanding about the copyright status of culture from both the substance of the right nor of the appreciation of the case which threatens foreign claims copyright over the culture of Indonesia

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.

scholarly journals Peran Lembaga Manajemen Kolektif Sebagai Bentuk Perlindungan Hukum Pencipta Lagu Dan Pemilik Hak Terkait

2019 ◽  
Vol 22 (01) ◽  
pp. 37-54
Author(s):  
Elly Hernawati
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Copyright Protection ◽  
Copyright Holder ◽  
Business Climate ◽  
Management Agency ◽  
Collective Management ◽  
The Creation ◽  
The Right

Copyright is one of the Intellectual Property Rights components and should be paid attention to. Even more in technology era that developing, copyright protection needed to be enhanced, so that the right of creator, Copyright holder or owner of relevant rights can be protected and urge people to create. Indirectly, good and healthy business climate could be fostered.  Not all people have skill to create, that is why those people who have skill to create must be protected and even awarded, hoping that people urged to create. One of the creations that protected are song and music. In creating song or music, creator involve recording producer, music director or arranger. Regarding the creation, creator holds moral and economy rights, while parties involved hold the relevant rights to it. Collective Management Agency is an agency that help creator or relevant rights owner in managing and distributing the creation which is song or music that being commercialized. Yet the creator must be the member of the agency beforehand. Commercialization of a song or music by user can rise problem. Protection to the song or music is for the whole thing, including lyric, notation, arrangement and song title. The utilization of a song or music should be still protecting the parties that hold the copyright and the relevant right to it.

scholarly journals The right to protection against unfair use of the means of individualization: content and features

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (11) ◽  
pp. 313-318
Author(s):  
Pekar A.
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
System Analysis ◽  
Scientific Literature ◽  
Unfair Competition ◽  
Economic Competition ◽  
Economic Entity ◽  
Objective Meaning ◽  
The Right

The article deals with the nature and features of the right to protection against unfair use of the means of individualization. It is argued that it is inappropriate to distinguish the right to protection against unfair use of the means of individualization in the structure of intellectual property rights from the right to protection of economic competition. Based on a system analysis of the legislation, scientific literature review, and the practice of its application, the right to protection is classified in an objective and subjective meaning. In its objective meaning, the right to protection against unfair use of the means of individualization is a component of the right to intellectual property, to protection against unfair competition. The subjective right to protection against the unfair use of the means of individualization is an independent right. The following features of the right to protection against unfair use of the means of individualization are identified on the basis of the analysis. The objective right to protection against unfair use of the means of individualization is characterized by a set of civil law rules governing relations in the field of intellectual property rights and economic competition and determining the grounds, forms, procedure and methods of protection of such rights. This right combines two components: the protection of intellectual property rights and economic competition relations. The subjects of this right are economic entities. At the same time, the exercise of the right to protection in connection with the violation of the law on protection against unfair competition ensures the protection of consumers’ rights, as it guarantees them good quality goods on the market. The object of this right is relations in the field of intellectual property rights and economic competition. The subjective right to protection against unfair use of the means of individuation is the use of a provided by law capacity to renew, recognize or award the right to use the means of individualization by an economic entity. Such subjective right is characterized by the following features: it always implies the implementation of active actions, the possibility of choosing the forms and methods of protection. Keywords: means of individualization, unfair use, right to protection, objective right, subjective right, intellectual property rights, unfair competition.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document