Эволюционная развилка регулирования права интеллектуальной собственности в ЕС и США
The article analyzes proposals for reform of intellectual property rights in EU and USA to reduce its violations in these countries and in the developing world.
The subject of this monograph is intellectual property law in Russia. This study focuses on legal mechanisms of protection of intellectual property rights since, in Russia, legislation is the main source of such rights. Though neither judicial practice nor theses propounded in legal literature are formally considered sources of intellectual property law in Russia, they at times seriously affect court rulings, and so much attention is paid to them in this study in dealing with key issues and points of dispute.
All references to legislation in this monograph are valid as of August 2014, but account is taken of amendments to Part Four of the Civil Code that are due to enter into force on 1 October 2014.
The author of article E.P.Gavrilov, professor of the chair of the civil law of the Higher school of economy, doctor of law answers to the questions of readers of the magazine, received in connection with his previously published article.
Foreign patenting faces a number of difficulties: necessity of preparation of a great number of demands, payment of great sums by the patent attorney in the form of patent fees. Work of patent departments is duplicated. Two international mechanisms facilitate these difficulties: Paris convention on protection of industrial property (1883) Patent cooperation treaty (1970). E.P.Gavrilov – doctor of sciences, professor, chair of the civil low of the state university Heigher school of economy the partisipant of the soviet delegation at this conference recollects this conference.
copyright, exclusive right, copyrighted works, successors of the author, the assignee
The purpose of this work is to study the problem of correlation between personal and property constituent elements of copyright within the framework of continental legal system. The work contains conclusions relating to the specific interrelations existing between the mentioned constituent elements of the mechanism of copyright and the extent of their compulsory nature both for lawmakers and for law enforcement officials.