ISSUES OF INCENTIVES FOR AUTHORS OF INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY OBJECTS
Keywords:
intellectual property, object of industrial property, author, invention, utility model, industrial design, application, exclusive right, public interest, privilege, personal and property rewardAbstract
This article scientifically analyzes ways to encourage authors of industrial property objects and also considers measures of personal and property incentives for authors. What is more important for the authors of an industrial property object: to disclose the invention to the public and obtain a patent, or to have a certain reputation and material interest? As a result of theoretical and practical studies of this issue, the author puts forward a number of scientific ideas and conclusions. Personal incentives, along with private incentives, can be great motivation for writers. Some countries and organizations provide personal incentives to authors of intellectual property in the form of prizes, awards, or scholarships. While the current legal system provides as a basis for encouraging authors, including academic degrees and titles, a document of legal protection received by authors of industrial property objects—a patent—the indicator in this regard does not fully meet modern requirements. Incentives for authors of industrial property are complex, and a balance must be struck between protecting the rights of authors and the public interest. At the same time, the opinions of theoretical scientists and experienced practitioners were analyzed.
References
1. Yillik hisobot [Annual report]. Available at: https://my.ima.uz/uploads/files/2021-yillik-hisobot-uz.pdf
2. Savina V.S. Perspektivnyye napravleniya razvitiya prava intellektual’noy sobstvennosti [Promising directions for the development of intellectual property law]. Copyright, 2018, no. 2, pp. 23–36.
3. Bliznes I.A. Voprosy intellektual’noy sobstvennosti [Intellectual property issues]. Moscow, 2004, 495 p.
4. Omarova Yu.A. Sredstva individualizatsii grazhdan [Means of individualization of citizens]. Aktual’nyye problemy rossiyskogo prava – Actual Problems of Russian Law, 2018, no. 6 (91), pp. 75–81. DOI: 10.17803/1994-1471.2018.91.6.075-081
5. Abil Abadín A. La moda como referente. La huella internacional de las marcas españoles de moda [Fashion as a reference. The international footprint of Spanish fashion brands]. 2017, pp. 10–11.
6. Ruiz Moreno M.F. The triangle of business success: Innovation, brand and exports. Alicante. Spanish Patent and Trademark Office, Association for the Defense of the Brand, 2016, 97 p.
7. Otero Lastres J.M., Fernandez-Novoa C., Botana Agra J. M. Manual of Industrial Property. 3rd ed. Madrid, Marcial Pons Publ., 2017, p. 781.
8. Long C. Patent signals. The University of Chicago Law Review, 2022, no. 69, pp. 625–679. DOI: 10.2307/1600501
9. Long J.S., Freese J. Regression models for categorical dependent variables using STATA. 2nd ed. College Station, Stata Press Publ., 2006.
10. Jensen K., Murray F. The intellectual property landscape of the human genome. Science, 2005, pp. 239–240. DOI: 10.1126/science.1120014
11. Göktepe-Hulten D., Mahagaonkar P. Inventing and patenting activities of scientists: in the expectation of money or reputation? The Journal of Technology Transfer, 2010, vol. 35, pp. 401–423.
12. Rahmatov A. Sportda intellektual mulkni shartnomaviy tartibga solish masalalari [Issues of contractual regulation of intellectual property in sports]. Lawyer Newsletter, 2021, no. 1, p. 64.
13. Bliznes I.A. Voprosy intellektual’noy sobstvennosti [Intellectual property issues]. Moscow, 2004, 495 p.
14. Dmitriyeva Ye.O., Dmitriyev O.V. Ob’’yekty prava promyshlennoy sobstvennosti v ispanskom zakonodatel’stve [Objects of industrial property rights in Spanish law]. Bulletin of Omsk University, Series “Right”, 2019, p. 41.
15. Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA). Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/trade/tackling-unfair-trade/acta/
16. Beijing Treaty on Audiovisual Performances. 2012, June 26. Available at: http://www.wipo.int/ treaties/en/ip/beijing/beijing_treaty.html
17. Ob’’yedinennyy dokument, kasayushhiysya intellektual’noy sobstvennosti i geneticheskikh resursov [Consolidated Instrument on Intellectual Property and Genetic Resources]. Available at: http://www.wipo.int/edocs/mdocs/tk/ru/wipo_grtkf_ic_20/wipo_grtkf_ic_20_ref_facilitators_text.pdf
18. Leahy-Smith America Invents Act. Patent Reform Act 2011. Available at: http://www.uspto.gov/aia_implementation/20110916-pub-l112-29.pdf
19. United states patent and trade mark office. Available at: http://www.uspto.gov/patents/law/aipa/ index.jsp
20. Commission Regulation (EC) No. 876/2007 of 24 July 2007 amending Regulation (EC) No. 2245/2002 implementing Council Regulation (EC) No. 6/2002 on Community designs.
21. Dids Macdonald. Safeguarding Design Assets: A UK Perspective. Available at: http://www.wipo.int/wipo_magazine/en/2012/01/article_0005.html
22. Owen-Smith J., Powell W. Careers and contradictions: Faculty responses to the transformation of knowledge and its uses in the life sciences research. Sociology of Work, 2001, no. 10, pp. 109–140. DOI: 10.1016/S0277-2833(01)80023-6
23. Owen-Smith J., Powell W. The expanding role of university patenting in the life sciences: Assessing the importance of experience and connectivity. Research Policy, 2003, no. 32, pp. 1695–1711. DOI: 10.1016/S0048-7333(03)00045-3
24. Higher Attestation Commission under the Ministry of Higher Education, Science and Innovation of the Republic of Uzbekistan. Available at: https://oak.uz/pages/9049
