������� �� �̲�� �������� ���˲����� ��̲Ͳ��������� � ���в �������������ί �������Ҳ � ������� ������������� �����

The article emphasizes that ensuring proper protection of intellectual property rights in modern conditions is a priority task of state policy, an integral condition of such policy is the protection of the subjective rights of right holders of intellectual property objects, ensuring the process of innovation acceleration and economic development of the Ukrainian state. This is due to the increased interest and constantly growing role of intellectual property in the life of a person, society, and the state as a whole. The emphasis is on the role of the state and its authorized bodies called upon to ensure the protection of intellectual property rights, whose activities should be aimed primarily at protecting the property and personal non-property rights of rightholders of intellectual property objects, at eliminating the causes that give rise to violations of intellectual property rights, and in the event of a violation - at bringing the guilty persons to legal responsibility, using the entire mechanism of public-legal protection of intellectual property. It is emphasized that the main goal and task of the state in the field of intellectual property should be a consistent combination of the interests of the owners of intellectual property rights, society and the state. It is noted that in order to ensure public and private interests, in Ukraine state power is exercised on the basis of its division into legislative, executive and judicial, each of which plays an important role in the public legal protection of intellectual property rights. The analysis of specific regulatory legal acts analyzed the activities of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, the Committee of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine on Education, Science and Innovations, the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine, the Ministry of Economy of Ukraine, the Ministry of Agrarian Policy and Food of Ukraine, the Ukrainian National Office of Intellectual Property and Innovations, and the activities of courts in the field of intellectual property protection. The conclusions provide a theoretical definition of the concept of «public legal protection of intellectual property».

According to Art. 1 of the Constitution of Ukraine is a social, democratic and legal state. Its development, in accordance with constitutional provisions, is impossible without effective means of protecting human rights and freedoms, including rights to intellectual property objects. It is worth noting that in modern conditions, intellectual property is developing rapidly, its objects are becoming more widespread, so it needs proper protection. The reason for the violation of intellectual property rights is the nature of the objects themselves, which makes it possible to easily and quickly reproduce and distribute them. In world practice, various forms of protection of these rights are used. But protecting them in court, as a rule, requires a lot of time, money and effort. Therefore, mediation is increasingly used as a form of protection of intellectual property rights. An important condition for the integration of our country into the European Union is the creation of a legal framework that would meet international standards, in particular in the field of intellectual property. It is important to adopt the positive experience of foreign countries in the field of legal regulation and functioning of alternative methods of dispute resolution. It should be noted that mediation in Ukraine is just beginning its development, however, on the basis of international standards and experience, we can analyze which aspects of legal regulation need to be improved, in particular for the protection of intellectual property. The use of mediation in the field of intellectual property in Ukraine would contribute to the improvement of the efficiency of dispute resolution, would improve the legal mechanisms for the protection of rights and legitimate interests, and would harmonize the current national legislation with international standards in this area. The purpose of this article's research is the issue of using mediation to resolve conflicts and protect rights to intellectual property objects.

The article draws attention to the specifics of protection of intellectual property rights in Ukraine by civil and special legislation, the rules of which are designed to protect the subjective rights of right holders and other participants in legal relations in the field of intellectual property. Some aspects of the legal nature of jurisdictional remedies are studied. Attention is paid to the specifics of protection of intellectual property rights by civil law, which consists primarily in the methods of protection provided by procedural law. The legislation, the norms of which guarantee the protection of intellectual property and the ways of protection of civil rights are outlined. The existing in the legal literature different views on the classification of methods of protection of property rights are analyzed. The legal analysis of the application of the vindication claim as a means of protection of intellectual property rights is carried out and the given proposals are formulated..

This article is dedicated to the study of legal regulation of the mediation procedure in the field of intellectual property. Due to the rapid development of intellectual property and the proliferation of its objects, there is a need to create effective mechanisms for the protection of rights. Traditional court proceedings are lengthy and costly, complicating the timely protection of these rights. Mediation, as an alternative dispute resolution method, offers a quick, less formal, and economically advantageous way to reach an agreement between parties. Analysis of foreign experience shows that mediation is an effective tool that helps to reduce the burden on the judicial system and increase the satisfaction of the participants in the process. In Ukraine, mediation is at an early stage of development, but its implementation is promising. To successfully apply mediation in the field of intellectual property, it is necessary to create a clear legal framework that includes defining the legal status of mediators, establishing procedural norms, and ensuring the voluntary participation of the parties. It is important to consider international experience and adapt it to national peculiarities. This will ensure effective protection of intellectual property rights, reduce the number of court disputes, and improve the investment climate in Ukraine. Based on the results of the study, the author concludes that mediation in the field of intellectual property can be applied in the following cases: 1. For the resolution of disputes arising from the use of intellectual property objects without the consent of the rights holder (author, creator, inventor, or the person to whom the intellectual property rights belong according to a contract or law); 2. In resolving disputes related to intellectual property rights infringements; 3. In cases of disputes arising during the licensing and transfer of intellectual property rights; 4. For the resolution of disputes that arise when concluding and fulfilling contracts in the field of intellectual property, particularly contracts regarding the disposition of intellectual property rights; 5. In resolving disputes that arise from the use of intellectual property objects that have been transferred to third parties.

The article is devoted to the research of the intellectual property rights system in Ukraine. Intellectual property is the result of the creative activity of any person or group of people. The author studied the categories «intellectual property» and «intellectual property right», investigated the principles of intellectual property and the system of intellectual property rights of Ukraine. In Roman law, there was the term «property», because the «property right» in its classical meaning was formed in Rome, and related to private relationships. Intellectual property is the property of a person that arose as a result of her creativity. However, for our Ukrainian legislation, the expression «intellectual property» is «terra incognita». Yes, intellectual property is studied by such branch legal sciences as: civil law, administrative law, international law, and others. Formed the State Service of Intellectual Property, but the organization of the state system of legal protection of intellectual property, in our difficult times, wants a better one. In the legal literature on intellectual property issues various definitions of «intellectual property right» are given. From a subjective point of view – this is a subjective right, and from an objective point of view – a civil law institute, a set of legal norms that regulate relations in the system of creation and protection of intellectual property. Man, his freedom and rights are the most important value of evolutionary development of society, which manifests itself in the growth of the intellectual potential of the population of each country. Only man possesses intelligence, creative potential and creative abilities. In addition to it, on earth, no living creature can create. Creative activity is the most important aspect of human life, which allows you to convey your talent to society. The consequence of this activity is something new, unique, unique and original. The accumulated products of the human mind are the heritage of the nation, which determine its further development.The Constitution of Ukraine guarantees to the citizens of the state freedom of scientific, artistic, literary and technical creativity, protection of intellectual property rights, moral and material interests arising in connection with various types of intellectual activity. Every citizen has the right to the results of his intellectual, creative activity; no one can use or distribute them without his consent, with the exception of the statutory provisions. The intellectual potential of the nation, in the form of improving education, production, culture, science and technology, needs constant support from our state. The Civil Code of Ukraine for the first time in our national legislation was given a formal definition of the right of intellectual property, as the rights of the individual to the result of intellectual, creative activity or other object of intellectual property rights.

The article is devoted to the study of the general provisions of intellectual property law in Ukraine. The article notes that the importance of protecting property rights in the intellectual sphere has been growing rapidly in recent decades. A theoretical and practical understanding of the nature of intellectual property rights was carried out based on the analysis of current legislation and available scientific, methodical and journalistic materials. The list of laws that regulate activities in the field of intellectual property, both at the national and international level, is given. It is interesting to note that in Ukraine there are quite a lot of special legislative acts regulating the above activities. Attention is focused on the adaptation of Ukrainian legislation to the legal system of the European Union. International legal acts regulating the protection of intellectual property rights are given. Scientific and regulatory approaches to defining the concept of intellectual property rights are considered. It is established that this concept can be considered in two ways: objective and subjective. In an objective sense, in the legal literature, intellectual property law is considered as a system of legal norms that regulates homogeneous social relations in the field of intellectual property. In a subjective sense, the right of intellectual property is considered as personal property and non-property rights of natural persons, which according to the current legislation belong to the authors for the results of intellectual activity. Special attention is paid to the interpretation of the concepts of property and non-property intellectual property rights. Property intellectual property is the author's rights to the results obtained from his creative activity, similar to the property rights of those who create material objects with their labor (devices, devices, mechanisms, new information technologies, etc.). Non-property intellectual property rights are a set of moral, mental, rational, intellectual and other human rights, which by their nature cannot be alienated from the owner. A comparative analysis was made between intellectual property law and property law in general, and their relationship was also analyzed.

Investment includes tangible and intangible assets. Intangible assets are often connected with intellectual property which leads to intangible results. The lack of “visibility” in intangible assets makes them difficult to measure. Current international regulations have not also explicitly provided room for enforcement regarding intellectual property rights in terms of foreign investment. Therefore, an emergence of cases is observed in investment disputes within the field of intellectual property rights through the Investor–State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) mechanism. In this research, we discuss cases of foreign investment disputes in such a field. From these cases, we find the factors that determine the occurrence of foreign investment disputes in the field of intellectual property rights. The ISDS mechanism can be used to resolve foreign investment disputes in the field of intellectual property. Furthermore, this research discusses the perspective of Indonesian law regarding foreign investment disputes in the mentioned field by using the ISDS mechanism. Qualitative methods and secondary data analysis are also used. The research aims to discover and identify foreign investment disputes in the field of intellectual property rights.

The paper presents a theoretical justification of the technology of competence formation in the field of protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights of teachers of general secondary education in the process of professional development. This technology is aimed at forming a base of knowledge, skills and abilities in the field of intellectual property, which will teach teachers to perceive the results of their own innovative activities as an economic product that can benefit, promote compliance with the rules and regulations of academic integrity in teaching.The outlined technology involves the implementation of five stages: preparatory-diagnostic, motivational-target, cognitive-orientational, activity-operational and control-evaluation.The preparatory and diagnostic stage of the technology consists in carrying out a set of diagnostic actions to determine the state of formation of competence in the field of intellectual property at different stages of professional development to ensure its effective formation.Motivational and target stage of teacher training technology in the field of protection and protection of intellectual property rights is based on information obtained at the preparatory and diagnostic stage, and is to develop a hierarchy of objectives and presentation of learning outcomes aimed at developing teacher competence in the field of protection and protection of rights intellectual property.During the cognitive-substantive stage of in-service teacher training in the field of protection and protection of intellectual property rights, a meaningful part of the process of forming competence in the field of protection and protection of intellectual property rights of teachers in the process of in-service training is realized. courses according to our goals and objectives.The activity-operational stage of the technology of advanced training of teachers in the field of protection and defense of intellectual property rights aims at the direct formation of knowledge, skills, abilities and professional qualities in the field of intellectual property of teachers of general secondary education. The control and evaluation stage of the technology of in-service training of teachers in the field of intellectual property involves the creation of a system for assessing the degree of formation of competence in the field of intellectual property of teachers based on the results of in-service training.

Мета статті – обґрунтувати особливості та проаналізувати можливості судової експертизи у сфері інтелектуальної власності під час досудового розслідування. Методологія. Достовірність отриманих результатів і висновків забезпечено використанням методу узагальнення – для формування результатів дослідження наукових джерел інформації про об’єкти права інтелектуальної власності, основні завдання та предмет судової експертизи у сфері інтелектуальної власності та виокремлення актуальних видів експертних досліджень; статистичних методів та методу аналізу, щоб проаналізувати експертну практику у сфері інтелектуальної власності та визначити перелік запитань, які вирішують під час проведення всіх експертних досліджень, притаманних цьому виду експертиз. Наукова новизна. За результатами узагальнення експертної практики сформовано перелік запитань, вирішуваних під час проведення основних видів експертних досліджень у межах судової експертизи у сфері інтелектуальної власності. Висновки. Проаналізовано можливості судової експертизи як однієї з найефективніших форм застосування спеціальних знань, окреслено завдання судового експерта під час дослідження об’єктів права інтелектуальної власності, які формують і ставлять для вирішення судової експертизи, зважаючи на необхідність установлення певних об’єктивних даних, що мають практичне значення для з’ясування істини у справі. Наголошено, що розслідування правопорушень у сфері інтелектуальної власності потребує використання спеціальних знань різних галузей науки і техніки, а відповідно – обов’язкового залучення компетентних, обізнаних осіб (спеціалістів, судових експертів) для отримання професійних консультацій, участі в окремих слідчих діях, дослідження різноманітних об’єктів права інтелектуальної власності в межах судової експертизи – порівняно нового напряму застосування спеціальних знань, що на відміну від інших видів судових експертиз дає змогу встановити фактичні дані про властивості, ознаки, закономірності створення та використання об’єктів.

Keywords: intellectual property, codification, human rights, private interests, publicinterests, exclusions, medicines, patents The article concerns the expediency of codificationof legislation in the field of intellectual property on the basis of the principles ofpolicy development of pharmaceutical nationalism or pharmaceutical independence ofthe state. Modernity encourages to determine the principles of intellectual propertylaw on the basis of «collective knowledge», to put the intellectual property right toserve the interests of society and provide appropriate incentives for scientific activity.The new spirit of intellectual property dictates the policy of introducing exceptions tointellectual property rights for objects used in the fight against COVID-19.Special attention should be paid to the formation in the world, on the one hand, ofa policy of «pharmaceutical nationalism», which provides for protectionism in relationto the national producer, and on the other — the policy of priority of public interestsover intellectual property rights. Today, this issue is particularly acute in the contextof limited access to vaccines against the background of free production sites of genericcompanies. Therefore, when determining the conceptual approaches to the codificationof legislation in the field of intellectual property, the international experience ofmaintaining such a balance should be taken into account.The path of harmonization of human rights and intellectual property rights hascertain social and economic obstacles, overcoming which requires significant efforts ofpublic organizations, rethinking the established paradigms of the scientific communityand the political will of international organizations. The pandemic has only strengthened our sense that modern science is supranational,it has long been beyond the geographical and beyond the human imagination.That is why the monopolization of its results has become a dangerous phenomenon fora society that has lost the ability to control the processes within itself and has becomedependent on external processes, which are controlled by a small percentage of intellectualproperty market participants.Today, Ukraine has become an Eastern European hub in the field of harmonizationof private and public interests in the field of health care with the mechanisms ofintellectual property rights, and the ongoing patent reform is a breakthrough success.It should be noted that although it is extremely important for Ukraine to be able touse the flexible provisions of the TRIPS Agreement, both for the production of vaccinesand over time for drugs for specific treatment KOVID, the Government shouldkeep in mind the need to clarify the production capacity of domestic producers. , toallow the production of such vaccines and drugs exclusively for the national market,at least at the first stage, as the priority is to meet the needs of the national patient.And, of course, compulsory know-how licenses (trade secrets) should contain provisionslimiting the time and number of doses produced by analogy with compulsory licensesfor inventions.

With the acceleration of technological development and the digital transformation of economies, the impact of intellectual property on economic growth will increase. The article shows that the forms and means of legal protection and use of intellectual property will evolve in line with the opportunities that will be provided by the infrastructure (production, fixation, management, tracking and protection of intellectual property rights) in this area. In Russia, the “digitalization” of legal protection and use of intellectual property rights will make it possible to form public-private platforms for rights management, which will create additional opportunities for authors to effectively manage their rights. This will attract investors to the non-raw-material sector of the economy and may become an important driver for the development of the digital economy in the country as a whole.

The objective of the paper is to determine how the utilisation of intellectual property rights (IPRs) by Canadian manufacturing firms is related to their characteristics, activities, competitive strategies and industry sector in which they operate. The principal source of information used in this endeavour is the Statistics Canada Survey of Innovation 1999. The paper starts with an overview of other studies that looked at the use of intellectual property rights in Canada. Follows a conceptual framework presenting variables likely to explain the use specific IPRs by Canadian manufacturing firms. The use of IPRs is to a great extent correlated with basic economic characteristics of firms, their activities and industry environment. A series of estimated logit regressions predict the probability that a firm will use a specific IPR instrument. Also estimated is the contribution of the use of IPRs to the probability that a firm innovates. The decision of a firm to use IPRs is often not independent of the decision to innovate. To eliminate the potential endogeneity bias I estimate a two-stage logit model. A comparison of the single- and two-stage logit models shows that the nexus from the protection of intellectual property (patents) to innovation may be weaker than indicated by the single equation model.

Russia is a subject of international intellectual property rights protection. It is a territory of exclusive rights to the results of intellectual activity established by international treaties and federal laws are valid. However after beginning of a special military operation and sanctions pressure, the question about correction of the Russian system of intellectual property rights protection in relation to unfriendly countries has become more relevant. Сonsolidation of national security and increasing the country’s technological independence are not always compatible with the principles of protecting the rights of foreign copyright holders that remain in Russian legislation. The state protects domestic producers from foreign copyright holders, and legalizes parallel import. But these mechanisms do not work in full force due to the fact that Russian courts actually continue to protect the right of unfriendly countries to intellectual property in equal volume with Russian copyright holders. This article proposes to consider some measures to protect the rights and interests of the Russian Federation, its citizens and entrepreneurs, including the revision of Russia’s international obligations in the field of intellectual property and the formation of new law enforcement and judicial practice. Also the process of sovereignization of the Russian model of intellectual property rights protection we can see the development of modern technologies with affects of creating the results of intellectual activity and the methods of legal protection of its results. Thus, the achievement of the goals of state policy in the field of intellectual property is also possible by introducing new digital technologies into the state regulation of intellectual property at the federal and regional levels.

The article deals with the problems of identifying subjective signs of an administrative offense in the field of intellectual property. It is determined that all structures of administrative offenses in the field of intellectual property are characterized by common subjective features (set of relevant entities (directly and the person who committed the offense) and subjective side (internal side of administrative offenses that covers the mental attitude of a person to the public the harmful act which it commits and its consequences). The subject of the administrative offense in the field of intellectual property is analyzed. The existing objective conditions of administrative liability of a legal entity for administrative offenses in the field of intellectual property are considered. The characteristic of the subjective side of the administrative offense in the field of intellectual property is given. It is emphasized that the subjective party to the administrative offenses in the field of intellectual property has mandatory and optional features. A mandatory feature of the subjective side of administrative offenses is wine. Optional features of the subjective side of administrative offenses in the field of intellectual property are the motive and purpose of the perpetrator. It has been established that in most cases the purpose of administrative offenses in the field of intellectual property coincides with its motives, although it sometimes takes on an independent meaning. It is proved that the administrative offenses in the field of intellectual property are committed solely for selfish reasons, and the purpose of the offense as the final result to which the offender seeks to commit this act is gain, illicit enrichment, public recognition, etc. Proposed ways to improve administrative responsibility for intellectual property offenses. The necessity of systematization of the national legislation on administrative responsibility for offenses in the field of intellectual property is emphasized. The necessity of adaptation of domestic legal acts in the field of intellectual property to the corresponding acts of the European Union, regulatory regulation of the problem of utilization of intellectual property objects, creation of a regulatory framework for the protection of intellectual property in the military and technical sphere are argued.

Exploitation of intellectual property rights in the field of sports is currently one of the most powerful sources of funding for sports, sports activities, and various sports events. However, unfortunately the sports organizations and individual right holders encounter problems regarding protection issues. There is a strong need to ensure the protection of these rights, and strengthen their potential to generate income from them. The use of intellectual property in modern conditions is a significant financial asset of the sports sphere. When acquiring rights of intellectual property, sports organizations, athletes and other rights holders often feel the need for legal regulation, protection and commercialization of intellectual property, as this is a prerequisite for their further profitable use. Hence, the present research aimed to study peculiarities of legal support, implementation and protection of intellectual property rights in the field of sports.