Protection of property rights in online gaming accounts

Abstract. The article is devoted to analysis of the effectiveness of the main procedural legal and financial (banking) mechanisms designed to ensure the protection of property rights’ immunity. The legally regulated procedures of such protection are analyzed on platforms — both procedural and legal as well as financial and economic. There is no doubt that only in a state where the immunity of property is declared and guaranteed to the person can be provided the development of economic, intellectual, socially oriented activities. The effect of the principle of immunity of property rights is not absolute, but its restrictions are possible only on the grounds and in the manner prescribed by law. The topicality of the inviolability of property rights is due to the role of law as a platform for citizens’ property independence and their participation in the processes of social reproduction. The guarantee of property independence is the right of ownership of property and non-property rights, which is realized by giving a person the right to freely, unimpededly, and fully exercise the rights of the owner of personal property. The compliance of the inviolability of property rights during criminal proceedings is not properly ensured in the current CPC (The Criminal Procedure Code) of Ukraine; in particular, the movement of confiscated property is not regulated, which questions the novelty of inviolability. To improve the procedure for the protection of property rights, this is necessary to regulate at the legislative level the mechanism of protection and restoration of property rights of persons victimized by criminal offenses. The etymology of «inviolability» guarantees by law the protection of the status of the person from any encroachment. Inviolability in the economic and legal context is mainly understood as a person’s legal status, which is an unalterable guarantee against unauthorized restrictions by the state institutions — law enforcement, financial, court, and individuals and legal entities. An attempt is made to accumulate most of the latest achievements (both legislative, theoretically investigative and applied) on the issues of legal regulation of the studied financial and legal relations, based on which scientific views are substantiated, and proposals are developed to improve regulations in this area. The main vectors of economic and legal mechanisms for the protection of the inviolability of property rights, which would correlate with generally accepted European and world standards, have been identified. Keywords: the inviolability of property rights, property rights, principles of proceedings, judicial protection, seizure of property, financial guarantee, financial risks. JEL Classification G28; К14 Formulas: 0; fig.: 0; tabl.: 0; bibl.: 12.

Although the evolution of the modern concept of the right to private property is a matter of historical contingencies, private property has now been firmly established as a basic institution of the contemporary world. It may be defended or justified by a number of moral and economic theories. Since the late twentieth century, the predominant conception of property has been one which associates it with its 'social function', thus superseding the earlier notion of 'absolute' property rights. At the same time, the protection of property rights has acquired increasing prominence in the constitutional jurisprudence of many legal systems. While it was a British colony, property rights in Hong Kong were not constitutionally entrenched. These rights were however clearly defined by the long established tradition of the common law which had been transplanted to Hong Kong. At the same time, the principle that the compulsory acquisition of private property by the exercise of governmental power must be subject to the payment of just compensation was reflected in legislation. Hong Kong law also followed the modern trend in subjecting various private property rights to regulation in the public interest. The pre-1997 legal system in Hong Kong has largely remained intact after Hong Kong's incorporation into the People's Republic of China (PRC). The legal protection of property rights has in fact been enhanced after the handover with the coming into effect of the Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) of the PRC. This 'mini-constitution' for post-1997 Hong Kong gives constitutional recognition to the protection of private property rights. This paper will begin by reviewing briefly the theories relating to and rationales for the protection of property rights (part II). It will then introduce the existing regime for the constitutional protection of property rights in Hong Kong (part III). Two specific problems arising from the interpretation and application of the constitutional provision for the protection of property rights in Hong Kong will then be examined (parts IV and V). The paper will conclude with a summary and some observations about the development of constitutional protection of property rights in Hong Kong and in mainland China (part VI).

This article establishes static and dynamic panel models of 30 provinces in China, using a variety of regression models and regression methods to empirically study the impact of China’s intellectual property rights (IPR) protection on FDI. Then verifying whether the impact of intellectual property rights protection on FDI is subject to the level of foreign technology introduction .The innovativeness is constructing a quantitative index system of intellectual property protection of China, which includes intellectual property rights protection legislative level and intellectual property rights protection enforcement level. The research results show that the level of legislation and enforcement of intellectual property rights protection have significant positive impact on China's FDI. For some provinces which urgently need to introduce advanced foreign technology, strengthening intellectual property rights protection will inhibit FDI. Especially the strengthening of the intellectual property rights protection legislative level has a more pronounced inhibitory effect.

The article draws attention to the specifics of protection of intellectual property rights in Ukraine by civil and special legislation, the rules of which are designed to protect the subjective rights of right holders and other participants in legal relations in the field of intellectual property. Some aspects of the legal nature of jurisdictional remedies are studied. Attention is paid to the specifics of protection of intellectual property rights by civil law, which consists primarily in the methods of protection provided by procedural law. The legislation, the norms of which guarantee the protection of intellectual property and the ways of protection of civil rights are outlined. The existing in the legal literature different views on the classification of methods of protection of property rights are analyzed. The legal analysis of the application of the vindication claim as a means of protection of intellectual property rights is carried out and the author's proposals are formulated. Keywords: civil law, intellectual property, lawsuit, protection

The article draws attention to the specifics of protection of intellectual property rights in Ukraine by civil and special legislation, the rules of which are designed to protect the subjective rights of right holders and other participants in legal relations in the field of intellectual property. Some aspects of the legal nature of jurisdictional remedies are studied. Attention is paid to the specifics of protection of intellectual property rights by civil law, which consists primarily in the methods of protection provided by procedural law. The legislation, the norms of which guarantee the protection of intellectual property and the ways of protection of civil rights are outlined. The existing in the legal literature different views on the classification of methods of protection of property rights are analyzed. The legal analysis of the application of the vindication claim as a means of protection of intellectual property rights is carried out and the given proposals are formulated..

Main aim of the article is to analyze the correlation of the institutes of protection of property rights and self-protection of rights. The natural course of civil rights is also due to the fact that this right lies in the sphere of ownership, control and predictability of the rightholder. The legal possibility of self-defense in the system of property rights protection is applicable not only on the basis of the circumstances of self-defense of the rights enshrined in the general provisions of civil legislation, but also in accordance with special norms. The chapter entitled "Protection of property and other property rights" essentially provides for at least two measures of self-defense of the rights enshrined in articles 274 and 277 of the Civil Code. It is necessary to clearly coordinate self-defense measures and the scope of their application in the RA Civil Code, otherwise there are problems with the practical application of self-defense rights. There are no clear legislative delimiters regarding the system of protection of rights. Are the defense guarantees of individual legal institutions part of the system of protection of private law? Can the right holders of rights protected by private law institutions that have a separate system of protection use general forms of legal protection, for example, self-defense of rights? In the course of the study, a comparative legal method was applied. We have come to the conclusion that the protection of property rights on at least two legal grounds can be carried out through self-defense of rights, being enshrined in both general legislative and special parts.

In the scientific article, the author explores the peculiarities of legal regulation of protection of property rights to property acquired in marriage by spouses, in actual, religious marriage, other family unions by its members under the civil and family law of Ukraine and some European Union states. In particular, the author determined that in Ukraine and the leading states of the European Union legal regulation of the main methods and forms of protection of property rights is carried out in accordance with the general provisions of civil law with certain features to protect the property of spouses and family unions, illegal behaviour of one of the spouses. In this aspect, there is a dualism in the legal regulation of these issues regarding the protection of property rights of spouses: in legal relations with third parties are subject to general methods of protection, in legal relations between spouses — methods defined by family law. The protection of property rights of de facto spouses, spouses in a church marriage and partners in a registered partnership has a different legal nature in the European Union: some of them do not recognize these family unions and protection of property acquired in these unions is governed by general rules; the other part of the states recognizes features in protection of the property right to the property acquired in the specified family unions, fully or partially equating them on these parameters to protection of the property right to property of spouses. In particular, French civil law lays down a special procedure for the protection of spouses’ property rights and the extension to civil partners (including de facto spouses) of the general provisions of civil law on the protection of their property rights. The German Civil Code does not recognize the legal consequences of actual marital relations, as well as church marriages, and civil partnerships concluded before 2017 (the time of recognition of same-sex marriages) in terms of protection of property rights and obligations equates to a registered marriage. Czech civil law defines the same ways of protecting the property of spouses and civil partners, and the protection of property rights acquired by de facto spouses is regulated on a general basis in accordance with the provisions on joint property and the protection of civil rights. Latvian civil law recognizes the possibility of protecting only the right of ownership of property acquired in a registered marriage, without recognizing other family unions.

Modern civilization is based on the principle of statutory tax and the principle of a legally prescribed punishment for a specified crime. The principle of a legally prescribed punishment for a specified crime is the protection of personal rights, while the principle of statutory tax is the protection of property rights. In the academic circles, the research on the principle of statutory tax places more emphasis on the protection of the property rights of citizens, but ignores the protection of the state financial power. The development of modern property law has recognized that the property right is not a pure concept of private law, but a dialectical unity of the property rights of citizens and public property rights. In this sense, the principle of statutory tax as the cornerstone of the modern state and civilization is an important principle of guaranteeing a dialectical unity of public property rights and the property rights of citizens. In addition, how to implement the principle of statutory tax is not only a matter of legislation, but also a practical problem. It is necessary to analyze tax index and other practical issues in tax practice to prevent from a serious discrepancy between theory and practice and actually achieve dual protection of public property rights and the property rights of citizens. Therefore, traditional principle of absolute statutory tax cannot completely adapt to the needs of modern economic society, and should be replaced by the principle of relative statutory tax.

The article examines the issue of the specifics of the protection of property rights, the specifics of their application to objects. Article 13 of the Constitution of Ukraine declares that the fundamental principle of in the field of protection of property rights there is a provision that the state provides equal protection of all subjects of property rights. In recent years, the question of protection of property rights has gained important theoretical and practical importance. The analysis of modern judicial practice shows that there is no unified position of judicial bodies on the resolution of disputes related to the violation of property rights. Courts of general jurisdiction and commercial courts, when considering disputes related to the protection of violated rights, ambiguously apply the norms of current legislation, therefore, the uncertainty of judicial authorities in the matter of the uniform application of the provisions of civil law to disputes of this category leads to the violation of the constitutional rights of owners. It is emphasized that the protection of property rights is a complex of civil legal means, which are aimed, on the one hand, at ensuring the normal economic use of property and maintaining property rights in an intact state, and, on the other hand, at restoring violated property relations, overcoming obstacles to their normal functioning and compensation for damages caused to the owner. As a conclusion, it is said that the protection of property rights acts as an independent subjective right that arises at the moment when there is a threat of its violation or dispute. This right includes powers, each of which involves the active implementation of positive actions. In the field of legal relations related to the protection of property rights, the objects of protection are directly the rights to certain objects. It is these rights that can be violated by other persons, and it is for their protection that the civil law provides for various means that a person can use to protect his violated or disputed rights, which are subject to protection by the law of interests. Subjects of legal relations related to the protection of property rights are, on the one hand, persons who have property rights to a specific object, and persons who retain property in accordance with relevant contracts or laws, and who, accordingly to legal norms, have the right to demand protection of their violated subjective rights. On the other hand, these are persons whose actions led to the unlawful violation of subjective rights to property objects.

At the Smithsonian National Museum of Natural History (SI NMNH), the Assistant Registrar and Informatics Manager in the Department of Paleobiology (Paleo) have identified key linkages between registering collections (documentation for specimens and data through acquisitions, loans and disposals) and management of digitized collections, especially for usage right designation. Both roles require extensive collaboration on a shared framework for managing data related to the provenance of fossil specimens and rights associated with any derivative digital assets. This eliminated a disconnect in overlapping responsibilities: those typically siloed in museum registration practices (e.g., provenance data, intellectual property rights) and the data typically siloed in collections management and digitization workflows (e.g., data quality, digital asset management, and usage rights). Paleo shifted to a new practical approach and mindset focused on communal thinking. This propelled implementation of data standard practices and laid the building blocks for a shared community perspective on digitizing paleontological collections. Since 2020, Paleo established processing workflows for digital asset requests of the fossil collections (new digital asset creations vs. use of existing digital assets) and baseline understandings about rights of digital assets. These products led to a comprehensive effort to outline SI NMNH’s options to designate usage rights for digital assets (Table 1) and distribute basic understandings about Smithsonian Terms of Use and Smithsonian Open Access Policy (SI OA) across SI NMNH. Paleo explored this topic further by engaging in virtual meetings, conferences, presentations and informal discussions with the collections management staff and data managers across SI NMNH and externally with domestic and international groups such as the Paleo Data Working Group (PDWG), Society for the Preservation of Natural History Collections (SPNHC) Registrars Group, and Biodiversity Information Standards (TDWG), to develop data standards initiatives for loans, permits and sensitive data (Fig. 1). Through regular community engagement, Paleo forged a concise, yet evolving, perspective on digitizing collections, which aligned both registration and informatics data management needs within the department and museum (Fig. 2). This multi-professional perspective enables the promotion of shared community knowledge and understanding about data rights. The primary purpose is to balance consistent goals, current needs, and long-term outcomes with the flexibility to adapt our practices based on institution-specific policies, new research methods, and varying domestic and international regulations and laws. The notable outcomes from almost four years of work are highlighted and incorporated into Paleo's departmental policy and documentation requirements for processing and fulfilling digital asset creation or use requests workflows and distribution of this information to the public website for visitors and borrowers. However, there are still persisting challenges related to registering and managing these digital assets. There are immediate and future obstacles such as: limitations in effective tracking methods to record creation of digital assets, use of digital assets, and designation of what usage rights and when the decision was made; gaps in community practice, policy and regulations at the institutional level and globally; past practices in workflows and staff structures or lack thereof, which have left digital assets in limbo without means of accessing the data or documentation to identify the appropriate use options and rights. We see a need to continue asking questions. How are varying policies across institutions globally, impacting compliance concerns in registration for sharing sensitive information with other research institutions? How have or will new research techniques and opportunities impact the need for flexibility in practices and decisions? Are there alternative ways to utilize a Collections Management Systems (CMS) or use other platforms to track, store and manage the digital assets? How have others engaged in community discussions to address overlapping needs for data standards and registration of digitized collections? These identify significant inconsistencies across the community that need further discussion with subject-matter experts before effective and comprehensive decisions in data standards for managing digitized collections can be made. Ultimately, there are outstanding questions and challenges at all stages for registering, digitizing and managing digital assets of natural history collections. We continue to unveil nuances in thinking about this topic and find the need for structures of shared knowledge built and actively engaged in by a professionally diverse community. The utilization of subject-matter experts encourages collaboration and alternative perspectives to standardize operations and policy while expanding community efforts and awareness.

Intellectual property rights (IPRs) always drive invention and creativeness. It also creates new employment and makes you more competitive. Intellectual property rights protect and benefit the work of writers, artists, designers, discoverers, and other IPR users while they are being used by others. Intellectual property rights (IPRs) help protect ideas and creative works developed by inventors, designers, developers, and writers. After all, protecting intellectual property is one of the major challenges for both developed and developing nations. There are numerous international laws that protect intellectual property. International law employs several guidelines and recommendations to confirm the protection of intellectual property. In addition, most countries have intellectual property laws. Maximum countries have their own legislative powers to protect their intellectual property rights. But if not done properly, all these international and domestic intellectual property laws will be valueless. The legal system that China and Pakistan follow to protect their intellectual property is very similar to the legal system of developed countries but also has some main variances. This research paper attempts to examine the assessment of IPR protection in China and Pakistan. This research paper also describes IPR protection procedures in China and Pakistan. In addition, this article initiates a comparison of international IPR indexes to demonstrate and describe the variances in IPR protection assessments. This article also lists and describes the various factors that influence the lack of proper protection of property and intellectual property rights in both countries.

Protection of Property Rights has become a pressing issue in China since the country strived to move from a planned economy to a market economy in late 1970s. The passage of the Property Law of China on March 16, 2007 marked an historic change in the country from public to private with respect to property rights. Effective on October 1, 2007, the Property Law for the first time in Chinese history grants an equal protection to both public and private properties, breaking up the orthodox ideology in favor of public ownership against private ownership and individual liberty. With a notable civil law tradition, the Property Law is intended to set forth comprehensive rules regulating creation, alteration, alienation as well as termination of property rights, and protecting private property rights in China, a country where the public or state ownership is still playing a leading role in the nation's economy. Many aspects of the Property Law, which are different from those in other countries, particularly common law countries, are unique not only in their content but also in their application. The land use rights typically reflect a Chinese reality, in that the ownership of land is separated from the possession and use of it. Adoption of the Property Law in China is a substantial step toward protection of private property rights in the nation. The greatest challenge facing the country, however, is how to enforce the law so that the private property rights are effectively protected, especially in situations where public ownership is involved. The Nail House syndrome that has spread across the country indeed raises the serious issue of compensation in cases of government takings. Whether or not compensation for takings will be just and reasonable remains to be answered. t Associate Professor of Law, Temple University Beasley School of Law. The author would like to thank Professor Robert Reinstein, the Dean of Temple University Beasley School of Law for his guidance, and Professor Jane Baron of Temple University Beasley School of Law for her suggestions and advice. Berkeley Business Law Journal

The transitional economies of Eastern Europe are in the long process of making the switch of a planned economy to a more capitalist economy. An important aspect of a capitalist economy, if not the most important aspect that characterizes the degree of capitalism, is the protection of private property rights. It is well documented that a weak protection of private property rights will lead to fewer investments, in particular in real estate, given the fact that real estate is very illiquid. On the other hand investments in real estate are essential for the economic development of a country, given its importance as a capital good. Building on earlier research, the author will explore the success of privatization legislation in some Eastern European countries. Using data on real estate investment returns and variables proven to indicate protection of private property rights, the author examines the impact of the separate privatization legislation. Indeed, in a previous paper it was found that legal institutions are an important factor in explaining investment returns. Given the fact that different countries in Eastern Europe have passed different privatization laws, it is time to try to identify which one has been the most effective. In the previous study the following model was used: Returns = E(Institutional Variables). Although it is not claimed that institutional variables explain returns alone, it is expected that there is a significant relationship. From this analysis it will hopefully become possible to make a qualitative judgement on the future success of these transitional economies and to make suggestions for changes that some countries will need to make.

Keywords: civil procedural protection, court, violation of private property rights toland, civil procedure The article is devoted to the study of the historical and legal aspects of the judicial procedure for theprotection of property rights to land in Ukrainian legislation. The author investigates themain stages of legal protection of property legal rights to land, in each historical periodits own characteristics of the aforementioned procedure for the protection of the correspondingproperty right are determined. Considerable attention is paid to the issues ofthe peculiarities of legal regulation and judicial procedure for the protection of propertylegal rights to land. In this scientific article, the author pays considerable attention to thedevelopment of judicial protection of legal property rights to land in the historical periodof the emergence of the independent state of Ukraine (1917−1918 yy). The author of thearticle writes that during this period the legal right to land received significant development:the land plot could be inherited, the right to rent the land could also be inherited.The procedure for the judicial protection of the legal right to land had no legal peculiarities.The author describes that during the Soviet period of Ukraine's existence, there was no legal property right to land. Only the state could have legal property rights to land.This means that the courts did not protect the private property legal right to land. Onlywhen Ukraine became an independent state did a private property legal right to landemerge. During this historical period, a significant number of legal instruments for theprotection of proprietary legal rights to land appeared in the legislation of independentUkraine. The property legal right to land was protected by the court. It is the judicialprotection of the property legal right to land that is democratic and meets the Europeandemocratic standards for the protection of property rights. The modern features of thegenesis of legal protection of property legal rights to land, which are protected by thecourt in the civil procedure of Ukraine, have been investigated. The author has createdand described new stages in the development of civil procedural protection of legal propertyrights to land.

In the wake of increasingly widespread bioprospecting and commercial use of indigenous knowledge by enterprises and research institutions, a variety of international agreements such as Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) (1992), the CBD Bonn Guidelines, the Food and Agriculture Organization’s (FAO) International Treaty on Plant and Genetic Resources (2001), the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Draft Provisions on Traditional Cultural Expressions/Folklore and Traditional Knowledge (2004) have proposed certain formulas for the protection of traditional knowledge (TK) from misappropriation at the international level. But all these global frameworks lack of specific instruments of TK protection, and rather constitute a soft law. All their protective measures merely boil down to liability protection: prior informed consent, access and benefit sharing. There is still no operating binding international agreement that provides effective protective measures. The aim of the research is to propose an optimal tool of adequate protection of TK-holders and bioprospectors at the international level. The important finding of this dissertation is that private contractual arrangements constitute one of the major means to protect TK during bioprospecting process both on national and international levels. The research aims to assess the strength and weakness of using contracts for the protection of TK holders. Among the most significant advantages are the freedom of concluding a contract and its flexibility. Thus, the contract could be of a very flexible instrument, fitting the peculiarities of a particular transaction. On the other hand, the approach has some limitations, such as imbalance of bargaining powers between contracting parties. Indigenous communities are always a weaker side of the collaboration. The second essential finding of the research is to recognize property rights of indigenous people over TK and transfer it under licensing agreement. The ownership ensures that indigenous peoples can engage with the state and third parties as active stakeholders rather than as passive beneficiaries, and thus increases the bargaining power of TK holders. The dissertation analyses two approaches here: applying existing property rights to TK or creating special ones. The conclusion is that existing IPRs, i.e. trade secret, are more likely to be accepted and applied in the international bioprospecting agreements. The research is supported by strong and diverse theoretical background: doctrine of countries, several modern economic theories of property. When pertaining to empirical analysis - a case study - several International Cooperative Biodiversity Group’s (ICBG) projects and concomitant contractual agreements are taken as an example of relatively integrated and successful scheme of collaboration between indigenous communities, research institutions and private entities. ICBG projects are characterized with high involvement of traditional knowledge holders or their legal representatives into contractual agreements as a rightful party. Prior informed consent and associated measures are a mandatory part of all ICBG projects. From ICBG case-study it was discovered that one of the ways to enhance the bargaining power of TK holders is to extend property rights over TK. In Peru-ICBG project the indigenous peoples’ traditional knowledge was transferred under know-how licensing agreement. Though contracts and IPRs are treated by legal researchers as independent instruments of TK protection belonging to different fields of law, one of the main findings of the present research that these tools are interconnected: one contributes to the resolution of the problem occurred with implementation of another. Without identifying indigenous peoples’ property rights, the contract is more biased in sense of TK-holders protection. The major contribution of the dissertation is to provide a practical guidance of effective mechanism of collaboration between TK-users and TK-providers, implementing an optimal model of TK licensing agreement that protects the interests of bioprospectors and, more importantly, of indigenous communities. The proposed model is aimed to result in a greater balance of bargaining powers.