Intellectual property statute in Private International Law

Abstract

The article highlights the comparative analysis of the conflict-of-laws regulation of intellectual property rights in international, European and Russian law. It is concluded that lex loci protectionis as the main conflict-of laws rule in this area has an ambiguous interpretation, cannot be recognized as lex fori – the law of the country where the competent court is seated, but should be generally understood as the law of the country where the legal protection of the relevant intellectual property object is provided. In addition, in some cases it seems reasonable to apply lex loci originis, lex loci actus and lex loci delicti, as well as lex voluntatis and lex loci solutionis – to contractual relations. In the case of non-contractual infringement of intellectual property rights granted and protected on the territory of several states, including on the Internet, the key issue is to establish the closest connection of the civil legal relationship with a particular state, taking into account various factors (the place of origin or registration of an intellectual property object, the place of committing infringement, the place of occurrence of negative consequences for the intellectual right holder, the orientation of a website to a specific state, the location of a competent court, etc.). It is also argued to enshrine the provisions on the intellectual property statute in Section VI “Private International Law” of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, including the following issues of its scope: a) authorship; b) types of protected intellectual property objects; c) requirements for the legal protection of intellectual property objects, including registration issues and other formalities to be executed; d) the types, content and effect of intellectual rights arising in relation to intellectual property objects, including the restrictions provided by law and the duration of legal protection; e) the emergence, exercise and termination of intellectual rights, including permissible ways of disposing of them; f) non-contractual protection of intellectual rights.