Field Of Intellectual Property Law Research Articles

Comments of the GRUR Committee for Design Law on the Request for a Preliminary Ruling in Case C-211/24 – LEGO A/S v. Pozitív Energiaforrás Kft

Abstract The German Association for Intellectual Property Law (hereinafter the ‘GRUR Association’), established in 1891, is a recognized non-profit scientific association of members of all professional groups and organizations active in the field of intellectual property law; these are, in particular, academics, judges, civil servants, lawyers, patent attorneys and representatives of associations and companies. The GRUR Committee for Design Law (hereinafter the ‘GRUR Committee’) has been established to determine the positions of the GRUR Association and is made up of design law experts from academia, the judiciary, the legal profession and industry. No member of the GRUR Association or the GRUR Committee who participated in or was involved in the proceedings prior to the request for a preliminary ruling participated in the present comments. The same is true for any member who is a party or participant in the proceedings. Participation in comments is reserved exclusively to members of the GRUR Association.

PECULIARITIES OF A PUBLIC LICENSE AS A FORM OF DISPOSAL OF PROPERTY RIGHTS TO OBJECTS OF RELATED RIGHTS UNDER THE LEGISLATION OF UKRAINE

This scientific article is devoted to consideration of the features of a public license as a form of disposal of property rights to objects of related rights under the legislation of Ukraine. The examination is carried out by comparing the license and the license agreement, the license and the public license, the public license and the license agreement, as well as considering the features of the public license, taking into account the peculiarities of the legal nature of the objects of related rights, in particular, such an object as the program of the broadcasting organization. Why did it become necessary to investigate the public license as a form of disposal of property rights to objects of related rights precisely by comparing it with a license, a license agreement? This necessity is caused by the need for a correct understanding of the legal nature of this form of order, including how this form of order should be considered - as a unilateral deed or as a bilateral/multilateral deed? So, despite the fairly widespread position in the scientific literature that a public license, just like a license, is a unilateral transaction, we believe that a public license is a form of a license agreement, not a type of license and not a unilateral transaction, because from the analysis of the current legislation of our state (to which we refer in the content of the article), we can see the obligations arising from the licensee, including from the use of the granted object of intellectual property rights, including related rights, in a specified manner, within specified terms, with payment of a fee (if it is stipulated by the terms of the contract) for the use of the specified object. That is, the expression of will, which is characteristic in the case of a unilateral transaction for only one party, as a general rule, in the case of both a public license and a license, meets with the expression of will and obligations of the other party, the licensee. Why, in our opinion, did such an approach arise in the current legislation regarding the fact that a license can be considered as a unilateral transaction? We believe that this approach arose due to the complex nature of legal relations in the field of intellectual property law. Indeed, relations in the field of intellectual property law also contain a public-law element, but does this public-law element extend to relations that arise when concluding a public license as a form of disposal of property rights to objects of related rights? Unlikely, since by its legal nature these relations are private law and are built on the dispositive principles of civil law. Therefore, we believe that the license is an integral part of the license agreement. The license agreement essentially covers both the license and the public license. A public license is a form of license agreement. Why did such a form of license contract as a public license arise? This form arose in connection with the rapid development of information technologies and fully meets the needs of the times and the needs of owners of property rights to increase the turnover of their property rights. This form of license agreement is especially relevant for objects of related rights (performances, phonograms, videograms, broadcasting organization programs). A broadcast organization program is a special object of related rights for which a public license can be concluded. This feature is essentially due to the fact that this object, by its legal nature, depends on the transferred property rights to other objects of copyright and related rights that are part of it, and especially if the property rights to such objects were are also transferred for use, including under a license agreement. Among the tasks of this work, the following should be highlighted: to investigate the legal nature of a public license as a form of disposal of property rights to objects of related rights by comparison with a license, a license agreement, as well as analysis and research of the peculiarities of the legal nature of objects of related rights, in particular, the program of the organization broadcasting in connection with the peculiarities that may arise when concluding a public license for such objects. Such outstanding scientists as A. S. Shtefan, I. V. Kryvosheina, O. M. Starovit and others dealt with questions related to the topic presented in the article.

THE CONCEPT OF THE SYSTEM OF LEGAL PROTECTION OF OBJECTS WILDLIFE AS A RESULT OF INTELLECTUAL ACTIVITY

The problems of the legal regime of the results of creative activity related to wildlife and humans have acquired special scientific significance and practical value in many countries, including Russia and Kazakhstan. Therefore, research on the development of concepts for the adaptation of the intellectual property law system as a sub-branch of civil law, the definition of the legal regime of new wildlife objects resulting from intellectual activity, and their integration into the already existing legal system, have a strategic level of state tasks aimed at achieving a balance of public and private interests, especially in the field of biomedical technologies and genomic experiments that create very significant risks not only for the living humanity, but also for future generations. Taking into account the above, this article presents the results of a scientific analysis conducted in order to develop a theoretical concept for building a system of legal protection of wildlife objects as the results of intellectual activity and to make proposals for improving legislation in the field of intellectual property law. Based on the results of the study, it is proposed to modernize the system of law in the field of intellectual property in terms of objects of wildlife, including new objects in addition to existing breeding achievements, namely: strains of microorganisms, genetically modified organisms, biomedical cell products, genomes, and other results of intellectual activity created using human and animal biomaterials, including birds, fish and other representatives of fauna, and provide them with an independent legal regime. The revision of the last object "other results ..." allows you to leave the list of wildlife objects open in order, if necessary, to introduce another innovative object into the intellectual property system, providing it with an appropriate legal regime, without additional changes to the law.

The Concept of ‘Inventiveness of Machines’: How Ready is Patent Law to Afford the Creative Inventiveness of Artificial Intelligence?

Making science fiction a reality, Artificial Intelligence (AI) has become a transformative drive in almost every aspect of human life today. With the advancements of modern technology, AI has acquired the ability to think like humans and create inventions that are economically worthwhile. The concept of ‘inventiveness of machines’ has become a focal point in the field of intellectual property law at present. It has compelled the world to reconsider the parameters of patent law in terms of protecting AI inventors and inventions of AI. Simultaneously, the procurement of patents for inventions of AI has posed challenges not only in the legal field but also in ethical and moral aspects. As AI is gradually becoming an undeniable part of human life, every nation will have to adopt the developments of AI technology into their legal systems sooner or later. Taking the prevailing definitions of ‘inventor’ into account, this research mainly discusses whether machine inventors and human inventors be given equal protection of law or whether there should be different dimensions of protection. This paper also discusses the moral and ethical dilemma of granting legal recognition for AI inventors while examining the capability of existing legal framework including Sri Lanka in accommodating the inventiveness of machines. This research was carried out using mixed method approach. Literature review, qualitative and empirical research methodologies and comparative analysis were incorporated to strengthen the study. The paper concludes by highlighting the need of legislative intervention of competent authorities to reconsider the legal parameters to accommodate the possible challenges waiting to be imposed by inventiveness of machine in future. This paper also introduces the concept of ‘collaborative inventiveness of humans and AI’ and suggests recommendations to amend existing laws in a manner that they afford the technological advancements of modern times.

The Legal Regime of the AI Generated Results: Anthropocentrism vs. Transhumanism in the Field of Intellectual Property Law

Rapid development of technology suggests the advent of a new industrial revolution. Artificial intelligence technology is one of the driving forces of this process that has an increasing impact on socioeconomic relations, changing ideas about the limits of human capabilities in the field of information analysis and data processing. The role of artificial intelligence is not limited to information processing, since its functioning is also aimed at generating creative content. The academic literature indicates that the development of artificial intelligence technology will lead to «seismic» social and economic consequences. It will have a devastating impact on legislation, in particular in the field of intellectual property. The paper defends the thesis that the technological and transhumanistic revolution in intellectual property law has not taken place. The fundamental idea that only a human is the creator provides the basis of intellectual property rights. As a general rule, the results generated by artificial intelligence should remain in the public domain, since neither software developers using artificial intelligence technology nor its users have the right to privatize the intellectual and cultural heritage of human society. The arguments of the authors, who believe that the transfer of the results generated by artificial intelligence into the public domain deprives the developers of this technology of economic incentives are unconvincing. Artificial intelligence technologies have their own economic incentives that justify investments in this area. The new practice of generative artificial intelligence providers to assume the property risks of their users justifies this approach. It can be stated that conditions are emerging for establishing a general model of tort liability for violation by generative intelligence providers of the exclusive rights of authors and other copyright holders.

Consideration of intellectual property law in the context of European Union practice

The development of effective legislation on intellectual property in the context of shaping a digital society is an important issue for ensuring the stable development of innovation and protecting creators’ rights. The aim of the work is to analyse the constitutional and international principles of legislative regulation in the field of intellectual property law in the European Union to improve its legal regulation in Ukraine. The scientific basis was the application of the dialectical method as a way to delve deeper into the issues of intellectual property law, as well as the use of methods such as detailing and synthesis, abstraction, analysis and synthesis, and comparative legal method. The peculiarities of legislation on intellectual property in Ukraine and the European Union have been studied, revealing the lack of unified legal regulation of intellectual property issues. Experience confirms that institutional support is necessary for the field of intellectual property in Ukraine. To determine an effective state policy, it is necessary to develop and implement new terminology in the field of copyright protection. In the past, insufficient international cooperation has led to Ukrainian legislation not meeting modern requirements, especially in actively developing areas that require special terms and designations for the protection of intellectual work results. Based on the results of the conducted research, it has been established that the system of intellectual property protection in Ukraine is developing and requires constant improvement. The existence of violations of intellectual property rights indicates the need for the implementation of a programme to improve this system, as state protection of intellectual property is the main aspect of developing an innovative economy and increasing Ukraine’s competitiveness. In other words, due to significant gaps in legislation, manufacturers of innovative products will not rush to introduce them to the Ukrainian market, and high-tech start-ups are not protected from unfair copying of ideas. Also, based on the research results, gaps have been identified in the regulation of legal regimes for texts, music, and images generated by artificial intelligence. The research results can be useful for legislators working on improving legislation on intellectual property and for the development of strategies for managing intellectual property, which will contribute to increasing competitiveness and innovative development of business

Право интеллектуальной собственности на объекты трёхмерной печати

Introduction. In the legal sphere, the Russian state is faced with the task of modernizing civil legislation regulating relations related to the creation and use of three-dimensional printing technology, including the development of a legal regime for a three-dimensional model and a three-dimensional material object created on its basis. Purpose. The author aims to analyze existing problems of legal regulation of 3D printing in the field of intellectual property law and develop proposals and recommendations for solving them. Methodology. The general principles of scientific knowledge (comprehensiveness, systematicity, objectivity), the general philosophical method (dialectical), general scientific methods of knowledge (comparison, ascent from the abstract to the particular), general logical methods (analysis, synthesis, induction, deduction, generalization, classification, abstraction), special legal methods (formal legal, method of interpretation of legal norms, dogmatic). Results. Various aspects of the legal regime of 3D printing are analyzed, including the features of a 3D model and a material 3D object in relation to copyright, patent law and other intellectual rights. Recommendations for improving legislation in the field of intellectual property rights for three-dimensional printing objects are proposed. Conclusion. Improving the legal regulation of three-dimensional printing technology in our country is of great importance. It is necessary to develop a unified approach to the regulation of 3D printing in both copyright and patent law.

Problems and Legal Protection of Art Works in Non-Fungible Token (NTF) Practices

This article analyzes the Non-Fungible Token, abbreviated NFT, which is a digital certificate that can be used to verify who owns certain assets in the world of crypto art, where this certificate represents ownership of authentic works of art. Non-Fungible Token (NFT) as a digital asset as well as several legal issues that arise related to NFTs, especially in the field of intellectual property law including copyright protection and legal construction of copyright ownership of NFTs. This study uses a normative legal research method with a statutory approach. This study aims to find out how the legal problems in the practice of intellectual property development commercialization of non-fungible tokens (NFT) and how to protect works of art in the form of Indonesian non-fungible tokens (NFT). The results of this study indicate that although in Indonesia there are no specific regulations that explicitly regulate Non-Fungible Tokens (NFT), the rights of creators of works are generally protected by Law Number 28 of 2014 concerning Copyright, but from an intellectual point of view property development, NFT presents the potential for the development and commercialization of works through digital media that has a wide reach and provides more optimal monetization opportunities.

Systematization of Ukrainian Legislation in the Sphere of Intellectual Property

The article contains proposals for the systematization of Ukrainian legislation in the field of intellectual property law, in particular the provisions of agreements and other transactions regarding the results of intellectual and creative activity. The author argues for the separation of intellectual property law into a separate complex branch of law, due to the specificity of its legal nature. It is proposed to regulate legal relations in this area in the general basic law on intellectual property law and two special laws: on copyright and related rights and on industrial property law. This will contribute to a holistic perceptionof intellectual property law and an understanding of its specifics, which will allow for proper protection of the results of intellectual, creative activity and strengthen the protection of the rights and legitimate interests of the subjects. In the general law of intellectual property, it is proposed to state the main provisions, in particular, on objects of protection, legal subjects and the content of their rights, general provisions of the agreements in the field of intellectual property law, their types and characteristics, as well as provisions on the protection of intellectual property rights. It is also important to establish the provision that not all agreements in the field of intellectual property are aimed at the disposal of intellectual property rights, and to give examples of such agreements. It is also proposed to include in the new law on intellectual property, in addition to the agreements currently provided in Chapters 75–76 of the Civil Code of Ukraine, provisions on technology transferagreements. With regard to special legislation, in addition to the existing Law of Ukraine «On Copyright and Related Rights», it is proposed to create a separate law on industrial property law, in which to specify which objects are objects of industrial property law, to allocate separate sections for each object of industrial property law, the specifics of agreementsin the field of industrial property, as well as the section on the protection of rights and legitimate interests.

Peculiarities of concluding an agreement on the transfer of property rights to a software

The article reveals the peculiarities of concluding an agreement on the transfer of property rights to a software, the analysis of current legislation in the field of disposal of rights to the results of intellectual activity, as well as the formulation of conclusions and proposals aimed at improving civil legislation in the specified field. It is noted that in recent years a lot of research has been carried out on contracts in the field of intellectual property law. However, many issues remain debatable and unsettled in the legislation of Ukraine.
 The essence and content of the contract regarding the transfer (assignment) of the exclusive (property) right to the software has been analyzed and determined as a set of essential conditions duly agreed upon by the parties to the contract. The essential conditions of the contract regarding the transfer (assignment) of the exclusive (property) right to a software in accordance with the Civil Code of Ukraine and the special copyright legislation of Ukraine have been formulated. It is noted that the essential conditions of the contract regarding the transfer (assignment) of the exclusive (property) right to the software are 1) the subject of the contract; 2) the amount of property rights to the software transferred under the contract; 3) characteristic features of a software that allow it to be identified as such; 4) the form of the contract; 5) the amount and method of payment (remuneration) under the contract, or an indication of the gratuitous nature of the contract and 6) other essential conditions defined by the legislation of Ukraine.
 It is established that the subject of the contract on the transfer (assignment) of the exclusive (property) right to the software is actions aimed at the transfer (assignment) of the exclusive (property) rights to the software in whole or in part, which must be specified in the contract. In fact, under this contract, property (exclusive) rights to the software are transferred from the subject of copyright to the acquirer. The difference between the subject and the object of the contract regarding the transfer (assignment) of the exclusive (property) right to the software has been determined. The characteristic features of a software that allow it to be identified as such have been separately defined. The forms of objective expression of the software have been analyzed. Such a feature of the contract on the transfer of property rights to a software as the term has also been indicated. This is because property copyrights have an expiry date. Therefore, when concluding this contract, the validity period of property rights must be taken into account. If the parties have not agreed on the term of validity of the contract, then the term of validity of the contract cannot exceed the maximum term of validity of copyrights for a software.
 It is noted that the moment of transfer of property rights is difficult to clearly define and is usually associated with a certain legal fact. It is suggested to consider two factors. First, when a software is registered, the validity of the contract must be linked to the date of its registration, i.e. the property right to the software passes to the acquirer at the time of state registration of the contract. However, when the program is not registered, the exclusive right to it passes from the right holder to the assignee at the time of concluding the contract, unless otherwise established by the contract or law.
 It is argued that it is necessary to further amend the legislation in the field of intellectual property in order to unify the terminology used in the regulation of relations related to the transfer of property rights to an object of intellectual property.

Institutionalization of mediation for the settlement of disputes in the field of intellectual property laws

The proposed article is devoted to the study of the institution of mediation as an independent procedure for the settlement of disputes in the field of intellectual property law. The author notes that the rather rapid stage of the development of the information society, IT technologies, the emergence of new objects of civil rights, including objects of intellectual property rights, pose a number of tasks to the legislator that require their urgent solution, in particular, the task of proper legal regulation of social relations, which, already today, take place in the state and society in general. In addition, taking the integration course of Ukraine into the EU also sets before our state the conditions for improving the legal regulation of intellectual property in accordance with international legal norms, in particular, the improvement of those legal provisions of national legislation related to the resolution of disputes in the field of intellectual property law, which are increasingly happening in reality. Therefore, the legislator adopts a number of legal acts regarding the improvement of legal regulation of relations arising in the field of intellectual property law, an example of which is the adoption of the Law of Ukraine «On Mediation». After all, mediation occupies a special place among the conciliation procedures for the settlement of disputes among alternatives to court proceedings for the resolution of disputes related to violations of intellectual property rights.Based on the results of the research, the author comes to the conclusion that mediation in the field of intellectual property can be used in the following cases: – when settling disputes arising in connection with the use of objects intellectual property without the consent of the right holder (author, creator, inventor or the person who owns intellectual property rights in accordance with the contract or law); – disputes arising in the event of violations of intellectual property rights; – disputes arising during licensing and transfer of intellectual property rights property; – disputes arising in connection with the conclusion and performance of contracts in in the field of intellectual property, in particular, contracts on the disposition of property rights of intellectual property; – disputes arising from the use of intellectual property objects, which are transferred to third parties.

LIMITATIONS ON THE EXCLUSIVE RIGHTS OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHT HOLDERS (SOCIAL JUSTICE PERSPECTIVE)

Social justice is the goal of the Indonesian state, which must be realized in all fields so that welfare is realized for all Indonesian people which also radiates in the field of intellectual property law, bearing in mind that the initial regulation of intellectual property came from developed countries which are industrial countries which are different from Indonesia. Social justice is the fundamental norm as well as the goal of the state, which is used as a reference in the formation of intellectual property law rules. Thus, arrangements regarding the distribution of intellectual property rights must pay attention to the public interest. Based on such arguments, the regulation regarding restrictions on the exclusive rights of intellectual property rights holders is realized in the public interest. At the implementation level, setting the exclusive rights of older intellectual property law protected without prejudice to the protection of community (general) rights as a form of limiting these rights for the common good. Restrictions on the exclusive rights of the holder of intellectual property law as a form of social justice have been regulated in the Indonesian legal system, although there are still deficiencies.

L’influence normative de l’IA en droit de la propriété intellectuelle

Nous avons identifié trois points qui témoignent de l’influence normative de l’intelligence artificielle (IA) sur le droit de la propriété intellectuelle. Premièrement, l'application du droit de la propriété intellectuelle à l'IA va être conditionné par les normes éthiques et juridiques qui encadrent l'usage de l’IA. Deuxièmement, l’IA est une innovation délicate à intégrer dans le giron de la propriété intellectuelle car il s’agit d’une technologie évolutive. Son introduction dans le champ du droit de la propriété intellectuelle conduit inexorablement à transformer les grandes notions de ce droit, et en particulier les notions de création protégeable et de créateur protégé. Troisièmement, il ressort de ce qui précède que le droit de la propriété intellectuelle n'a pas encore été adapté à l'IA. En revanche, en dehors du droit de la propriété intellectuelle, plusieurs règles ont déjà été adoptées pour favoriser le développement de l’IA. Elles ont en particulier pour objet de rendre accessible les données nécessaires au fonctionnement de l'IA. Finalement, le droit de la propriété intellectuelle, tel qu’il existe aujourd’hui, ne semble pas être le régime choisi pour favoriser les technologies de l'IA.

Dispute resolution in the field of intellectual property law in Uzbekistan

This article discusses ongoing reforms in the field of intellectual property protection in Uzbekistan. In particular, the issues of administrative responsibility for violation of intellectual property rights, the process of judicial protection are covered. Opinions were also expressed on the procedure for resolving disputes in the field of intellectual property by administrative, civil and criminal courts. At the same time, based on the types of intellectual property objects (industrial property objects, means of individualization, copyright), the features of resolving conflict situations related to them are revealed. Based on the results of the article, the author concluded that it is necessary to specialize courts in resolving disputes in the field of intellectual property, expand the mechanisms of alternative ways of resolving disputes in the field of intellectual property, and improve the system of enforcement of judgments on intellectual property

Legal Protection of Song Creators whose Works Used Without Permission for Commercial Purposes in The Field of Intellectual Property Law

This research is intended to find out and fully understand the use of copyrighted works of songs from creators without permission for commercial purposes. The author also reviews the efforts that can be made by the state so that the copyrighted works of the composers are not used without permission for commercial purposes. The research method that the author uses is a normative research method by searching secondary data through library research. The results of the study indicate that the use of the author's copyrighted works without permission for commercial purposes is a form of crime in the field of intellectual property that creates sanctions under copyright law. to protect songwriters whose works are used without permission for commercial purposes, it is necessary to enforce strict laws through copyright laws, socialize the importance of copyright to the public and empower the National Collective Management Institute to request payment for all songs sung or played in the business. The last thing that needs to be carried out is very strict supervision of all shopping centers so that the goods that come into and are sold at the trade center are far from goods resulting from copyright crimes, song works, or pirated goods.

Проблемы развития интеллектуальной собственности и инноваций в России

The article substantiates the need for the development of intellectual property in Russia in the conditions of the global innovation economy and identifies the problems that hinder its development. The relevance of this article lies in the fact that the development of intellectual property and innovation is an important factor for achieving sustainable economic growth and improving the competitiveness of the country. In the modern information society, where knowledge and innovation play a key role, countries strive to create a favorable environment for the development of intellectual property and the promotion of innovation. The development of intellectual property and innovation should be one of the priorities of state policy. The purpose of the study is to propose measures for the development of intellectual property and innovation in Russia, based on world experience. To identify problems and identify areas for improving the policy of intellectual property management in terms of education, popularization, digitalization, finance. To achieve the research goal, several approaches are used. Analysis of the current legislation, since it is important to understand the laws and regulations concerning the protection of intellectual property, the promotion of innovation, technology transfer and international cooperation. Data collection and analysis. This allows you to evaluate the current state. Formulation of recommendations and proposals for improving measures aimed at the development of intellectual property and innovation in Russia. The article uses research methods, including analysis of literary sources, comparative analysis of practices and policies of other countries, analysis of legislation and economic data. The main problems faced by innovative companies in Russia were analyzed, including the lack of state support, insufficient funding, difficulties in obtaining patents and other forms of intellectual property. A critical analysis of the current measures used in Russia is presented separately, the reasons for low inventive activity are revealed. The necessary directions of development are also highlighted and recommendations are given. As a result of the study, the main measures that the state can take to support innovation and the development of intellectual property in Russia were identified. Among them are increased financing of innovative projects, simplification of procedures for obtaining patents and other forms of intellectual property, creation of special innovation support centers, etc. As further directions of research, the author suggests the study of specific practices of intellectual property development in other countries and their adaptation taking into account the conditions and capabilities of Russia. The practical significance of the work lies in the fact that its results can be used to develop new policies and measures to support innovation in Russia. Further research may be aimed at a deeper analysis of the problems related to intellectual property and innovation in Russia, as well as at studying the experience of other countries in this area. The recommendations proposed in the article can be used to develop new programs and measures to support innovation in Russia, as well as to conduct more in-depth research in this area. The article may be useful for specialists in the field of intellectual property law, scientists and business leaders, as well as for government agencies interested in the development of an innovative economy in Russia.

Общие положения об авторском праве в системе права интеллектуальной собственности в России и за рубежом

The author examines the intellectual property system and gives general theoretical overview of copyright, its status in the Russian law and from an international perspective. Intellectual property is an important asset for industrial, medical, information and nanotechnology enterprises, and a key (or even major) asset for creative companies such as film studios, art galleries, theaters, and animation studios. If in the first case we refer more to industrial property, the second case touches upon copyright. In order to effectively use, protect and defend such asset as products of creativity, we need to thoroughly understand its mechanisms. Purpose. The purpose of the study is to compile and systematize knowledge in the field of intellectual property law, in particular, concerning the place of copyright in the intellectual property system. The author intends to make an overview on copyright, considering all its aspects: exclusive rights, moral and “other” rights. Methodology. While conducting the present research, the authors used bothgeneral scientific and private law methods, such as: the comparative legal method, the method of interpreting legal norms, the formal legal method, the method of comprehensive analysis of legislation and the method of structural analysis. Results. Based on the results of the study, the author comes to the conclusion that copyright and related rights tend to be an important institution of intellectual property law, along with industrial property law. Comparing the copyright in Russia with similar institutions of foreign countries, the author reveals the tendency of “realification” of intellectual property in Anglo-American law, which is fundamentally opposite to the meaning that the Romano-Germanic legal family endows with this institution. In addition, the author reveals the concept of “other” rights, which exists only in Russia, and eligibility criteria for copyright protection in a comparative legal aspect. Conclusion. The study is of a practical and theoretical nature: the author, on the one hand, provides overview of copyright and related rights in the intellectual property system in Russian and foreign legislation, on the other hand, focuses on examples from legal practice that allows to use the information in practical activities. This study lays the groundwork for a more detailed consideration of “other” rights, in particular, the right to author's reward.

The high court for intellectual property as an element of the judicial system in Ukraine. CONTRA SENTENTIAM

Keywords: intellectual property law, Higher IP Court, judicial system, legal position,fact in issue
 Based on the analysis of the provisions of the Law of Ukraine «On Judicial System and Status of Judges», provisionsof procedural codes, as well as international practices, the author expresses doubts about the expediency of existence in the judicial system of Ukraine of a Higher Intellectual Property Court as a separate judicial institution. The identified proceduraland organizational flaws point to the untenability of the position that introducing such a specialized court into the judicial system would increase the effectiveness of intellectual property protection in Ukraine.There is every reason to assert that the Ukrainian state policy in the matter of the specialized court for this field tends towards ending up with something like a patent court. However, considering the qualification of the candidates for the domestic IPcourt and the first results of the competition, most likely Ukraine is going to end up with a High Court for Intellectual Property Matters composed of regular judges.In view of that, the decision to establish a specialized court for intellectual property matters as a separate element of the judicial system appears to be quite questionable, as it defeats the purpose of its creation. And this means, at the very least, budget wasted on the maintenance of an entire judicial institution.It is also absolutely unclear how the judges of the specialized court will be able to improve the quality of justice in the field of intellectual property law, as they will be effectively unable to bring law enforcement to a new level due to being burdened bythe already existing legal positions of the Supreme Court.The purpose of the article is to demonstrate the importance of the problems that are to be expected as a result of functioning of the Higher IP Court, and to propose an alternative way of ensuring the effectiveness of the protection of exclusive rights.

НОВАЦІЇ У ПОРЯДКУ УКЛАДЕННЯ ЦИВІЛЬНО-ПРАВОВОГО ДОГОВОРУ

The article is focused on defining procedure novations for concluding independent contractor agreements. The existence of two tendencies in the legal construction of the procedure for concluding an independent contractor agreement has been emphasized: unchanged architectonics of the procedure for concluding an acceptance and introducing novation elements into this system, which depend on the method of concluding and the purpose of the corresponding agreement. The general and special procedures for concluding independent contractor agreements have been characterized. General procedure – is when proposals set out in the offer coincide with the acceptance. Special procedure for concluding an independent contractor agreement is implemented in regard to public, defense procurement. The content of the stages of concluding an independent contractor agreement has been revealed, in particular the offer and acceptance. Specific features of concluding an independent contractor agreement with Diia-City residents have been researched. It has been emphasized that the conclusion of an independent contractor agreement in the digital environment forms a special legal regime of civil legal relations, which arise, are changed, are terminated in this environment. At the same time, the consumer receives a positive effect from the electronic agreement in the real, material world, and the product or service has the appropriate objective form. It has been proved that the institution of assurance can be applied in corporate, labor legal relations, relations in the field of intellectual property law, innovation law, foreign economic activity. It has been stated that this institution includes the following elements: 1) pre-contractual contacts of the parties (negotiations); 2) obtaining assurances and guarantees; 3) consideration of assurances and guarantees; 4) formation and provision of the offer; 5) consideration of the offer; 6) acceptance of the offer. It has been established that the procedure of concluding an independent contractor agreement for public, defense procurement is characterized by: the presence of an imperative element in the procedure of concluding an agreement; mandatory compliance with the procedure for concluding an agreement; lack of pre-contractual contacts of the parties: expanded public offer; planned procurement, i.e. the conclusion of a future agreement; narrowing the principle of contractual freedom. The lack of practice in applying the institution of assurance has been emphasized.

The system of subjects of intellectual property law in the conditions of the cyberspace formation

The article is devoted to identifying the system of subjects of intellectual property law in the conditions of the formation of cyberspace. The topic of the article covers the subject composition of intellectual property legal relations. The purpose of the article is to define the system of subjects of intellectual property law, taking into account the virtual and digital aspect.
 The research methodology consisted of a system of general scientific and special methods of scientific knowledge. The application of the dialectical method has made it possible to establish that digital law is developing as a complex institution that gravitates towards private law. Thanks to the use of the formal legal method, it has been stated that the author and co-authors have the right to create their own virtual identity in the digital environment, which can be the object of intellectual property legal relations, in particular copyright. Based on the application of methods of analysis and synthesis, it has been determined that modern subjects of intellectual property law are divided into primary, derivative and auxiliary.
 It has been proven that the development of cyberspace has a direct impact on the formation of new subjects of intellectual property law. The author in cyberspace has the right to: create their own virtual identity, which will be the object of intellectual property legal relations; to place their own results of creative, scientific, intellectual work. Derivative subjects of intellectual property rights are persons who acquire property rights to the already created, existing result of creative, intellectual, scientific work in a material and/or virtual environment. Auxiliary subjects of intellectual property law perform an auxiliary function regarding the implementation of state intellectual property policy, creation of an object of intellectual property law, registration of property rights to these objects, stimulation of creative activity, and more.
 The results of the article can be used in scientific works in the field of intellectual property law, as well as by lawyers when identifying the subject structure of intellectual property legal relations.
 It has been concluded that there is an actual problem of identification of the virtual author, the relationship of virtual identity with a real person, the place of digital law research in the legal system, in particular, it is proposed to determine it by the institute of intellectual property law.