Search results

SECTION I: GENERAL OVERVIEW 1. LEGAL SOURCES 1.1. Intellectual Property 1.1.1. International Conventions 1.1.2. EU Law: Approximation of Laws and Community Rights 1.1.3. National Legislation 1.1.4. Institutional Competences 1.2. International Jurisdiction 1.2.1. EU Law: Scope of Application and Grounds of Jurisdiction 1.2.2. International Conventions 1.2.3. National Legislation 1.3. Choice-of-Law 1.3.1. International Conventions 1.3.2. EU Law: Implications of the new Regulations 1.3.3. National Legislation 1.4. Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments 1.4.1. International Conventions 1.4.2. EU Law 1.4.3. National Legislation 2. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW 2.1. International Jurisdiction 2.1.1. Infringement Claims 2.1.2. Contractual Disputes 2.1.3. Exclusive Jurisdiction on Validity of Rights Subject to Registration 2.2. Applicable Law 2.2.1. Infringement of IP Rights 2.2.2. Territoriality and lex loci protectionis 2.2.3. Contracts Relating to Intellectual or Industrial Property Rights 2.3. Recognition and Enforcement of Judgments 2.3.1 Procedural Issues 2.3.2 Grounds for Non-Recognition SECTION II: HYPOTHETICAL CASE STUDIES Case 1. General Special Grounds of Jurisdiction Case 2. Subject-Matter Jurisdiction Case 3. Consolidation of Proceedings Case 4. Choice of Court Case 5. Parallel Proceedings Case 6. Principle of Territoriality (Choice of Law) Case 7. Infringement of Intellectual Property Rights Case 8. Applicable Law to Initial Ownership Case 9. Applicable Law to the Transfer of Rights Agreements Case 10. Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Case 11. Provisional Measures and Injunctions

The work aims to analyze the theoretical aspects of the use of information technologies in the mediation process, as well as the aspects of its implementation. The purpose of the investigation is online mediation as a form of resolution of intellectual property disputes. In addition, the topic of study is the social relationships that arise when using information technologies and mediation to resolve civil conflicts in the field of intellectual property. The research methods used in this case are the dialectical method, the generalization method, the comparison method, the analysis method, the synthesis method, the method in administration and the deduction method, the modeling method, and the abstraction method. As a result of the study, conclusions are drawn on the state of online mediation in the real world, the benefits and potential problems of introducing virtual mediation for disputed parties, the need for support for special applications, along with the need for the introduction of online mediation at the state level to a state policy.

The relevance of the study lies in the fact that in Ukraine under martial law the system of protection of intellectual property rights and mechanisms of its public administration is continuously transformed, which implies a scientific search to identify the problems that exist in this area and the development of effective practical solutions to overcome them. The purpose of the study was to identify the main features and obstacles arising in the implementation of public administration in the field of intellectual property and the implementation of protection of its objects under martial law in Ukraine. The research methods used were general and special legal methods of knowledge. Everything allows to conclude that there is an urgent need to develop new mechanisms of digital security of copyrights and to push forward the creation of blockchain accounting of copyright objects. Similarly, a revision of the approach to the evaluation of objects of intellectual property rights and the determination of the inventive level is needed, as a condition of possibility to adapt the legislation governing the matter to the needs of today's society.

The value of intellectual property is now growing by the day in view of globalization of economic processes and integration of the Russian Federation into the world economy. The need for development of legislation in the field of intellectual property, improvement of legal mechanisms to protect the intellectual deliverables is dictated by a market economy, changes in social relations, as well as the inconsistency of regulatory enforcement, which prevents from proper implementation of the individual's rights in the sphere of intellectual property realization. Over the past decade, the entrepreneurial activity has demonstrated an increase in a number of facts of recognition of the intellectual property created by an employee as work for hire (WFH). Under these procedures, both employers and employees often make mistakes that subsequently lead to such items being non-protectable. The point is that the current legislation has no procedure or criteria to recognize the intellectual property created by employees as WFH. However, failure to observe the procedures regulated by tax legislation when recognizing the results of an employee's intellectual activity as WFH poses a high risk for instituting administrative action against the employer. In this paper, we will try to determine the procedure and criteria for recognizing the results of an employee's intellectual activity as WFH.

Fast improvement of the IT field requires relevant safety of intellectual assets rights. The legal protection of laptop applications, software programs and foreign legal practices is a contentious issue. With the rapid development of the IT sector within the international context, the issues of copyright safety, patenting and non-disclosure of personal data have gained urgency. The research methodology involved the use of methods of analysis and synthesis, logical and system - structural analysis, control methods, structural and functional analysis in combination with the method of case study and the method of content analysis. The article comprehensively analyses the modern perspective of intellectual belongings proper and copyright in IT outsourcing. The scope of unconventional challenges in the sphere of copyright safety inside the area of IT sphere are exemplified using the case of Ukraine. The case addresses opportunities to enhance the regulatory framework for copyright safety of experts engaged in IT outsourcing. It is stressed that the existing legal procedures and methods are slower in responding to changes in the field of IT outsourcing than the world's quickest trends in this sphere.

In modern conditions of development of public relations, the creation of objects of intellectual property rights by artificial intelligence is becoming more widespread. With this in mind, it is important to analyze the international legal experience of regulating the use of artificial intelligence as the author of intellectual property, to further borrow it for domestic laws, as well as to pay attention to problematic aspects of such regulation and make proposals to resolve inconsistencies. The study clarifies the international legal regulation of intellectual property rights created by artificial intelligence, as well as analyses the problematic issues of regulation of artificial intelligence by international law and the features of such regulation in Ukraine and presents positions on the development of artificial intelligence systems and prospects, as well as the prospects for its impact on world society.

Summary The discussion on the fundamentals that legitimise intellectual property often focuses on two main approaches: iusnaturalists and utilitarists. The former argue that it is possible to justify ownership of intellectual creation by relying on John Locke's liberal property theory. The latter converge around the so-called "progress clause" and the incentive argument. This work analyses whether or not intellectual property can be justified on the basis of such approaches, concluding that, given the paradoxes identified, these are insufficient. ; Resumen La discusión sobre los fundamentos que legitiman la propiedad intelectual se suele centrar alrededor de dos grandes planteamientos: iusnaturalistas y utilitaristas. Los primeros sostienen que es posible justificar la propiedad sobre la creación intelectual recurriendo a la teoría liberal de la propiedad formulada por John Locke. Los segundos convergen en torno a la llamada "cláusula del progreso" y el argumento de los incentivos. En este trabajo se analiza si es posible o no justificar la propiedad intelectual sobre la base de dichos planteamientos, concluyendo que, dadas las paradojas identificadas, éstos resultan insuficientes.

The principle of proportionality covers a broad field of application, arising from the protection of fundamental rights, of which intellectual property is undeniably a part. Its implementation, through several types of proportionality controls, has upset doctrinal certainties and triggered a reflection on the motivation and legal interpretation. The most discussed of these proportionality checks is the one used in cases of fundamental conflict.Its impact at the judicial level has been made in several stages. It originates from the jurisprudence of the two European courts, itself inspired by the German principle of proportionality. The European Court of Human Rights and the Court of Justice of the European Union have developed their own proportionality checks to resolve a conflict between fundamental rights. While the former takes a more concrete approach than the latter, due to the nature of its task, both courts confirm the non-absolute nature of intellectual property rights and the need to reconcile them with other fundamental rights (recognized by the European Convention on Human Rights and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union). In their proportionality test, the two courts reserve a certain margin of appreciation to the Member States, but give indications as to how to carry it out in their turn. Beyond the development of a three-step test (adequacy, necessity and proportionality stricto sensu), the European courts reveal elements to be taken into account according to the fundamental right opposed to the intellectual property right and the facts of the case (type of speech at stake for the freedom of expression invoked for a use of an intellectual property outside the legal exceptions; duration, complexity, cost, necessity for the freedom of enterprise or the right to privacy invoked for a blocking measure on the Internet.). France launched this process of adopting proportionality review in a fundamental dispute at the judicial level on May 15, 2015 by a ruling of the First Civil Chamber of ...

Understanding the role and necessity of the use of intellectual property in the field of medicine is the basis for the proper development of this field in the postwar period, as well as for the entire healthcare system. Therefore, the purpose of the study was to determine the impact and prospects of the use of intellectual property in the development of the Ukrainian health sector, post-war. The methodological basis of the work consists of general and special scientific methods: analysis and synthesis, generalization, dialectical, axiological, legal-formal, legal-comparative and structural system. The result of the work shows the necessity of using heterogeneous objects of intellectual property, in particular, those in the field of copyrights and patents, for adequate reform and effective modernization of the health sector. It is concluded that intellectual property is designed not only to ensure the property and non-property interests of the subject of the specified property, but, in addition, is intended to ensure the needs of society in general in the appropriate sphere, where the objects of intellectual property find their concrete application.

The development of information technologies in what is often reffered to as the "information society" is at the origin of new uses, new exchanges wich necessitate the implementation of new economic and judicial models. The copyright constraints and above all its the immateriality have not only been misunderstood but also ignored by society. Recently, French parliament has proclaimed the principle of illegality of peer to peer file sharing between internet users. We will need to reconcile a fair and equal compensation of "authors", taking into consideration international legal constraints regarding free access to knowledge and information, as required by the Tunis agreement. The issue of the compensation of authors therefore appears to be one of the most important aspects the new internet governance. ; Le développement des technologies de l'information dans ce que l'on appelle la « société de l'information » est à l'origine de nouveaux usages, de nouveaux échanges qui imposent, de manière coercitive, la mise en place de nouveaux modèles économiques et juridiques. Les contraintes du droit d'auteur et surtout son immatérialité étaient alors mal comprises voire ignorées par le corps social. Récemment les parlementaires français posaient dans des circonstances exceptionnelles le principe de l'illégalité du téléchargement entre internautes. Il faudra conjuguer : juste et équitable rémunération des auteurs, prise en considération des contraintes juridiques internationales avec la garantie de l'accès à la connaissance et à l'information pour tous, conformément à l'engagement de Tunis. La question de la rémunération des auteurs apparaît donc comme un des aspects majeurs de la gouvernance de l'Internet.

The development of information technologies in what is often reffered to as the "information society" is at the origin of new uses, new exchanges wich necessitate the implementation of new economic and judicial models. The copyright constraints and above all its the immateriality have not only been misunderstood but also ignored by society. Recently, French parliament has proclaimed the principle of illegality of peer to peer file sharing between internet users. We will need to reconcile a fair and equal compensation of "authors", taking into consideration international legal constraints regarding free access to knowledge and information, as required by the Tunis agreement. The issue of the compensation of authors therefore appears to be one of the most important aspects the new internet governance. ; Le développement des technologies de l'information dans ce que l'on appelle la « société de l'information » est à l'origine de nouveaux usages, de nouveaux échanges qui imposent, de manière coercitive, la mise en place de nouveaux modèles économiques et juridiques. Les contraintes du droit d'auteur et surtout son immatérialité étaient alors mal comprises voire ignorées par le corps social. Récemment les parlementaires français posaient dans des circonstances exceptionnelles le principe de l'illégalité du téléchargement entre internautes. Il faudra conjuguer : juste et équitable rémunération des auteurs, prise en considération des contraintes juridiques internationales avec la garantie de l'accès à la connaissance et à l'information pour tous, conformément à l'engagement de Tunis. La question de la rémunération des auteurs apparaît donc comme un des aspects majeurs de la gouvernance de l'Internet.

The development of information technologies in what is often reffered to as the "information society" is at the origin of new uses, new exchanges wich necessitate the implementation of new economic and judicial models. The copyright constraints and above all its the immateriality have not only been misunderstood but also ignored by society. Recently, French parliament has proclaimed the principle of illegality of peer to peer file sharing between internet users. We will need to reconcile a fair and equal compensation of "authors", taking into consideration international legal constraints regarding free access to knowledge and information, as required by the Tunis agreement. The issue of the compensation of authors therefore appears to be one of the most important aspects the new internet governance. ; Le développement des technologies de l'information dans ce que l'on appelle la « société de l'information » est à l'origine de nouveaux usages, de nouveaux échanges qui imposent, de manière coercitive, la mise en place de nouveaux modèles économiques et juridiques. Les contraintes du droit d'auteur et surtout son immatérialité étaient alors mal comprises voire ignorées par le corps social. Récemment les parlementaires français posaient dans des circonstances exceptionnelles le principe de l'illégalité du téléchargement entre internautes. Il faudra conjuguer : juste et équitable rémunération des auteurs, prise en considération des contraintes juridiques internationales avec la garantie de l'accès à la connaissance et à l'information pour tous, conformément à l'engagement de Tunis. La question de la rémunération des auteurs apparaît donc comme un des aspects majeurs de la gouvernance de l'Internet.

The development of information technologies in what is often reffered to as the "information society" is at the origin of new uses, new exchanges wich necessitate the implementation of new economic and judicial models. The copyright constraints and above all its the immateriality have not only been misunderstood but also ignored by society. Recently, French parliament has proclaimed the principle of illegality of peer to peer file sharing between internet users. We will need to reconcile a fair and equal compensation of "authors", taking into consideration international legal constraints regarding free access to knowledge and information, as required by the Tunis agreement. The issue of the compensation of authors therefore appears to be one of the most important aspects the new internet governance. ; Le développement des technologies de l'information dans ce que l'on appelle la « société de l'information » est à l'origine de nouveaux usages, de nouveaux échanges qui imposent, de manière coercitive, la mise en place de nouveaux modèles économiques et juridiques. Les contraintes du droit d'auteur et surtout son immatérialité étaient alors mal comprises voire ignorées par le corps social. Récemment les parlementaires français posaient dans des circonstances exceptionnelles le principe de l'illégalité du téléchargement entre internautes. Il faudra conjuguer : juste et équitable rémunération des auteurs, prise en considération des contraintes juridiques internationales avec la garantie de l'accès à la connaissance et à l'information pour tous, conformément à l'engagement de Tunis. La question de la rémunération des auteurs apparaît donc comme un des aspects majeurs de la gouvernance de l'Internet.

The principle of proportionality covers a broad field of application, arising from the protection of fundamental rights, of which intellectual property is undeniably a part. Its implementation, through several types of proportionality controls, has upset doctrinal certainties and triggered a reflection on the motivation and legal interpretation. The most discussed of these proportionality checks is the one used in cases of fundamental conflict.Its impact at the judicial level has been made in several stages. It originates from the jurisprudence of the two European courts, itself inspired by the German principle of proportionality. The European Court of Human Rights and the Court of Justice of the European Union have developed their own proportionality checks to resolve a conflict between fundamental rights. While the former takes a more concrete approach than the latter, due to the nature of its task, both courts confirm the non-absolute nature of intellectual property rights and the need to reconcile them with other fundamental rights (recognized by the European Convention on Human Rights and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union). In their proportionality test, the two courts reserve a certain margin of appreciation to the Member States, but give indications as to how to carry it out in their turn. Beyond the development of a three-step test (adequacy, necessity and proportionality stricto sensu), the European courts reveal elements to be taken into account according to the fundamental right opposed to the intellectual property right and the facts of the case (type of speech at stake for the freedom of expression invoked for a use of an intellectual property outside the legal exceptions; duration, complexity, cost, necessity for the freedom of enterprise or the right to privacy invoked for a blocking measure on the Internet.). France launched this process of adopting proportionality review in a fundamental dispute at the judicial level on May 15, 2015 by a ruling of the First Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation. The latter now requires trial judges to explain in a concrete manner how the search for a fair balance between intellectual property rights and another opposing fundamental right commands the sentence handed down. The first judgments and rulings on the merits have applied this jurisprudence of the Cour de cassation, in particular in the case of a conflict between freedom of expression through the notion of necessity of use. Their motivation should certainly be developed in the coming years.At the same time, one should not neglect the control of the proportionality of the sanction, which also derives from the principle of proportionality and which has decisive applications for the control during a fundamental conflict. A disproportionate sanction could directly threaten the application and coherence of fundamental rights, and this risk makes the conjunction of the two controls indispensable. If the legislator, both national and European, has adopted various measures inspired by the desire to achieve a proportionate sanction, the judge remains essential in the application of the principle of proportionality, since he chooses the sanction best adapted to the facts. The issue is central to intellectual property law in that it offers a wide variety of sanctions, both criminal and civil, to combat counterfeiting. However, its application remains timid, as much as its interest for the doctrine. This application is bound to develop further through case law. Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version) ; Le principe de proportionnalité recouvre un champ d'application large, découlant de la protection des droits fondamentaux, dont la propriété intellectuelle fait indéniablement partie. Sa mise en œuvre, par plusieurs types de contrôles de proportionnalité, a bouleversé les certitudes doctrinales et enclenché une réflexion relative à la motivation et l'interprétation juridique. Le plus discuté desdits contrôles de proportionnalité est celui utilisé en cas de conflit fondamental. Son impact au niveau judiciaire s'est fait en plusieurs étapes. Il a pour origine la jurisprudence des deux cours européennes, elle-même inspirée du principe de proportionnalité allemand. La Cour européenne des droits de l'homme et la Cour de justice de l'Union européenne ont développé leurs propres contrôles de proportionnalité pour résoudre un conflit entre droits fondamentaux. Si la première entreprend une démarche plus concrète que la seconde, liée à la nature de sa mission, ces deux juridictions confirment toutes deux le caractère non absolu du droit de la propriété intellectuelle et la nécessité de le concilier avec les autres droits fondamentaux (reconnus par la Convention européenne des droits de l'homme et la Charte des droits fondamentaux de l'Union européenne). Lors de leur contrôle de proportionnalité, les deux cours réservent une certaine marge d'appréciation aux États membres mais donnent des indications afin de le réaliser à leur tour. Au-delà du développement d'un test en trois étapes (adéquation, nécessité et proportionnalité stricto sensu), les cours européennes révèlent des éléments à prendre en compte selon le droit fondamental opposé au droit de la propriété intellectuelle et les faits de l'espèce (type de discours en cause pour la liberté d'expression invoqué pour une utilisation d'un bien intellectuel hors des exceptions légales ; durée, complexité, coût, nécessité pour la liberté d'entreprise ou le droit à la vie privée invoquée pour une mesure de blocage sur internet…). La France a lancé ce processus d'adoption du contrôle de proportionnalité lors d'un conflit fondamental au niveau judiciaire le 15 mai 2015 par un arrêt de la première chambre civile de la Cour de cassation. Celle-ci impose désormais aux juges du fond d'expliquer de façon concrète en quoi la recherche d'un juste équilibre entre le droit de la propriété intellectuelle et un autre droit fondamental opposé commande la condamnation prononcée. Les premiers jugements et arrêts au fond ont appliqué cette jurisprudence de la Cour de cassation, notamment en cas de conflit de la liberté d'expression à travers la notion de nécessité d'usage. Leur motivation devrait assurément s'étoffer dans les prochaines années. En parallèle, il ne faut pas négliger le contrôle de proportionnalité de la sanction, qui découle également du principe de proportionnalité et qui a des applications déterminantes pour le contrôle lors d'un conflit fondamental. Une sanction disproportionnée pourrait menacer directement l'application et la cohérence des droits fondamentaux et ce risque rend indispensable la conjonction des deux contrôles. Si le législateur, tant national et européen, a adopté différentes mesures inspirées par la volonté de parvenir à une sanction proportionnée, le juge demeure essentiel dans l'application du principe de proportionnalité, puisqu'il choisit la sanction la mieux adaptée aux faits. L'enjeu est central pour le droit de la propriété intellectuelle en ce qu'il offre une grande variété de sanctions, tant pénales que civiles, afin de lutter contre la contrefaçon. Cependant, son application reste timide, autant que son intérêt pour la doctrine. Cette application est appelée à se développer davantage à travers la jurisprudence.