Unfair competition and the legal protection of the unregistered scent marks in UAE: a comparative study

The article examines the legal nature of unfair competition, regulations governing competition, methods of protection of economic entities in commodity markets, as well as the application of sanctions for violations of Ukrainian legislation on economic competition. According to the Law of Ukraine "On Protection against Unfair Competition", unfair competition is any action in competition that contradicts the rules, trade and other fair practices in business. Unfair competition includes the misuse of an entity’s business reputation, the creation of barriers to the entity’s competition and the achievement of undue competitive advantages, the unlawful collection, disclosure and use of trade secrets. The main methods of unfair competition include economic espionage, counterfeiting of competitors, bribery and blackmail, misleading consumers, fraud with business reporting, currency fraud, concealment of defects and more. The article considers the concept of fair and unfair competition from the point of view of different scientists. There are different approaches to the concept of "unfair competition" in the scientific doctrine, for example, the scientist N. Saniakhmetov notes that "unfair competition is a violation of rules of conduct that have developed, are widely used in business and are recognized by entrepreneurs as mandatory business rules that harm relations of fair competition and freedom of entrepreneurial activity ". According to O. Bezukh, "unfair competition arises as a result of illegal use of other people's intellectual products for commercial purposes, business reputation, other achievements of enterprises, goods or activities of a competitor, misleading consumers about competitors and gaining illegal advantages in competition." The general definition of unfair competition is contained in the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property, so according to this document, unfair competition is any act of competition that is contrary to fair practice in industrial and commercial matters. The article analyzes the mechanisms of combating unfair competition, highlights the administrative and judicial methods of combating unfair competition. It turned out that the body that deals with the fight against unfair competition is the Antimonopoly Committee. The article analyzes judicial practice in recent years. The provisions of foreign legislation on combating unfair competition have also been studied.

Abstract: This study aims to determine how the legal protection of business actors in monopolistic practices and unfair competition through electronic transactions. The type of research used in this research is normative research which includes legal principles, legal systematics, legal history, and comparative law. The approach used in this research is the Legislative Approach The data analysis technique used in this research is the deductive method. The results of this study indicate that unhealthy business protection has an impact on business actors where the absence of regulations governing the setting of low prices is currently lacking. In addition, marketplace business actors have mushroomed by selling the same goods as those in the marketplace. So that sales through the marketplace have dominated offline retail business actors. The form of legal protection for activities carried out by the marketplace has been regulated by legislation on information and electronic transactions and unfair business competition practices but does not regulate in detail the existence of legal protection itself. Therefore, the role of government officials, both as policymakers and as supervisors and regulatory apparatus for a legal product, must make laws and regulations that can later become social engineering for all Indonesian people.Keywords: Protection; Competition; Monopoly.

The focus of this study is the efforts made by the law to protect micro, small, and medium enterprises (MSMEs) from unfair competition. This law is regulated through Law No. 5 of 1999. Activities prohibited in business competition are the topic of this study. This study investigates the impact of unfair business competition on MSME actors, which makes the KPPU necessary to supervise business competition. The results of the study indicate that legal protection for MSMEs against unfair business competition practices is very important because these practices can affect the growth and desires of MSMEs. This finding provides insight for the government, business actors, and legal experts. The government can establish stricter laws to supervise business competition. To avoid unfair business practic

Streszczenie dostępne wyłącznie w języku angielskim: This article focuses on issues concerning legal protection of marks – features identifying goods and services in commercial trade. Adopting another partyis mark without their consent or using a similar one may result in infringment of fair competition rules. Hence, the present paper deals with the issue of the protection of marks regulated in article 10 of the law on unfair competition.

Until the year 2000, there was no specific statute enacted in Jordan that regulates unfair competition.In the year 2000, the Jordanian Unfair Competition Law No. 15 of 2000 was enacted.The Law deals with the issue of unfair competition in a very generic way.In addition to the Jordanian Unfair Competition Law, the principal statutory source of protection is implemented through the general rules and principles of civil law, particularly, tort law and injurious acts.Although the Jordanian Unfair Competition Law purports to implement a general legal regime on unfair competition, it includes very little in terms of substantive or procedural protection of unfair competition.Presently, the Jordanian legal system provides only very limited protection which is not adequate to accommodate unfair competition cases.Therefore, statutory changes are needed. INTRODUCTIONLittle is known about Arab and Islamic law, including Jordanian law.It is rather a realistic approach that businessmen should know about unfair competition law of other countries and that they know about effectiveness, fairness, speed and cost of judicial procedures abroad (Carroll 2001).As far as the author is aware, the issue of unfair competition in Arab countries, including Jordan, has not been researched before from technical and legal standpoints since unfair competition is a newly developed area.This Article represents a first attempt to examine the issues arising in this difficult and important subject.Therefore, this article will examine the suitability of the Jordanian legal system in providing sufficient protection of unfair competition.The article concludes that there are serious obstacles in terms of substantive and procedural protection of unfair competition in Jordan and provides some recommendations in this regard.In order to examine this issue, this article is divided into two sections.First, the scope of application of unfair competition under the Jordanian law.Second, the legal Protection of unfair competition in Jordan.Finally, the conclusion of the article will relate the finding to each other in a coherent way and suggests practical solutions to some pitfalls of the current law.Merchants are indoctrinated for competition which is essential and perhaps inevitable in all commercial fields in order to attract customers.However, it has been argued that although every competitor who wins customers from another justifiably damages the business of the losing competitor, that damage is merely damnum absque injuria.(Knight 1978) In other words, the justified diminution, injury, even

With aims of protecting trade mark proprietors against commercial practices of third parties that could hinder the use of the trade mark in informing and attracting customers, negatively influence its selling power, or exploit its attractive force, the EU legislator and the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) have broadened the protection afforded under trade mark law to cover such acts. At the same time, the CJEU has sought appropriate balance between the exclusive rights of trade mark proprietors and the interests of third parties, in allowing those practices that can be deemed acceptable as part of fair competition. The author argues that, in consequence, EU trade mark law is becoming ever more an EU law of unfair competition with regard to practices that involve the use of trade marks. The article represents an attempt to explain these developments by looking at specific policy choices and decisions of the CJEU on the protection of trade marks, alongside the wider context of EU law dealing with unfair competition. A key conclusion is that, in light of the lack of harmonisation of unfair competition law in the EU (at least pertaining to practices that affect businesses), the widening of the scope of protection under trade mark law helps to ensure the necessary degree of harmonisation while avoiding a parallel system of protection. When compared to pre-existing EU instruments of unfair competition law that prohibit certain uses of trade marks, this approach provides trade mark proprietors with a more efficient mechanism for enforcing their rights. In the course of elucidating this finding, the article gives the reader an understanding of how EU law addresses the protection of the commercial value of trade marks.

The article identifies the nature and forms of unfair competition in the form of misuse of business reputation of the entity, its consequences for the original company, outlines areas of comprehensive counteraction to such violations, reveals their content, mechanisms of protection of infringed intellectual property rights from unfair competition by the bodies of the Antimonopoly Committee of Ukraine are considered. It is analyzed that a significant part of violations in the form of unfair competition occurs in the field of intellectual property. However, intellectual property is often the subject of illegal actions by third parties and therefore needs legal protection. The results of intellectual activity can be protected through various options for the protection of intellectual property rights. For example, appropriate measures may be taken to prohibit the illegal use of intellectual property through legislation to protect against unfair competition. Unfair competition and intellectual property law are interrelated institutions, as they have one legal nature - the Paris Convention of 1883. This international act established provisions on protection against unfair conferences in terms of protection and protection of unregistered designations. Responding to manifestations of unfair competition is one of the priority tasks for the Antimonopoly Committee of Ukraine. The study concluded that the illegal use of intellectual property is usually related to the actions of the entity that could cause confusion about a competitor, its products or activities. Such confusion may result from the violation of exclusive rights to intellectual property and the means of individualization, which may qualify as unfair competition. Within the framework of the article, an analysis of cases on the practice of application by the Antimonopoly Committee of Ukraine of the legislation on protection against unfair competition in recent years was carried out.

Unfair competition and the legal protection of the unregistered scent marks in UAE: a comparative study

Monopolistic practices and unfair competition are significant issues in the global economy. Indonesia and Malaysia have legal frameworks that aim to maintain fair competition and prohibit monopolistic practices. This article compares Indonesian and Malaysian laws prohibiting monopolistic practices and unfair business competition by examining the legal basis, supervision, enforcement mechanisms, and protection of consumers and businesses. Although both countries have similar objectives in protecting market competition, there are differences in the approach to law enforcement, merger and acquisition regulations, and philosophy in competition regulation. The results show that Indonesia focuses more on protecting consumers and small businesses, while Malaysia tends to pay more attention to overall market efficiency.

This article summarizes the current status of protection against unfair competition in 19 Member States of the African Regional Intellectual Property Organization (ARIPO) as well as South Africa. Since several study countries are Member States to at least one Regional Economic Community (RECs) or customs union, which have introduced regional or sub-regional competition regimes to advance regional integration in this area, the relevant RECs and customs unions are also briefly analysed. This is followed by some reflections on the impact of the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) and the AfCFTA’s recently adopted Phase II protocols on Intellectual Property Rights and Competition Policy. The article then examines the different approaches adopted in the study countries to fulfil the obligation to ensure effective protection against unfair competition, as stipulated in Article 10bis(1) of the Paris Convention (PC), and investigates how the concept of ‘honest practices in industrial or commercial matters’ (Article 10bis(2) PC) is interpreted and applied. The article also explores how study countries have implemented the examples of prohibited acts of unfair competition contained in Article 10bis(3) PC, and addresses the question whether additional acts fall within the scope of protection against unfair competition in the study countries. The findings here are presented in such a way that observations from several countries are typically clustered together to exemplify general approaches and categories. The article observes that while countries in the region typically provide some form of legal protection to safeguard fair play in the business sector, study countries represent a variety of legal systems (civil law, common law, a combination of civil law and common law and/or religious law). This influences the way of how they address unfair competition.

BRICS is one of the most significant geopolitical events of the early XXI century. It plays a significant and ever-growing role in world politics and international relations. BRICS member countries have decided to use conjoint approaches to solve the most important problems in the development of medium-sized enterprises and competition policy. For this reason this article is devoted to the questions relevant to the notions“unfair competition,”“competition” and its correlation, distinguish with the contiguous notions. In the literature are deduced the different characteristics of unfair competition such as acts aiming to obtain advantages through entrepreneurial activity, incursion and potential losses for entities — (competitors), arising as a result of said acts. It is set out special features of the legal regulation the competition and the struggle against unfair competition by the laws of the Russian Federation. For instance, it includes some provisions common for both institutions of protection against unfair competition and protection against monopoly activity. It also describes different patterns of the competition law, for example, American and European, which are traditionally distinguished in the scientific legal literature. Russian lawmakers on the whole have adopted the European system of antitrust regulation (the restriction and control of monopoly activity). However, the Russian legal regulatory system against unfair competition has its specific features. In particular, it is based on the plurality of resources that have different legal validity and are linked to different branches of law. Moreover, this article is considered the problems of protection against acts of unfair competition are widely covered in the legal practice, classification of legal protection forms (factual and juridical, jurisdictional and not jurisdictional, public and private, etc.).

Key words: intellectual property, unfair competition, means of individualization, valuation,squatter, losses, digital transformation, artificial intelligence The article examines the economic, legal and institutional aspects of combating unfair registration and useof means of individualization (trademarks, brand names, geographical indications,domain names) in the context of digital transformation. The formation of theoreticaland methodological and methodological foundations for the protection of the rights oftheir owners, improving the efficiency of experts of intellectual property agencies, lawenforcement agencies, tools for digital search and use of artificial intelligence (AI) toensure the effectiveness of the institution of individualization. The economic and legalaspects of foreign (in the jurisdictions of China, USA, EU) and domestic legislativeand law enforcement practices to combat the phenomenon of unfair registration anduse of personalization, digital search tools and the use of AI are analyzed. It is shownthat over the next five years, 30 to 50% of product searches will be by voice ratherthan text, so the impact of AI on the way a product is purchased will have significanteconomic and legal implications for individualization legislation. The means of counteractingunscrupulous applicants in the USA have been studied. The U.S. Patentand Trademark Office (USPTO) has developed rules under which foreign applicantsand trademark owners must be represented by a U.S. licensed attorney when filingtrademark applications with the USPTO. Emphasis is placed on the introduction oflegislative liability of e-commerce platforms for counterfeit goods. The analysis of thelast changes in the legislation of Ukraine on protection of trade marks is carried out.It is shown that the new rules change the approaches to registration and protection oftrademarks, create the possibility of their fair use. Digitalization, transition to e-documentcirculation in the Customs Register, improvement of the procedure for destructionof counterfeit goods are important anti-corruption steps in the activities ofUkrainian customs in the context of digital transformation of the economy.

In this paper, the author analyzes the legal framework for the regulation of company protection as an important distinguishing feature of companies in Croatian company law, especially in the light of the first amendment to the Companies Act from 2022. With regard to the key principle of exclusivity in company protection, all modalities of unauthorized use are considered other companies, both according to the afore- mentioned law and according to special regulations. Thus, the modalities of prote- cting the company according to the regulations on companies and the court register were specially processed, with a note that a company can be protected in Croatian law also according to the regulations on unfair competition (unfair trading) and in- dustrial property (protection of trade marks and other distinguishing marks). The paper specifically pointed out the novelties in the Croatian Companies Act regarding the inclusion of the names of international organizations and countries in the name of a company.

This paper argues that the 1929 General Inter-American Convention for Trade Mark and Commercial Protection (Pan-American Convention) should be remembered, and will explain why it has instead been forgotten. This paper recounts the history of the Convention and shows how that history fits into the development of a practice in the U.S. of requiring implementing legislation in order for treaty provisions to become directly operative. I will rely on foreign caselaw to show how the Convention has not been forgotten in member states (Colombia, Cuba, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay and Peru) and therefore has played a very different role abroad. And finally, I will demonstrate how the Convention makes at least two important contributions to international trademark law. First, it provides a novel approach to the protection of well-known marks by limiting their availability in cases where the mark was known to have been previously used in the region. Second, the Convention goes well beyond the Paris to provide a detailed set of protections against unfair competition. Given these substantive provisions, the fact that the Convention is still in force in the U.S., and that is self-executing, it is a wonder that there are so few U.S. cases that invoke this Convention.

This paper argues that the 1929 General Inter-American Convention for Trade Mark and Commercial Protection ("Pan-American Convention") should be remembered, and will explain why it has instead been forgotten. This paper recounts the history of the Convention and shows how that history fits into the development of a practice in the U.S. of requiring implementing legislation in order for treaty provisions to become directly operative. I will rely on foreign caselaw to show how the Convention has not been forgotten in member states (Colombia, Cuba, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay and Peru) and therefore has played a very different role abroad. And finally, I will demonstrate how the Convention makes at least two important contributions to international trademark law. First, it provides a novel approach to the protection of well-known marks by limiting their availability in cases where the mark was known to have been previously used in the region. Second, the Convention goes well beyond the Paris to provide a detailed set of protections against unfair competition. Given these substantive provisions, the fact that the Convention is still in force in the U.S., and that is self-executing, it is a wonder that there are so few U.S. cases that invoke this Convention.