Protection of Intellectual Property Rights in Investor-State Arbitration: Underlying Challenges and Perspectives

This article provides an analysis of existing international mechanisms for protecting intellectual property rights and concludes whether investment arbitration can be an effective forum for resolving intellectual property disputes. It focuses on an examination of the scope of intellectual property rights protection by bilateral investment agreements, as well as the specifics of the investment dispute resolution procedure. In addition, the analysis includes an assessment of the territoriality principle of intellectual property rights and its application in Ukrainian law, as well as an examination of international investment treaties concluded with Ukraine to determine the scope of protection afforded to intellectual property.

The development of an intellectual property strategy for a biotechnology company

<p>The 2014 Masters of Advanced Technology Enterprise (MATE) programme is a multi-disciplinary course with the goal of creating teams that explore the challenges of creating successful technology enterprises. NacreTech is the result of one of the enterprises which has been developed within this course. It has found a market application for a nacre-like material as a biodegradable osteoconductive load bearing materials for orthopaedic implants and developed a target product profile to help guide further material development to out-compete existing materials on the market. In addition a proof of concept testing plan, intellectual property strategy and regulatory analysis has been conducted. This thesis is based on the author’s experience working within NacreTech while applying current knowledge and thinking surrounding protecting intellectual property for biotechnology. In particular, the author has investigated the intellectual property aspects, such as the requirements of the complete specification, filing dates and locations, and existing strategy models, required for commercialisation of the NacreTech biomaterial and examines the factors which influenced the development of the intellectual strategy.</p>

The development of an intellectual property strategy for a biotechnology company

<p>The 2014 Masters of Advanced Technology Enterprise (MATE) programme is a multi-disciplinary course with the goal of creating teams that explore the challenges of creating successful technology enterprises. NacreTech is the result of one of the enterprises which has been developed within this course. It has found a market application for a nacre-like material as a biodegradable osteoconductive load bearing materials for orthopaedic implants and developed a target product profile to help guide further material development to out-compete existing materials on the market. In addition a proof of concept testing plan, intellectual property strategy and regulatory analysis has been conducted. This thesis is based on the author’s experience working within NacreTech while applying current knowledge and thinking surrounding protecting intellectual property for biotechnology. In particular, the author has investigated the intellectual property aspects, such as the requirements of the complete specification, filing dates and locations, and existing strategy models, required for commercialisation of the NacreTech biomaterial and examines the factors which influenced the development of the intellectual strategy.</p>

Procedural issues of applying to the court for the protection of intellectual property rights

Keywords: protection of intellectual property, court, EPC of Ukraine, CPC of Ukraine, European Court of Human Rights This scientific article explores the proceduralissues of going to court in case there is a violation of intellectual property rights. Inthe process of scientific research, the issues of jurisdiction in court cases on violationof intellectual property rights have been analyzed, the legal features of jurisdiction inlawsuits for violation of intellectual property rights have been determined, requirementsfor the content of a legal claim. Based on analysis of the economic procedurallegislation, it is concluded that a person who applies to the court for infringement ofintellectual property rights may refer to the cases of the European Court of HumanRights in order to substantiate his legal position. It is indicated that in the course ofthe 2016 judicial reforms in Ukraine, the rules of judicial jurisdiction and the competenceof the court in court cases on violation of intellectual property rights werechanged. At the level of procedural law, a special court was created — the High Courtof Intellectual Property, which is empowered to judicially review cases of IP violation.The High Court of Intellectual Property has not started its work for now. The authorpoints out that this situation has a negative impact on Ukrainian judicial practiceand the practice of protecting intellectual property rights. Based on the results of the study, the author proposed his own theoretical groundsand developed proposals for improving procedural legislation regarding the possibilityof introducing alternative jurisdiction in some categories of cases of violation of intellectualproperty rights. Such legal cases include copyright infringement of an individualwho is the author or the author's representative. The legal rule on alternativejurisdiction in cases of infringement of intellectual property rights is effective if thereis a violation of IP rights in the Ukrainian temporarily occupied territories. The authorpoints out that such a legislative proposal will improve the quality of legal protectionof subjects of intellectual property rights in the temporarily occupied Ukrainianterritories.

Accounting of Intangible Assets and Their Reflection in Corporate Reporting in Conditions of Digital Transformation

Relevance. Recently, intangible assets have become of particular importance for companies and become an essential information component of its reporting in its analysis. Against the background of a total digital transformation, digital assets are more and more entrenched in all spheres of public life, and the mechanisms for creating, using and protecting intellectual property are becoming especially relevant. Results. The article reveals the features of accounting for intangible assets and their reflection in corporate reporting. The attitude towards intellectual property in the context of digital transformation is considered, as a result of which the value of the company’s assets increases significantly, including due to cases of a better assessment of intellectual property. Today, intellectual property rights have become a leading economic resource. In turn, the digital transformation of the intellectual property sphere has affected to some extent such a specific class of intangible assets as cryptocurrency. In addition, the article discusses the importance of creating value based on intangible assets, which will have serious consequences for the management of the company in the future, and thus more attention will be paid to the formation of indicators in corporate reporting that reflect their real state. Methods. The research is based on complex and systemic analysis, general scientific methods of cognition — analysis and synthesis, dialectical method, systematization and classification, process and system approaches, as well as the comparison method. Discussion. A problematic issue is the reflection of intangible assets in accounting. This is due to the need for timely and proper execution of primary documents in strict compliance with the requirements of regulatory enactments. Difficulties arise when accepting individual objects for accounting, due to the fact that objects do not always meet the conditions for recognition.

Protection of Intellectual Property Rights: Towards Harmonisation of Ukrainian and EU Law

The article analyses the civil law means of protecting the ownership rights to intellectual property from the standpoint of Ukrainian law and practice. The focus is on those means of protecting intellectual property rights envisaged by the Association Agreement between the EU and the eaec and their Member States, of the one part, and Ukraine, of the other part, and outlines the prospects for their practical implementation within the legal framework of Ukraine. Among the means of protecting intellectual property rights, prohibition of the misuse of intellectual property in a specific way is considered. The paper also analyses the ways of protecting intellectual property rights, which are aimed at restoring the situation that existed prior to their violation, in particular, the removal from the civil circulation of goods manufactured or put into civil circulation, thus causing a violation of intellectual property rights, and subsequent destruction of such goods.

Foreing and domestic experience in protecting intellectual property right to jewelry and jewelry

Key words: copyright, jewelry, bijouterie, unfair competition, trademark, litigation Fedorova N. Foreing and domestic experience in protecting intellectual property right to jewelry and jewelry. The article focuses on studying the issue of protecting the design of artistic jewelry and bijouterie. The concept of “functionality” for jewelry is analyzed, namely, it is determined that the «functionality» notion is the quality of servicing the useful purpose. For example, a chair manufacturer cannot claim the four legs of a chair as a copyright. These four legs are a useful and functional aspect of this chair. If a competitor also manufactures a chair with 4 legs, it does not infringe any manufacturer's right, since these legs are for functional purposes only. The concept of«functionality» in jewelry means that the last cannot be protected as a normal work, since it is purely utilitarian. For example, the hands or numbers on the dial of a watch are considered as functional because the exclusive use of these aspects seriously impedes healthy competition in the watch industry. On the other hand, unique jewelry design cannot be considered functional as it has the exclusive use of its particular elements’ combination.The analysis of European legislation and US judicial practice is carried out. Under applicable US copyright law, jewelry is a subject to copyright. Under normal circumstances, the law does not require prior registration of jewelry copyright. However, in order to protect jewelry or bijouterie under the US Law on Copyright, it must meet certain conditions. The complaining party must provide evidence of illegal copying of the work and prove copyright infringement. In case of violation of copyright for jewelry, the author or the jewelry house must prove:•the originality of design;•the uniqueness in the elements combination in the process of jewelry design development.The object of an industrial design can be a shape, pattern, color, or their combination that determines the appearance of an industrial product. The main criterion for the industrial design patentability is its novelty. However, in practice, an examination for novelty when registering a designation as an industrial design, according to Alexandra Odinets, is not carried out, and the patent is issued «under the responsibility of the applicant».With regard to unfair competition in the jewelry market, according to the US jurisprudence, it is more often an offense in this context than a violation of trademark rights or copyright infringement. It is unfair competition that misleads a consumer. A competitor, by assigning a good name and an reputation established, is trying to get profit. The definition of unfair competition is carried out in a comprehensive manner, here the court will not focus on one feature of a piece of jewelry but would consider all its inherent features. In particular, it is a combination of unique elements that provide the originality of the product.The article provides recommendations for jewelry and bijouterie authors on copyright protection. 1. Pro avtorski i sumizhni prava : Zakon Ukrainy. URL: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/3792-12#Text. 2. Tomarov I. Fashion Law: kopiiuvaty ne mozhna zaboronyty! Yurydychna hazeta Online. 2017. № 25(575). URL:https://yur-gazeta.com/publications/practice/zahist-intelektualnoyi-vlasnosti-avtorske-pravo/fashion-law-kopiyuvati-ne-mozhna-zaboroniti.html. 3. Herbert Rosenthal Jewelry Corp. v. Kalpakian, 446 F.2d 738 (9th Cir. 1971). 4. Dyrektyva Yevropeiskoho Soiuzu № 98/71. URL: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/994_a88#Text. 5. “Designer” Jewelry vs. “Inspired-by” Jewelry: Intellectual Property Infringement and Unfair Competition Considerations, 34. 6. Davis v. Gap, Inc. - 246 F.3d 152 (2d Cir. 2001). 7. Trifari, Krussman & Fishel, Inc. v Charel Co., 134 F Supp 551 (1955, DC NY). 8. Copyright Law of the United States §102, at 68 (2000). 9. Cprava Vacheron I Constantin-LeCoultreWatches, Inc. proty Benrus Watch Co., Inc. URL: http://saperlaw.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2007/09/cba-fashion-presentation-final.pdf (last visited April 19th, 2008). 10. Cosmetic Ideas, Inc. v. IAC/Interactivecorp, CV08-02074 R (C.D. California); Los Angeles Copyright Attorneys File Jewelry Copyright Infringement Lawsuit Over Copying Protected Jewelry Design, available at: http://www.iptrademarkattorney.com/2008/04/copyright-attorneys-jewelry-los-angeles-protected-jewelry-design-lawsuit-copying-copyrights-la.html (last visited April 19th, 2008). 11. Saper Law. “Designer” Jewelry vs. “Inspired-by” Jewelry: Intellectual Property Infringement and Unfair Competition Considerations. 2008.

Provenance Attestation of Human Cells Using Physical Unclonable Functions

We introduce a novel methodology, namely CRISPR-Engineered Attestation of Mammalian Cells using Physical Unclonable Functions (CREAM-PUFs), which can serve as the cornerstone for formally verifying transactions in human cell line distribution networks. A PUF is a physical entity which provides a measurable output that can be used as a unique and irreproducible identifier for the artifact wherein it is embedded. Popularized by the electronics industry, silicon PUFs leverage the inherent physical variations of semiconductor manufacturing to establish intrinsic security primitives for attesting integrated circuits. Owing to the stochastic nature of these variations and the multitude of steps involved, photo-lithographically manufactured silicon PUFs are impossible to reproduce (thus unclonable). Inspired by the success of silicon PUFs, we sought to exploit a combination of sequence-restricted barcodes and the inherent stochasticity of CRISPR-induced non-homologous end joining DNA error repair to create the first generation of genetic physical unclonable functions in three distinct human cells (HEK293, HCT116, and HeLa). We demonstrate that these CREAM-PUFs are robust (i.e., they repeatedly produce the same output), unique (i.e., they do not coincide with any other identically produced PUF), and unclonable (i.e., they are virtually impossible to replicate). Accordingly, CREAM-PUFs can serve as a foundational principle for establishing provenance attestation protocols for protecting intellectual property and confirming authenticity of engineered cell lines.