Certain aspects of possible codification of legislation of intellectual property law

O. Shtefan
{"title":"Certain aspects of possible codification of legislation of intellectual property law","authors":"O. Shtefan","doi":"10.33731/52021.244528","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Keywords: recodification of the Civil Code of Ukraine, codification of legislation onintellectual property law, subject and method of intellectual property law \nThe article examines the issues related to the possibility ofcodification of legislation in the field of intellectual property rights. Currently, inUkraine there is a three-tier regulation of public relations in the field of intellectualproperty law. On the one hand, the Civil Code of Ukraine, the rules of which are characterizedby a corresponding nature, terminological inconsistency with special legislation;special legislation regulating legal relations arising from the creation and use ofcertain objects of intellectual property rights; as well as the provisions of ratified internationallegal acts in this area. Such legislation does not contribute to effectiveprotection or effective protection of intellectual property rights.The updating of the Civil Code of Ukraine will not improve the situation regardingproper legislative support in this area, and may lead to new conflicts. \nBased on the analysis of existing approaches in legal doctrine on the possible codificationof legislation in the field of intellectual property law, it is concluded that it ispossible if the latter is separated into an independent branch of law, characterized bythe subject and method of legal regulation. The existing approach to the definition ofthe subject of regulation in the doctrine of intellectual property law coincides with thecivilized approaches and does not reflect the specifics of legal relations that characterizethe field of intellectual property. The subject of intellectual property law is notlimited to private law relations, public law is also quite common. In this regard, it isproposed to understand the subject as a legal relationship arising in connection withthe creation, use and protection of intellectual property rights. It is proved that theright of intellectual property can be separated into an independent branch of law andto codify its legislation. This will be facilitated by the interest of the state and the correspondingpolitical will to do so.","PeriodicalId":356184,"journal":{"name":"Theory and Practice of Intellectual Property","volume":"38 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Theory and Practice of Intellectual Property","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33731/52021.244528","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Keywords: recodification of the Civil Code of Ukraine, codification of legislation onintellectual property law, subject and method of intellectual property law The article examines the issues related to the possibility ofcodification of legislation in the field of intellectual property rights. Currently, inUkraine there is a three-tier regulation of public relations in the field of intellectualproperty law. On the one hand, the Civil Code of Ukraine, the rules of which are characterizedby a corresponding nature, terminological inconsistency with special legislation;special legislation regulating legal relations arising from the creation and use ofcertain objects of intellectual property rights; as well as the provisions of ratified internationallegal acts in this area. Such legislation does not contribute to effectiveprotection or effective protection of intellectual property rights.The updating of the Civil Code of Ukraine will not improve the situation regardingproper legislative support in this area, and may lead to new conflicts. Based on the analysis of existing approaches in legal doctrine on the possible codificationof legislation in the field of intellectual property law, it is concluded that it ispossible if the latter is separated into an independent branch of law, characterized bythe subject and method of legal regulation. The existing approach to the definition ofthe subject of regulation in the doctrine of intellectual property law coincides with thecivilized approaches and does not reflect the specifics of legal relations that characterizethe field of intellectual property. The subject of intellectual property law is notlimited to private law relations, public law is also quite common. In this regard, it isproposed to understand the subject as a legal relationship arising in connection withthe creation, use and protection of intellectual property rights. It is proved that theright of intellectual property can be separated into an independent branch of law andto codify its legislation. This will be facilitated by the interest of the state and the correspondingpolitical will to do so.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
知识产权法立法可能编纂的某些方面
关键词:乌克兰民法典编纂、知识产权法立法法典化、知识产权法的主体与方法本文探讨了知识产权领域立法法典化可能性的相关问题。目前,乌克兰在知识产权法领域有一个三级公共关系法规。一方面,乌克兰民法典,其规则的特点是相应的性质,术语不一致的专门立法,专门立法规范的法律关系产生的创造和使用的某些知识产权的对象;以及这方面已批准的国际法律文件的规定。这样的立法无助于有效保护或有效保护知识产权。乌克兰民法典的更新不会改善在这一领域获得适当立法支持的情况,并可能导致新的冲突。通过对知识产权法领域立法法典化可能性的现有法理途径的分析,认为知识产权法领域立法法典化的可能性在于将知识产权法领域的立法分离为一个独立的法律分支,以法律规制的主体和方法为特征。现有的知识产权法理论中对规制主体的界定方法与文明方法相吻合,并没有反映出知识产权领域法律关系的特征。知识产权法的主体不仅限于私法关系,公法关系也相当普遍。在这方面,建议将主体理解为与知识产权的创造、使用和保护有关的法律关系。事实证明,知识产权可以独立为一个独立的法律部门,并编纂其立法。国家利益和相应的政治意愿将促进这一点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Accelerated examination of patent applications for «green» technologies: foreign experience for Ukraine Draft Regulation of the European Union about artificial intelligence and related initiatives Intellectual property rights in the context of biology, medicine and pharmacy: a look into the future The sui generis right to non-original objects generated by a computer program: novelties of legal regulation ABUSE OF PATENTABILITY CRITERIA WHEN PATENTING INVENTIONS RELATED TO MEDICINES
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1