Objects Of Intellectual Property Rights Research Articles

TO THE QUESTION ABOUT THE CONTENT OF THE CONCEPTS "INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY" AND "RIGHTS OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY"

The article is devoted to the content of the concepts «intellectual property» and «right of intellectual property» and to the issue of the possibility of using them as equivalent concepts. The author considersthe features of a broad understanding of the concept of intellectual property, in which it is revealed as a complex set of social relations arising at all levels of public life. With this approach intellectual relations are only one of the varieties of intellectual property relations, the totality of which is subject to legal regulation only in part.Taking into account the above, the difference between the meanings of the concepts «intellectual property» (in the sense of this concept as a social relation) and «intellectual property right» is reflected in the content of the structural elements of the relations that denote these concepts: 1) Subjects of intellectual property rights are determinedon the basis of compliance with certain legal requirements regarding legal personality, as well as the acquisition of subjective legal rights and obligations, which are provided to them by legal norms (by using their legal personality); the subjects of intellectual property become participants of social relations of different levels, including those, which are outside of the legal regulation. Such interactions may be related to realization of creative abilities of a person, mental activity, etc; 2) In the centre of understanding of the concept «object of intellectual property rights» is the content of intellectual property rights as a totality of personal non-property and property rights.The defining aspect of legal protection is the right to the created object of intellectual property rights. At the same time the object of intellectual property is a value in sociophilosophical sense that satisfies the social, cultural, mental and other needs and interests of people. In this sense the object by its nature is a good for man; 3) Social connections between the subjects of intellectual relations are revealed through corresponding rights and obligations of the participants of these relations; in the relations of intellectual property social relations manifest themselves as interaction between people in different spheres of social life, based on the corresponding social statusesand roles, in which individuals carry out creative activity, realize their mental and cultural needs, etc. Understanding the concept «intellectual property» as identical with the concept «intellectual property right» is based on a normative approach. This approach shows that the concept of «intellectual property» and «intellectual property right» are used in the legislation in the same sense and can denote both objects of intellectual property right and rights about such objects.

LEGISLATIVE NOVELS ON THE PROTECTION OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS UPON THE TRASPORTATION OF GOODS ACROSS THE CUSTOMS BORDER OF UKRAINE

The article reviews and analyzes the main legislative amendments of the Law of Ukraine «On Amendments to the Customs Code of Ukraine on the Protection of Intellectual Property Rights during the Movement of Goods across the Customs Border of Ukraine» №202-IX following the provisions of European standards. In particular, changes have been analyzed with the extension of the list of intellectual propertyrights, the promotion of which is carried out during the movement of goods across the customs border of Ukraine and the provisions on the non-application of measures to promote the protection of intellectual property rights for the movement across the customs border of Ukraine of original goods that were made with the consent of therights holder or goods made by a person duly authorized by the rights holder to produce a certain amount of goods over the stipulated and the right holder have been disclosed.The peculiarities of suspension of customs clearance and destruction of small consignments of goods transported (shipped) across the customs border of Ukraine in international postal and express shipments are investigated. In particular, it has been established that practically all persons who purchase goods for the online storeof another country fall within the scope of this legislation novel provided if the respective right holder has entered information about the object of intellectual property rights in the customs register of objects of intellectual property rights, and agreed to the procedure for the destruction of small consignments of goods. It is determinedthat small consignment of goods in the view of this novel means goods transported (shipped) across the customs border of Ukraine in one dispatch from one sender in international postal items, in one cargo by an express carrier in international express dispatches, in no more than three units for each product subcategory according to the Ukrainian Classifier of Goods for Foreign Economic Activity or total gross weight of not more than two kilograms. In the case of suspension of customs clearance of a small consignment of goods moving (shipped) across the customs border of Ukraine in international postal and express consignments, on suspicion of infringement of intellectual property rights, such goods may be destroyed if they fail to comply with theconditions established by law.

THE STATE AND PROBLEMS OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF TAXATION OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY OPERATIONS

The article summarizes from a scientific point of view the state and economic nature of changes in taxation of operations in the innovation intellectual economy with objects of intellectual property rights (IPR) taking into account the processes that are followed in the European Union (EU). The author considers in detail the content and classification of IPRs that are included into intangible assets.Emphasis is placed on conducting the operations with IPRs, linking with the implementation of the relevant state tax policy through the Tax Code of Ukraine, which regulates the relations arising in the field of tax and fees collection. The author systematically considers the dynamics of changes in the tax system of Ukraine in the direction of adjustment (increase or decrease) of the financial result before the taxation (profit or loss), determined in the financial statements of the enterprise on the difference in accordance with national provisions (standards) of accounting or international standards of financialreporting. The article considers the value added tax taxation of operations with IPRs under a license agreement when paying royalties as double taxation. Attention is paid to changing the tax base, taking into account the various constraints on the content and amount of costs that are defined in accounting system, with the disclosure of the generalization of approaches of different countries to the profit taxation of corporations. The author analyzes tax rates of separate taxes, expressed in absolute units, that are characterized by greater volatility, and researches the growth of hryvnia equivalents in hard currencies of tax rates due to the devaluation of hryvnia, which leads to a nominal increase in state budget revenues. Attention is drawn to the fact that there are not fully taken into account the specifics of tax regulators of creation, acquisition and use of IPRs and the transfer of technologies that require the harmonization of financial, tax and accounting legislation in Ukraine with the application of EU common approaches to taxation of profit by amending the legal acts regarding their realization.

FEATURES OF CRIMINAL AND LEGAL PROTECTION OF ECONOMIC AND OTHER INTERESTS OF SUBJECTS OF THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS ON UKRAINIAN LANDS UNDER THE CRIMINAL PROVISIONS OF 1903

The article analyzes the criminal law provisions of the Criminal Code of 1903, which provided the responsibility for encroachments on objects of intellectual property rights, and defined the peculiarities of criminal legal protection of economic and other interests of subjects of intellectual property rights in Ukrainian lands according to these criminal legal norms. The Criminal Code of 1903 was marked by a significant difference from the Criminal Code of 1845, expressed as a significant reduction in the number of criminal acts, the general humanization of criminal punishment, and in a more progressive approach to the design of criminal law. For example, in Art. 1, the principle of "nullum crimen sine lege" was directly affirmed for the first time, while in criminal laws of earlier times it was laid down but only proceeded from the general content of the articles. Analysis of the criminal law of the Criminal Code of 1903 provisions allowed to conclude that the criminal legal protection of objects of intellectual property rights was carried out at the expense of: 1) criminal law, which provided for liability for attacks on objects of copyright and patent law. In this case, the legal protection of copyright objects was closely linked to the censorship and, in fact, was inseparable from it; 2) the provisions establishing criminal liability for actions related to the disclosure of secrets; 3) provisions relating to the introduction of goods into the market and their circulation there, as well as the importation of goods into the territory of the Russian Empire, which provided for liability for the following acts: a) acts related to the illegal manufacture of works and their introduction into circulation, in including the illegal circulation of equipment that may be used for the illicit manufacture of works; b) acts related to the illicit sale or other distribution of works; c) other acts related to the illegal circulation of objects of intellectual property rights.

The Format of the Result of Intellectual Activity as an Emerging Object of Intellectual Rights

The article investigates the tendency of “formatization” of the results of intellectual activity that is also taking place in cross-border private law relations. On the basis of the analysis of foreign and Russian legal doctrines, jurisprudence and case law, the author comes to the conclusion about the independence of the format as a result of intellectual activity and about the possibility of using formats not only for audiovisual works, but also for some other categories of intellectual property regardless of protectability of the latter as objects of intellectual property rights. Taking into account the above, the author proposes a definition of the concept “format of the result of intellectual activity” that is generic in relation to the concept of “format of an audiovisual work”. The author substantiates the system of concepts included in the scope of the generic concept “format of the result of intellectual activity.” The conclusion is made that the concept of the format of the result of intellectual activity has a significant potential for development as an independent object of intellectual property.

Civil Law Regime of Genes as Objects of Civil Rights

At the present stage of the formation of the rule of law and developed civil society in the Russian Federation, the possibility of using and protecting genes, genomes and genomic technologies, mainly related to the sphere of private life, becomes particularly relevant. The world has already formed a scientific direction — gene editing. The practice of implementation of such developments is aimed at the implementation of genetic «improvement» of a person, his life and health. Society has existed for a long time in the era of genetic engineering. Currently, quite a large number of scientific studies are being conducted and many practical experiments are being implemented, both medical and socio-legal, aimed at involving genes and genetic structures in the framework of the legal field, in civil circulation.A particularly large number of questions and practical problems arise in determining the possibility of including genes and genomes as objects of legal relations and their definition as objects of civil rights.Debatable is the question of the turnover of genes, genomes, genetic structures and the possibility of making various civil transactions with them, the entry of subjects (participants) of genomic technologies in the binding and proprietary relationships with genes. The possibility of inclusion of genes and genomes in the objects of intellectual property rights and ensure their patent protection, the establishment of legal protective procedures is proved.There is an objective need to qualify and determine the legal nature of genes and genomes as objects of civil rights and the establishment of a special civil regime of genes, genomes and genetic structures. This special civil law regime of genes has a civil law nature. The author’s definition of a special civil-law regime of genes as objects of civil rights is proposed, the features and content of this regime are determined. The possibility of regulatory and legal regulation of genomic studies and the implementation of their results in medical practice is proved.

SOCIO-ECONOMIC AND OTHER FEATURES OF CRIMINALIZATION OF ENCROACHMENTS ON OBJECTS OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS

The article analyzes and proves the existence of public need for criminal law protection of objects of intellectual property rights. According to the special importance of intellectual property, which is based directly on its social value (significance) and is associated with the satisfaction of the mental, cultural, economic and other needs of society, it is proved that full and effective legal protection of the rights, freedoms and interests of the subjects of intellectual property rights is possibly solely through measures of criminal law influence. The fact that the economic and social value of intellectual property forms the intellectual capital of the country and society is extremely important. It needs state support, and in the absence of it - undergoes qualitative changes that cause the fall of all spheres of the economy, an increase in unemployment, backwardness of technologies etc. Thus, it has been established that the factors that predetermined the social necessity to criminalize encroachments on objects of intellectual property rights include the following: a) the economic and social value of intellectual property that forms the intellectual capital of the country and society; b) informational nature and ethical essence of intellectual property, allowing to consider it as one of the fundamental values ​​of society; c) the public danger of these encroachments; d) the criminal law provisions concerning violation of the right of intellectual property are a guarantee of protection of constitutional rights and interests of the person; e) international legal obligations of Ukraine affect the introduction of standards for the legal protection of intellectual property rights, including criminal law protection. Thus, the author concludes that the criminalization of encroachments on objects of intellectual property right is justified and meets the interests of society and the state.

Bibliometric Analysis of Dissertation Research on Intellectual Property Rights in Ukraine

Modern society is characterized by the widespread distribution of objects of intellectual property rights. The article analyzes the state of dissertation research on intellectual property issues which has been conducted in Ukraine since the time of proclamation of its independence and to the present days. The topicality of the study is due to the fact that the results of intellectual activity determine the strategy and tactics of socio-economic development of any country. The components of intellectual activity are the intellectual capital, embodied in the form of experience, knowledge, skills, qualification of a person. The growth of the role and importance of intellectual activity in the social relations of the society necessitates the solution of the main problem issues: the normative and legal support of intellectual activity; rational use of the results of intellectual activity; effective protection of objects of intellectual property rights, protecting the rights of subjects of intellectual property rights. Reliable guarantees of acquiring and protecting intellectual property rights are an integral part of the statehood of each civilized country. One of the sources of highlighting the study of any case is the provision of conclusions and recommendations for solving problem issues, dissertation researches. The article analyzes the quantitative distribution of dissertation research on intellectual property issues according to scientific specialties, scientific institutions, in which they were defended. It was found out that the proportion of dissertation research on intellectual property problems in legal sciences is 77 %, in economic sciences, respectively, 19 %, in other sciences - 4 %. Among legal sciences, 60 % of scientific theses have been defended on specialty 12.00.03; respectively, 19 % - on specialty 12.00.07; 6.8 % - on specialty 12.00.04; 5 % - on specialty 12.00.08; 3.6 % - on specialty 12.00.09; 2.2 % - on specialty 12.00.01; 1.8 % - on specialty 12.00.11; 0.4 % - on specialty 12.00.02; 0.4 % - on specialty 12.00.05; 0.4 % - on specialty 12.00.12. Among the dissertation research in the economic field of intellectual property rights, the work on specialty 08.00.04 was the most defended - 32.7 %; respectively, on specialty 08.00.01 - 21.8 %; on specialty 08.00.03 - 12.8 %; on specialty 08.00.02 - 7.3 %; on specialty 08.00.09 - 7.3 %; on specialty 08.01.01 - 5.5 %; on specialty 08.00.07 - 3.6 %; on specialty 08.00.08 - 3,6 %; on specialty 08.05.01 - 3.6 %; on specialty 21.04.01 - 1.8 %.

ПОНЯТТЯ ТА ОЗНАКИ АУДІОВІЗУАЛЬНОГО ТВОРУ ЯК ОБ’ЄКТА ПРАВА ІНТЕЛЕКТУАЛЬНОЇ ВЛАСНОСТІ

The article is devoted to the study of the legal nature of an audiovisual work as an independent object of copyright. The current legislation, international treaties and foreign experience in the field of audiovisual work protection are analyzed. The basic scientific approaches concerning determination of the legal framework of an audiovisual work are described and the basic characteristics of the latter are formulated. It is revealed that audiovisual work is the result of multi-stage collective creative work. The necessity of assigning an audiovisual work to the category of complex objects of intellectual property law is substantiated. Despite the fact that it covers a number of heterogeneous objects, the latter are united around the sole purpose – the creation of an independent work. Based on the analysis of the features of the collective form of creativity, the appropriateness of assigning an audiovisual work to the category of works that arise as a result of collective creation is concluded. As relations between the persons involved in its creation are regulated by the relevant laws and provisions of contracts concluded between them. In addition, their activities are subject to the sole purpose - the creation of an independent object of copyright. The unity of the leadership, in turn, is ensured by concentrating management activities in the hands of the director. It is noted that for determining the features of audiovisual works, it is necessary to take into account the complexity of its creation, conditioned by a wide range of subjects participating in such a process and the heterogeneous nature of its components. The expediency of separating two groups of features of an audiovisual work is substantiated – characteristics justified by its belonging to works as objects of copyright, as well as features relating to audiovisual work exclusively, and, thus, making it possible to distinguish the latter among other objects of intellectual property rights. It is emphasized that creative character and objective form of expression should be classified as the characteristics of the first type. By contrast, a second group includes the following features: 1) the presence of a series of fixed and interconnected frames (images), analog or discrete signals; 2) the presence of a visual effect of motion; 3) the use of appropriate technical means; 4) intended for visual and auditory perception; 5) the complex and collective character of the creation.

Legal Protection of TV Programs and Shows as the Objects of Intellectual Property Rights

The aim of the study. The article analyses the issues of legal protection of TV programs and shows as objects of intellectual property rights, and specifies the peculiarities of legal regulation of these objects and their place in the system of intellectual property rights. The rapid development of technology makes television and its products popular, which leads to the need to improve the legal protection of such an object of intellectual property rights as a television program (show). Methodology of the study. The main methodological principles in the research are general scientific and dedicated methods; in particular, the structural method is used in the classification and presentation of main material, its analysis and use. The research is also based on the comparative method, system approach and comparative analysis, which allowed understanding the peculiarities of the legislation of Ukraine and foreign countries, as well as to structure and consider the legal protection of television programs and shows. The scientific novelty is to determine the specifics of legal regulation of described above objects and their place in the system of intellectual property rights. Conclusions. Therefore, the need to define a TV program as one of the types of audiovisual works and to provide it with appropriate legal protection makes sense, considering the creative input in the process of its creation. The specified object of intellectual property rights proves to be rather complicated and requires qualification that will allow placing a particular television program or show to be in a definite group of objects of intellectual property rights and determine the features of its legal regulation and lawful use. Therefore, we believe that it is necessary to introduce in the legislation a more precise definition for the television broadcast in terms of the difference from other audiovisual works, for example, TV movies.

SOME ASPECTS IN CALCULATING THE AMOUNT OF DAMAGES FOR VIOLATION OF RELATED RIGHTS

The article discusses the methodology for calculating the amount of material damage that is inflicted on the owners of related rights to distribute television programs (television companies and individuals who have acquired exclusive and non-exclusive property rights to distribute television programs). The legislative framework for economic examinations in the field of intellectual property is analyzed. The main cases of calculating the amount of damages depending on the category of the owner of related rights to broadcast TV channels are given. The calculation of the amount of material damage for the violation of related property rights to broadcast television channels is carried out for the period proven, as part of investigative actions, the time of violation. Usually, economic expertise in the field of intellectual property is preceded by a number of technical examinations, which are carried out by experts in the field of telecommunications in order to confirm the fact of illegal broadcasting of TV channels. According to paragraph 26 of the National Standard № 4 «Evaluation of Intellectual Property Rights», the amount of damages for illegal use of an object of intellectual property rights is determined as of the valuation date using the valuation procedure for accumulating profit (income) that the subject of the intellectual property right did not receive and / or the licensee, as a result of the illegal use of the object of intellectual property rights and, based on the volume of production and / or sale of counterfeit products. Now, in the field of broadcasting, the main media groups enter into licensing agreements for broadcasting with legal entities that represent their interests and conclude sublicensing agreements on their own behalf. They are of two types – with the transfer of an exclusive license to distribute programs using DVB-C / MITPIC / MMDS / TELESELO / analog network, IPTV, OTT and DTH and a non-exclusive license to distribute programs using DVB-C / MITPIC / MMDS / TELESELO / analog network, IPTV, OTT and DTH. In the case of the transfer of exclusive property rights to calculate the amount of material damage, the author considers it expedient to obtain information from the investigation (by sending a corresponding petition) under similar sub-licensing agreements with other providers, which are “similar” to the so-called company-violator. Consequently, the amount of material damage caused to the owner of related property rights, as a result of an illegal broadcast, is calculated as an arithmetic average of the amounts of similar sublicensing contracts, that is, using the procedure of income accumulation. If a legal entity applies to law enforcement agencies that owns non-exclusive proprietary rights to distribute programs using DVB-C / MITPIC / MMDS / TELESELO / analog network, IPTV, OTT and DTH, then Art. 1108 of the Civil Code of Ukraine “A non-exclusive license does not exclude the possibility for the licensor to use an object of intellectual property rights in an area that is limited by this license and to issue licenses to others to use this object in this area” So, according to the author, a legal entity that owns non-exclusive property rights does not bear material damage. Key words: exclusive license, nonexclusive license, material damage.

FEATURES AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC COMPONENTS OF THE CONCEPTS “INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY” AND “RIGHT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY”

The article is devoted to the content of the concepts "intellectual property" and "right of intellectual property", as well as to the possibility to use them as equivalent concepts. The author considers the features of a broad understanding of the intellectual property concept, in which it is revealed as a complex set of social relations arising at all levels of public life. According to this approach intellectual relations are only one type of the varieties of intellectual property relations, the totality of which only occasionally acts as the subject of legal regulation. Taking into account the above facts, the difference between the meaning of the concepts "intellectual property" (in the sense of this concept as a social relation) and "intellectual property right" is reflected in the content of the structural elements of the relations that denote these concepts: 1) Subjects of intellectual property rights are determined on the basis of compliance with certain legal requirements regarding legal personality, as well as the acquisition of subjective legal rights and obligations, which are provided to them by legal norms (by using their legal personality); the subjects of intellectual property become participants of social relations of different levels, including those, which are outside the legal regulation. Such interactions may be related to realization of creative abilities of a person, mental activity, etc.; 2) In the centre of understanding of the concept "object of intellectual property rights" is the content of intellectual property rights as a totality of personal non-property and property rights. The defining aspect of legal protection is the right to the created object of intellectual property rights. At the same time the object of intellectual property is a value in socio-philosophical sense that satisfies the social, economic, cultural, mental and other needs and interests of people. In this sense, an object by its nature is a blessing for a person; 3) Social connections between the subjects of intellectual relations are revealed through corresponding rights and obligations of the participants of these relations; in the relations of intellectual property social relations manifest themselves as interaction between people in different spheres of social life, based on the corresponding social statuses and roles, in which individuals carry out creative activity, realize their mental and cultural needs, etc. Understanding the concept "intellectual property" as identical with the concept “intellectual property right” is based on a normative approach. This approach shows that the concepts of “intellectual property” and “intellectual property right” have the same sense in the legislation and can denote both objects of intellectual property right and rights to such objects.

THE LEVEL OF KNOWLEDGE INTENSITY OF THE COUNTRY’S ECONOMIC SYSTEM

The relevance of studying the issues of the knowledge intensity of economic systems has led to the conduct of these studies and determines their scientific and practical significance. The purpose of the study is a multidimensional analysis of the knowledge intensity of the domestic economic system, in particular, its creative potential, the activity of technological modernization of industry, and the creative initiative of economic actors. In the process of research, the EBRD methodology is used to evaluate the development of the knowledge economy, taking into account the specifics of the national organization of official statistical observations. In 2017, more than 1.8 thousand domestic enterprises (in the industrial sector – 1159 enterprises) created and used the latest technologies, innovation proposals, and other objects of intellectual property rights. The highest rates of creative activity were observed steadily among enterprises of information and communication sphere, financial and insurance directions, and also in the field of engineering. The leaders in the production and implementation of technological research and development (R&D) were processing industry, energy, engineering, professional scientific and advertising activities, non-technological – financial, insurance, information, telecommunication, processing enterprises. By types of economic activity, pharmaceutical companies, manufacturers of precise and extremely-precise equipment, chemical industry enterprises steadily occupied the leading positions in the field of creative activity. The analysis of regional dynamics shows the general tendency of reduction in the number of industrial enterprises that created, used or distributed creative developments. In general, during the period of research, the creative activity of enterprises decreased by almost a third, and downward processes are characteristic for almost all regions of Ukraine. In 2017, 2387 product innovations were introduced by the objects of industry, including innovative devices, equipment, machines, most of which were new for the relevant market. Today, there is a sufficient scientific and practical foundation for the development of creative clusters in hightech sectors. However, these processes are hampered over the lack of budget allocations. There is a tendency of increasing R&D financing by leading industrial enterprises, establishing the practice of their acquisition of hightech equipment and related technologies. In 2016–2017, there was a restructuring of investment flows, which manifested in reducing the costs of R&D intellectual components and reorientation of financial flows towards the acquisition of modern production equipment. In order to implement their own creative and innovative programs, in 2017, enterprises acquired 832 new technologies, most of which were completed with the corresponding equipment. By industrial enterprises, 59 creative technological developments were created and transferred to other entities. Total investments in updating domestic industrial enterprises amounted to more than 9.1 billion hryvnias in 2017. By types of economic activity, the leaders were the machinery and equipment industry and the food industry. Conclusions. Therefore, the significant creative potential of the domestic industry, further enhanced by active cooperation with scientific institutions, can become the basis for structural transformation and a source of scientific and technological “breakthrough” of our state.

Intellectual property in the defense sphere

The legislation of Ukraine, which defines the state policy in the sphere of defense, is considered in relation to the regulation of issues related to ensuring the realization of intellectual property rights in the process of improving the state defense capability. The necessity of the improvement of the legislation is clearly indicated in order to clearly identify all possible violations of these rights and ensure the inevitability of punishment for violations of intellectual property rights.Without theoretical substantiation of the principles of forming a state policy on ensuring the state's defense capability taking into account intellectual property issues that affect and will affect all spheres of the state's life, it is impossible to provide defense capability, which determines the relevance of this publication.In order to ensure the proper level of national security and defense of any state, it is necessary all central executive authorities should work continuously and systematically in peacetime.To ensure an adequate defense level of the state, these measures should aim at the creation and implementation of cutting-edge technologies in all areas, especially in the development of the objects of intellectual property rights. And this involves the creation and use of the objects of intellectual property rights. The effectiveness of this process mainly depends on targeted state policy on creating favorable conditions for the protection of intellectual property in the process of transforming the intellectual potential into a specific intellectual product, as well as ensuring equal conditions for the realization of their rights to all participants in the process and the inevitability of punishment for violation of intellectual property rights.In order for the realization of intellectual property rights in Ukraine in the defense sphere to be in line with best principles and proper international practice, it is worthwhile to draw attention to the following:legislative guarantee of protection of intellectual property rights;a clear definition of violations of these rights;the inevitability of punishment for violations of intellectual property rights.At the same time, analyzing the existing state of ensuring the realization of intellectual property rights in the defense sector of Ukraine, one can conclude that the current legislation is imperfect in these areas.

Особливості оперативно-розшукового запобігання контрабанді об’єктів права інтелектуальної власності

Особливості оперативно-розшукового запобігання контрабанді об’єктів права інтелектуальної власності

Митний контроль товарів, що містять об’єкти права інтелектуальної власності

У статті висвітлено суть митного контролю товарів, що містять об’єкти права інтелектуальної власності, стан відображення в національному законодавстві міжнародних норм із цього питання, а також вплив зазначеного на розвиток зовнішньої торгівлі України.

Legal Nature of Results of Scientific Activities

At present, social development as a whole is determined by the results of research activities. For this reason, it is important to identify the legal nature of the results of scientific activity. The aim of the article is to determine the boundaries of legal regulation of relations on creation and use of the results of scientific activity. The article analyzes the concept «the result of scientific activity» from the points of Russian legislation and civil law doctrine. The author discusses various options for improving legal regulation of civil law relations regarding the results of scientific activities from the standpoint of the correlation of such results with the protected object of intellectual property rights. These options range from expanding the circle of protected objects of intellectual property rights in the framework of the existing system to developing special absolute rights to the results of scientific activity. In some cases, the author refers to historical experience of the Russian law. It is concluded that identification of the legal nature of the results of scientific activity should be carried out with the combined application of all approaches de-scribed.

PECULIARITIES OF TRANSLATION OF THE TERMINOLOGY OF FORENSIC EXAMINATION OF THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS IN UKRAINE: THEORY AND PRACTICE ISSUES

The publication defines and scientifically substantiates the peculiarities of translation of the legal terminology of the English language in the field of intellectual property into Ukrainian and vice versa, taking into account the structural and semantic features of the respective terms. Methods and forms of applying the appropriate translation are summarized and systematized in the development and approval of the standards of terminology of the forensic examination of the objects of intellectual property rights. First of all, on the example of work of Subcommittee No. 5 “Examination of the Intellectual Property Objects” of the Technical Committee 192 “Forensic Examination” on the draft national document (National Income) State Standard of Ukraine 0000: 20XX “Forensic Examination of the Intellectual Property Rights Objects. Terms and Definitions” in 2018-2019. It is investigated the essence, content and genesis of the terms and terminology in the field of forensic examination of the intellectual property objects in the world, as well as the main methods and forms of their approval since their establishment in the first international conventions – in the Paris Convention for the Protection of the Industrial Property (1883) and in The Berne Convention for the Protection of the Literary and Artistic Works (1886) and before the formation in 1967 of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). The decisive mission of the WIPO in standardization of the terminology in the field of intellectual property is emphasized and its influence on the formation of the standards of terms and definitions of the forensic examination of the intellectual property objects in Ukraine. The peculiarities of the methodological approaches to the translation of the legal terms from English into Ukrainian and vice versa are revealed. It is emphasized that the translation of the terminology of the forensic examination on the intellectual property matters is even more complex than the translation of purely legal terminology: in it legal terms are intertwined with linguistic ones (spec. 13.1.1 and 13.6); engineering-computer (spec. 13.1.2, 13.8), engineering-technical, chemical, pharmacological (spec. 13.3, 13.4 and 13.8), agricultural and biological (spec. 13.5.1), economic (spec. 13.9), etc. It is noted that these terms are not exclusively legal, but are bordered by other, unrelated areas of knowledge. The conclusions of the study suggested the author’s translation of the main terms of the forensic examination of the intellectual property rights from one language to another and identified the features of their translation.

Subject of Know-How Transfer Agreement as a Type of Agreement in Technology Transfer Area

Problem setting. The article is devoted to: the analysis of the category of know-how as a form of commercial transfer and the object of intellectual property. The main source of economic development of the country and ensuring its competitiveness in the economy are the results of scientific and technical works, in particular, on an object such as know-how. In Ukraine, in the context of a market economy, entrepreneurs engage in a competitive struggle for the profitability of their business, which to a certain degree depends on the ability to dispose of the results of intellectual activity of a person to which the know-how has long been a part. However, despite the widespread use of know-how through the conclusion of an agreement on the transfer of rights in everyday life, the mechanism of its legal protection has not received the appropriate legislative consolidation, which greatly complicates the solution of problems that arise in everyday practice. Target of research. The purpose of the study is to analyze the category of know-how as an object of intellectual property, transfer of know-how as a form of technology transfer and directly disclosure of the features of the contract on the transfer of know-how as a contractual design in the classification of contracts in the field of technology transfer. Analysis of resent researches and publications. Know-how as an object of intellectual property was studied by such scholars as T. I. Begova, O. V. Dobrynin, A. A. Hakobyan, G. Yu. Stauppf. They were interested in the problem of technology transfer, including about the know-how agreement, Yu. E. Atamanova, O. M. Vinnik, O. M. Davydyuk, G. I. Zhits, Yu. M. Kapitsa, D. S. Makhnovsky , V. S. Milash, E. A. Novikov, B. M. Paduchak, O. S. Trofimchuk, N. M. Fonstein, A. A. Chobot, I. E. Yakubivsky. Article's main body. Today, know-how is a necessary intellectual property object, which thanks to an agreement on the transfer of rights as a regulator, which ensures the steady development of commercialization. Technology transfer and technology commercialization are different processes that can both exist separately from one another and be linked to each other if the technology transfer makes it possible for commercialization. Under this agreement, the object of a know-how must be distinguished - a specific, non-traditional object of intellectual property rights that has the characteristics of confidentiality, which makes it possible to distinguish it from well-known information, and the subject of an agreement on the transfer of know-how under which the communication of information is carried out, knowledge and experience and the right to use know-how. Conclusions and prospects for the development. The author came to the conclusion that the subject of the contract on the transfer of know-how as a type of contract in the field of technology transfer may be the main action that must be taken to achieve the purpose of the contract, which is reflected in the definition of this type of contract - transfer of the acquirer "access rights" to know- how for its further use and know-how as a combination of certain information, knowledge and experience that it belongs to and the necessary acquirer to achieve the purpose of the contract. According to the agreement under study, the author emphasizes that confidential information, scientific and technical knowledge and experience are transferred under the contract on the transfer of know-how and the right to use know-how is transferred.

LEGAL PROTECTION OF COMPUTER PROGRAMS AS OBJECTS OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS

The article examines the legal protection of computer programs as intellectual property rights. The analysis of theoretical and practical aspects of the existing system of protection of the computer program according to the rules of copyright is carried out and the possible ways of its improvement in accordance with the current conditions. As many scientists, in particular, Kirin R, S., Tarasenko L.L., Efremova T.F., emphasize the imperfection of the legal protection of this object of intellectual property rights, the possible ways of improving the legislative protection of computer programs in accordance with to the needs of today. We identify the strengths and weaknesses of the various legislative protection systems that are relevant today or those that could theoretically be applied to protecting computer programs. Particular attention has been paid to the emergence and development of the legal protection of computer programs in general since the 1960s. It has been revealed that from the very beginning, the legal protection industry has relied on various systems of protection, including copyright and patent law, and so on. In the future, with the development of intellectual property rights, in almost all states, a system for protecting computer programs as literary works has been adopted. However, in the current context, such legal protection is ineffective. And the more useful a computer program is, the more vulnerable it to copying. That is why the prevalence of unlicensed versions of computer programs is analyzed. So, about 85% of the population were found to be using, at least one, illegal copy of computer programs. The main reasons for this phenomenon are the perception of intellectual property rights as a free resource, as well as fragmented, imperfect action by the state to identify and eliminate this type of offense. Due to the urgency of the problem, the authors have proposed various options for protecting computer programs: in particular, the traditional protection of a computer program as a copyright object; protect your computer program by patent law. However, only if the program is part of a utility model or invention; protecting your computer program name as a trademark, etc. Keywords: computer program, copyright, patent, source code, object code.