1.1. Понятие интеллектуальной собственности
In this article, the problem of Big Data is examined from the standpoint of civil law in the context of the question whether the existing mechanisms are sufficient for the purposes of civil regulation of Big Data or whether a qualitative review of the system of objects of civil objects, including intellectual property, is required. In the frame of civil discussion, it is proposed to consider Big Data in close connection with new knowledge formation, including on the basis of its analysis, for the purposes of using it in one’s own activity or selling it on the market and, as a result, to qualify Big Data as a special service based on Big Data technology. An emphasis on the “service” focuses attention on the “dynamics” of relations and the subject of regulations. Equally, the inclusion in the concept of indications of “information and analytical” nature and “Big Data technology” highlights the relevant specific features. Commenting on the characteristics of various objects of civil rights, the authors note the impossibility of extending the existing legal regimes to Big Data and suggest the expediency of recognising Big Data as a new non-traditional object of intellectual property. The proposed approach, according to the authors, allows to take into account not only the differentiation of objects of intellectual property in the broadest sense, but also their inherent unity, which is manifested in the granting of special — exclusive — rights to intangible objects being the results of the activity in question.
Results of a research of a legal regime of the intellectual property items created by spontaneous programs (artificial intelligence or robots) are presented in article. The author reasons a conclusion according to which it is necessary to recognize the results received by artificial intelligence as the protected intellectual property items on which there is no copyright; each such object has to have automatically assigned identification number allowing to determine, first, by what artificial intelligence he is created to establish, secondly, the developer of the spontaneous program having the exclusive right not only to this program, but also to the object created by it.
Introduction: efficient legal protection of intellectual outputs is essential for the dynamic development of modern society. The list of intellectual property objects is not intended to be exhaustive, separate outputs lose their relevance and become excluded from the list of protected objects, while new ones, on the contrary, are added to it. Purpose: this work aims to identify the tendencies regarding the extension of the range of intellectual property objects at the beginning of the 21st century, and to define the scientific and technological progress results that were granted protection under the influence of the Fourth Industrial Revolution and other factors. Methods: the method of formal logic, historical, comparative legal, systemic structural and formal dogmatic methods were used in course of the analysis. Results: international legal regulation does not provide clearly-defined guidelines to restrict the sphere of intellectual property. This factor undoubtedly contributes to expanding the list of its objects. At the beginning of the 21st century, law-based lists of copyrighted works did not include any new items. The institute of neighboring rights is most dynamically developing in the Law of the European Union. The Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market proposes recognizing two new neighboring rights. One of them is the right of the press publishers for online use of their publications by the news aggregators. The other neighboring right included into the draft Directive was the right to coverage of sporting events. However, in February, 2019, the provisions on this right were excluded from the Directive. In our opinion, biomedical cell products constitute new objects of civil circulation that require their own legal regulation as intellectual property constituents. Conclusions: intellectual property law cannot and should not undergo changes with the emergence of every new kind of objects. The contemporary challenge facing civil jurisprudence and the legislature is to formulate universal regulations that would make it possible to protect the rights of authors and developers of technological solutions even at the stage of experiments.