SPECIFICITY OF PROOF IN CASES OF INFRINGEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS ON SITES ON THE INTERNET

Keywords: intellectual property, judicial protection of intellectual property rights, violations on sites on the Internet, electronic evidence

Abstract

In recent years, the rapid development of both technical progress and activities on the Internet, including the economic one, could not but affect the improvement of existing and the emergence of new mechanisms for violating the rights of intellectual property subjects, gives rise to various disputes between participants in the relevant relations, and such disputes is no exception, since each category of court cases has its own peculiarities of consideration.

However, analyzing the judicial practice, a number of procedural problems related to evidence and proving in the field of intellectual property rights protection on Internet sites were identified.

– Object of Research: What is the key of proof?

– Where? and Who? need to collect evidence?

– What is meant by belonging and admissibility of evidence?

– What are the ways of securing facts as means of proof on the Internet?

Investigated problem: to give a legal assessment not only to the norms of national and international legislation, but also to the practical experience of using the institution of proof in the protection of intellectual property rights raised on sites on the Internet.

The main scientific results: the procedural nuances of proving the violation of intellectual property rights on sites on the Internet are highlighted, problematic points are identified, and the proposed optimal ways to overcome them, both in pre-trial and in court.

The area of practical use of the research results: fixation, preservation of the evidence itself, their assessment, both in pre-trial and in court.

Innovative technological product: an algorithm (technical and legal) securing factual data from the Internet site for submitting them to court.

Scope of application of the innovative technological product: the application of the algorithm for securing factual data from the Internet site when protecting intellectual property rights should be carried out in accordance with the rules of the current Economic Procedure Code of Ukraine, namely Chapter 5 "Evidence" of Section 1.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Kateryna Mudrytska, Kyiv Institute of Intellectual Power Law National University "Odessa Law Academy"

Department of Intellectual Power and Civil Legal Disciplines

References

Farkhtdinov, Ia. F. (2002). Istochniki grazhdanskogo protsessualnogo prava Rossiiskoi Federatsii. Ekaterinburg, 375.

Osipov, Iu. K. (1973). Podvedomstvennost iuridicheskikh del. Sverdlovsk: Izd-vo iurid. in-ta, 124.

Siedlecki, W. (1987). Postepowanie cywilne: zarys wykladu. Warszawa: Panst. Wydaw. Naukowe. Krak.

Siedlecki, W. (1953). Rozklad ciezaru dowodu w polskim procesie cywilnem. PiP, 7.

Reshetnikova, I. V. (2000). Kurs dokazatelstvennogo prava v rossiiskom grazhdanskom sudoproizvodstve. Moscow: Norma-INFRA-M, 288.

Kurylev, S. V. (1969). Osnovy teorii dokazyvaniia v sovetskom pravosudii. Minsk: Izd-vo BGU, 204.

Hospodarskyi protsesualnyi kodeks Ukrainy (1991). No. 1798-XII. 06.11.1991. Vidomosti Verkhovnoi Rady Ukrainy, 6, 33.

Tsyvilnyi protsesualnyi kodeks Ukrainy (2004). No. 1618-IV. 18.03.2004. Vidomosti Verkhovnoi Rady Ukrainy, 40-41, 42.

Subiekty dokazuvannia ta otsinky dokaziv u tsyvilnomu protsesi (2005). Kyiv, 20.

Filyk, N. V., Trotsiuk, N. V. (2012). Spetsyfika sudovoho zakhystu avtorskykh prav na obiekty, rozmishcheni v merezhi Internet: porivnialno-pravovyi analiz. Sudova apeliatsiia, 2, 47–54.

Pro deiaki pytannia praktyky vyrishennia sporiv, poviazanykh iz zakhystom prav intelektualnoi vlasnosti (2012). Postanova Plenumu Vyshchoho hospodarskoho sudu Ukrainy No. 12. 17.10.2012. Available at: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/v0012600-12#Text

Uhody pro poriadok vyrishennia sporiv, poviazanykh iz zdiisnenniam hospodarskoi diialnosti(1992). Ratyfikovano Postanovoiu VR No. 2889-XII. 19.12.1992. Available at: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/997_076#Text

Rishennia Hospodarskoho sudu mista Kyieva u spravi No. 59/230. 24.09.2012. Available at: http://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/26264741

Rishennia Hospodarskoho sudu mista Kyieva u spravi No. 910/11186/16. 17.10.2016. Available at: http://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/62176099

Pro notariat (1993). Zakon Ukrainy No. 3425-XII. 02.09.1993. Available at: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/3425-12#Text

Pro zatverdzhennia Poriadku vchynennia notarialnykh dii notariusamy Ukrainy (2012). Nakaz Ministerstva yustytsii Ukrainy No. 296/5. 22.02.2012. Available at: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/z0282-12#Text

Pro vykonannia rishen ta zastosuvannia praktyky. Yevropeiskoho sudu z prav liudyny (2006). Zakon Ukrainy No. 3477-IV. 23.02.2006. Available at: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/3477-15#Text

Pro advokaturu ta advokatsku diialnist (2012). Zakon Ukrainy No. 5076-VI. 05.07.2012. Available at: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/5076-17#Text

👁 216
⬇ 161
Published
2020-10-30
How to Cite
Mudrytska, K. (2020). SPECIFICITY OF PROOF IN CASES OF INFRINGEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS ON SITES ON THE INTERNET. ScienceRise, (5), 103-110. https://doi.org/10.21303/2313-8416.2020.001494
Section
Legal aspects in the system of industrial relations