ISSUES OF DETERMINATION OF THE LEGAL STATUS OF TRADEMARKS
Keywords:
trademark, exclusive rights, domain name, pledge, Singapore treaty.Abstract
The legal status of trademarks comes into attention in the sphere of the production of goods as a means of individualization. The legal status of a trademark owner is also particularly important in order to determine the status of a trademark. It is the owner of the trademark, who determines the fate of the trademark. In other cases, such as civil contractual relations, or the use of trademarks by way of unfair competition, the legal status of a trademark becomes a unique subject of regulation. A trademark, as a means of individualization, determines the belonging of a specific type of product to a particular owner. However, the current laws regulating the use of trademarks do not specifically define issues of its status. It is worth pointing that some norms of the laws contradict each other. Additionally, it is impossible to apply a legal analogy while determining the procedure for the use of trademarks in contractual relations. This article is aimed to analyze relevant provisions of the legislative acts regulating the issues of determination of the legal status of trademarks followed by providing suggestions on the improvement and unification of the current legislation.
References
1. Wu W. The balances of two trademark rights: generation systems in Japan’s Trademark Laws. J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L., 2017, vol. 17, p. i.
2. Anuchkina A.D., Belokopytova N.Ju., Petrov V.D. Tovarnyj znak kak ob’ekt pravovoj ohrany [Trademark as an object of legal protection]. Innovation and science, 2016, no. 4 (53), p. 130.
3. Nwabueze C. Challenges of transnational trademark law practice: The Case of Nigerian companies’ brands in OAPI States. Revue générale de droit – General Review of Law, 2015, vol. 45, no. 1, pp. 321-347.
4. Bagdasaryan A.A. Mezhdunarodno-pravovye aspekty okhrany sredstv individualizatsii [International legal aspects of the protection of means of individualization]. Law and practice, 2011, no. 1. Available at: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/mezhdunarodno-pravove-aspekty-ohrany-sredstv-individualizatsii/ (accessed 13.04.2022).
5. Gavrilov E.P., Yeremenko V.I. Kommentariy k chasti chetvertoy Grazhdanskogo kodeksa Rossiyskoy Federatsii [Commentary on Part Four of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation]. 2009, p. 554.
6. Paksimadi Ye.E. Vozmozhnost’ priznaniya oboznacheniya obshcheizvestnym kak osnovaniye dlya dosrochnogo prekrashcheniya okhrany tovarnogo znaka [The possibility of recognizing the designation as well-known as a basis for early termination of trademark protection]. Bulletin of the University named after O.E. Kutafin, 2017, no. 6 (34). Available at: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/vozmozhnost-priznaniya-oboznacheniya-obscheizvestnym-kak-osnovanie-dlya-dosrochnogo-prekrascheniya-ohrany-tovarnogo-znaka/ (accessed 13.04.2022).
7. Buklova A.V. Osobennosti rassmotreniya sudom po intellektual’nym pravam del o dosrochnom prekrashchenii pravovoy okhrany tovarnogo znaka vsledstviye yego neispol’zovaniya [Features of consideration by the intellectual property court of cases on early termination of the legal protection of a trademark due to its non-use]. Issues of Russian Justice, 2022, no. 17. Available at: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/osobennosti-rassmotreniya-sudom-po-intellektualnym-pravam-del-o-dosrochnom-prekraschenii-pravovoy-ohrany-tovarnogo-znaka-vsledstvie/ (accessed 13.04.2022).
8. Butenko S.V. Vvedeniye potrebitelya v zabluzhdeniye kak absolyutnoye osnovaniye dlya otkaza v predostavlenii pravovoy okhrany tovarnomu znaku [Misleading the consumer as an absolute ground for refusing to grant legal protection to a trademark]. PhD thesis. 12.00.03. Moscow, 2014.
9. Mazayev D.V. Grazhdansko-pravovaya zashchita prav na tovarnye znaki [Civil law protection of rights to trademarks]. PhD thesis. 12.00.03. Moscow, 2011, p. 93.
10. WIPO administrative treaties. Available at: https://wipolex.wipo.int/ru/treaties/ShowResults?search_what=C&treaty_id=30/.
11. Imomov N.F. Intellektual mulk huquqining yangi obyektlari [New objects of intellectual property law].Tashkent, TSIL Publ., 2011, p.141.
12. Gazarova V.S. Osobennosti dosrochnogo prekrashcheniya okhrany tovarnogo znaka [Peculiarities of early termination of trademark protection]. Bulletin of the Magistracy, 2014, no. 9 (36). Available at: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/osobennosti-dosrochnogo-prekrascheniya-ohrany-tovarnogo-znaka/ (accessed 13.04.2022).
13. Kononenko R.O. Kollektivnyy tovarnyy znak: osobennosti pravovogo rezhima i rasporyazheniya pravom na nego [Collective trademark: features of the legal regime and disposal of the right to it]. Society and Law, 2011, no. 1 (33). Available at: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/kollektivnyy-tovarnyy-znak-osobennosti-pravovogo-rezhima-i-rasporyazheniya-pravom-na-nego/ (accessed 13.04.2022).
14. Epstein E.J. The evolution of China’s general principles of civil law. Am. J. Comp. L., 1986, vol. 34, p .705.
15. Babakulov Z.K. Tovar belgisidan foydalanishda fuqarolik-huquqiy javobgarlik masalalari [Issues of civil-legal responsibility in the use of the trademark]. Lawer herald, 2021, vol. 2, iss. 1,
pp. 32-39. DOI: 10.26739/2181-9416-2021-2-3/.
16. Babakulov Z. Teoreticheskiye i prakticheskiye aspekty zaloga isklyuchitel’nykh prav (na primere tovarnogo znaka) [Theoretical and practical aspects of the pledge of exclusive rights (by the example of a trademark)]. Review of law sciences, vol. 5, no. spec. iss., 2020, pp. 68-80.
DOI: 10.24412/2181-919X-2020-68-80/.
