Suchergebnisse

Compensation is a form of compensation for property damage for violation of copy­right and related rights. In the previous 25 years the Law of Ukraine «On Copyright and Related Rights» provided that compensation is determined by a court in the amount of 10 to 50 thousand minimum salaries established by law. At the same time, it was not necessary to prove a specific amount of damages. Therefore, compensation was the most widespread way of protecting copyright and related rightsOn July 22, 2018, the new procedure for payment of compensation came into force. In today's conditions, compensation is characterized by the following features:1) Compensation is a lump sum payment. It cannot be determined as a percentage of future sales of copies or other use of copyright and / or related rights objects with­out specifying its size. Compensation should be paid as a single, one-time payment in a fixed amount;2) The amount of compensation depends on the guilty form of the offender. In the case of the intent of violating, the compensation calculates in a triple rate, with negligence — in the double amount of remuneration that would have been paid if a right holder was granted permission to use the object that was unlawfully used by the offender;3) The basis for calculating the compensation is the amount of remuneration that would have been paid if the offender applied for authorization to use the disputed object.This approach is based on the rule of paragraph b) of part 1 of Art. 240 of Associa­tion Agreement which reproduces the provisions of paragraph b) of part 1 of Art. 13 of Directive 2004/48/EC.In the EU, compensation is provided by the legislation of Croatia, Germany, Greece, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, however, each state regulates the rule for compensation differently. The approach introduced in the Ukrainian legislation is exactly the same as in Poland. The practice of its application has not yet begun to form but there is no doubt that in the new legislative environment protection of copy­right and related rights will be more complicated. The right holder must prove the amount of remuneration that would have been obtained by him for granting permis­sion to use the relevant object which was not previously required for the payment of compensation. However, despite the predicted difficulties, the new compensation model can become a sufficiently effective way of protecting copyright and related rights. This model is in line with the European approach and it provides for one of the highest payments compared to the legislation of the EU Member States. ; Статья посвящена определению правовой природы компенсации как формы возмещения имущественного вреда за нарушение авторского права и смежных прав; анализу положения п. г) ч. 2 ст. 52 Закона Украины «Об авторском праве и смежных правах» в соотношении с аналогичными нормами европейского права и законодательства государств-членов ЕС; определению того, насколько новая модель компенсации соответствует европейскому уровню защиты авторско­го права и смежных прав; разработке предложений по усовершенствованию пра­вового регулирования выплаты компенсации. ; Стаття присвячена визначенню правової природи компенсації як форми відшкоду­вання майнової шкоди за порушення авторського права і суміжних прав; аналізу положення п. г) ч. 2 ст. 52 Закону України «Про авторське право і суміжні права» у співвідношенні з аналогічними нормами європейського права та законодавства держав-членів ЄС; з'ясуванню, наскільки нова модель компенсації відповідає європей­ському рівню захисту авторського права і суміжних прав; виробленню пропозицій щодо вдосконалення правового регулювання виплати компенсації.

В статье освещаются основные аспекты действия Соглашения об ассоциации как источника авторского права и проблемы его применения. Рассмотрены вопросы прямого действия норм права ЕС и критерии, по которым нормы прямого действия отличаются от других норм. Исследованы основания для использования в украинской правоприменительной практике официальных переводов текстов международных договоров, обращено внимание на проблемы содержательных различий между аутентичным текстом Соглашения на английском языке и его официальным переводом. ; У статті висвітлюються основні аспекти дії Угоди про асоціацію як джерела авто­рського права та проблеми її застосування. Розглянуто питання прямої дії норм права ЄС та критерії, за якими норми прямої дії Угоди відрізняються від інших норм. Досліджено підстави для використання в українській правозастосовній практиці офіційних перекла­дів текстів міжнародних договорів, звернуто увагу на проблеми змістовних розбіжностей між автентичним текстом Угоди англійською мовою та його офіційним перекладом. ; The article covers the main aspects of the Association Agreement as a source of copyright and problems of its application.On the example of the practice of the Court of the European Union, the criteria on the basis of which the law of the EU can be applied directly and without the implementation in the domestic law were established.Based on the analysis of the rules of the current legislation of Ukraine, it was concluded that the Association Agreement is the part of the national legislation and is applied in the same manner as foreseen for the rules of the national legislation. In the context of copyright, the Agreement has primacy over domestic law provisions that contain rules other than those in the Agreement.Since Ukrainian courts do not refer to the authentic text of the international treaty in a foreign language but to its official translation, the article analyses the legislation in this regard. It is established that in the law of Ukraine there is no provision which obliges to use only the official translation of the international treaty and prohibits the use of the authentic text of the treaty in another language in which it was concluded. However, if the party of the case indicates that the translation of the text of the international treaty is inaccurate and will refer to the authentic text in a foreign language, the court will not take this into account. The article gives an example of such a case, where the claimant tried to draw the court's attention to the English text of the Association Agreement but the court used the text of the official translation.There are some problems in the official translation of the text of the Association Agreement illustrated by two examples. In Part 2 of Art. 180 translators added the term «mathematical expression» which significantly influences the criteria for providing legal protection to computer programs while in the original text of the Agreement there is no such a term. In Art. 174 translators confused «right of making the work available to the public for the first time» and «right of communication to the public» and incorrectly translated the term «exhaustion of rights». As a result of these errors, a new content was formed which completely differs from the wording of this article in the authentic English text.Due to the fact that some errors found in the official translation of the text of the Agreement have a direct effect on the legal relationships in the field of copyright, this means that the same legal relationship in the EU and Ukraine is regulated differently by the same rule of the Agreement. It is concluded that the official translation of the Association Agreement needs to be amended as the accuracy of the translation is very important for the application of the Agreement.

Compensation is a form of compensation for property damage for violation of copy­right and related rights. In the previous 25 years the Law of Ukraine «On Copyright and Related Rights» provided that compensation is determined by a court in the amount of 10 to 50 thousand minimum salaries established by law. At the same time, it was not necessary to prove a specific amount of damages. Therefore, compensation was the most widespread way of protecting copyright and related rightsOn July 22, 2018, the new procedure for payment of compensation came into force. In today's conditions, compensation is characterized by the following features:1) Compensation is a lump sum payment. It cannot be determined as a percentage of future sales of copies or other use of copyright and / or related rights objects with­out specifying its size. Compensation should be paid as a single, one-time payment in a fixed amount;2) The amount of compensation depends on the guilty form of the offender. In the case of the intent of violating, the compensation calculates in a triple rate, with negligence — in the double amount of remuneration that would have been paid if a right holder was granted permission to use the object that was unlawfully used by the offender;3) The basis for calculating the compensation is the amount of remuneration that would have been paid if the offender applied for authorization to use the disputed object.This approach is based on the rule of paragraph b) of part 1 of Art. 240 of Associa­tion Agreement which reproduces the provisions of paragraph b) of part 1 of Art. 13 of Directive 2004/48/EC.In the EU, compensation is provided by the legislation of Croatia, Germany, Greece, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, however, each state regulates the rule for compensation differently. The approach introduced in the Ukrainian legislation is exactly the same as in Poland. The practice of its application has not yet begun to form but there is no doubt that in the new legislative environment protection of copy­right and related rights will be more complicated. The right holder must prove the amount of remuneration that would have been obtained by him for granting permis­sion to use the relevant object which was not previously required for the payment of compensation. However, despite the predicted difficulties, the new compensation model can become a sufficiently effective way of protecting copyright and related rights. This model is in line with the European approach and it provides for one of the highest payments compared to the legislation of the EU Member States. ; Статья посвящена определению правовой природы компенсации как формы возмещения имущественного вреда за нарушение авторского права и смежных прав; анализу положения п. г) ч. 2 ст. 52 Закона Украины «Об авторском праве и смежных правах» в соотношении с аналогичными нормами европейского права и законодательства государств-членов ЕС; определению того, насколько новая модель компенсации соответствует европейскому уровню защиты авторско­го права и смежных прав; разработке предложений по усовершенствованию пра­вового регулирования выплаты компенсации. ; Стаття присвячена визначенню правової природи компенсації як форми відшкоду­вання майнової шкоди за порушення авторського права і суміжних прав; аналізу положення п. г) ч. 2 ст. 52 Закону України «Про авторське право і суміжні права» у співвідношенні з аналогічними нормами європейського права та законодавства держав-членів ЄС; з'ясуванню, наскільки нова модель компенсації відповідає європей­ському рівню захисту авторського права і суміжних прав; виробленню пропозицій щодо вдосконалення правового регулювання виплати компенсації.

The article covers the main aspects of the Association Agreement as a source of copyright and problems of its application.On the example of the practice of the Court of the European Union, the criteria on the basis of which the law of the EU can be applied directly and without the implementation in the domestic law were established.Based on the analysis of the rules of the current legislation of Ukraine, it was concluded that the Association Agreement is the part of the national legislation and is applied in the same manner as foreseen for the rules of the national legislation. In the context of copyright, the Agreement has primacy over domestic law provisions that contain rules other than those in the Agreement.Since Ukrainian courts do not refer to the authentic text of the international treaty in a foreign language but to its official translation, the article analyses the legislation in this regard. It is established that in the law of Ukraine there is no provision which obliges to use only the official translation of the international treaty and prohibits the use of the authentic text of the treaty in another language in which it was concluded. However, if the party of the case indicates that the translation of the text of the international treaty is inaccurate and will refer to the authentic text in a foreign language, the court will not take this into account. The article gives an example of such a case, where the claimant tried to draw the court's attention to the English text of the Association Agreement but the court used the text of the official translation.There are some problems in the official translation of the text of the Association Agreement illustrated by two examples. In Part 2 of Art. 180 translators added the term «mathematical expression» which significantly influences the criteria for providing legal protection to computer programs while in the original text of the Agreement there is no such a term. In Art. 174 translators confused «right of making the work available to the public for the first time» and «right of communication to the public» and incorrectly translated the term «exhaustion of rights». As a result of these errors, a new content was formed which completely differs from the wording of this article in the authentic English text.Due to the fact that some errors found in the official translation of the text of the Agreement have a direct effect on the legal relationships in the field of copyright, this means that the same legal relationship in the EU and Ukraine is regulated differently by the same rule of the Agreement. It is concluded that the official translation of the Association Agreement needs to be amended as the accuracy of the translation is very important for the application of the Agreement. ; В статье освещаются основные аспекты действия Соглашения об ассоциации как источника авторского права и проблемы его применения. Рассмотрены вопросы прямого действия норм права ЕС и критерии, по которым нормы прямого действия отличаются от других норм. Исследованы основания для использования в украинской правоприменительной практике официальных переводов текстов международных договоров, обращено внимание на проблемы содержательных различий между аутентичным текстом Соглашения на английском языке и его официальным переводом. ; У статті висвітлюються основні аспекти дії Угоди про асоціацію як джерела авто­рського права та проблеми її застосування. Розглянуто питання прямої дії норм права ЄС та критерії, за якими норми прямої дії Угоди відрізняються від інших норм. Досліджено підстави для використання в українській правозастосовній практиці офіційних перекла­дів текстів міжнародних договорів, звернуто увагу на проблеми змістовних розбіжностей між автентичним текстом Угоди англійською мовою та його офіційним перекладом.