Source: http://book.wolterskluwer.pl/x_C_I__PT_40110400__LL_0__PZTA_0E__UPT_40485205.html
Timestamp: 2020-06-01 00:27:29
Legal References Found: art. 305
 art. 305
 art. 305
 art. 305
 art. 305
 Art. 305
de lege ferenda
 Art. 305
de lege lata

Document Content:
Zeszyty Naukowe Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego. Prace z Prawa Własności Intelektualnej - Zeszyt 137
Kod: KAM-6003:201703 Ilość w paczce: 100
Pięć lat po nowelizacji  kanadyjskie prawo autorskie gotowe do przeglądu
Dynamiczna i chaotyczna ewolucja importu równoległego
Dzieła osierocone jako dwudziestowieczna czarna dziura  czy potrzebujemy rozwiązań prawnych na poziomie międzynarodowym?
Halyna Dovhań
Rozwój ustawodawstwa prawnoautorskiego w imperium rosyjskim i jego egzekwowanie na ziemiach ukraińskich
Patenty na drugie zastosowanie medyczne i zamienniki produktów medycznych
Geodane  nowy przedmiot własności intelektualnej?
Paweł Podrecki, Janusz Raglewski
Karnoprawna ochrona unijnego znaku towarowego na podstawie art. 305 prawa własności przemysłowej
Orphan Works as a Twentieth Century Black Hole  Is There a Need for the Adoption of Legal Solutions at International Level?
Despite the fact that the orphan works problem is an international issue, neither the European Union nor the United States have been trying to fi nd a legal compromise in order to implement a minimal legal provision common for both Europe and the U.S. The intangible and cross-border nature of the works and the fact that they may be exploited in many places simultaneously, given the global nature of the Internet, raise some doubts as to whether regional solutions may provide effi cient protection of particular interests in the information technology era. Therefore, an international solution would be justifi ed due to numerous circumstances. However, it is to be noted that countries have already made investments in crafting their own solutions. In these circumstances, an international discussion on the copyright paradigms seems to be more and more necessary.
The Development of Copyright Legislation in the Russian Empire and its Enforcement on Ukrainian Lands
Ukrainian lands had been divided among other states for a long period of time. As a result, foreign legislation was valid within these lands infl uencing the formation of law enforcement practice, legal culture and legal awareness a lot. In order to understand the current processes in this specifi c sphere it is worth looking at the previous experience. This may facilitate the interpretation of many of todays problems.
Second Medical Use Patents and the Substitution of Medicinal Products
This paper relates to the legal problems of second medical use patents and the substitution of medicinal products. It is inspired by two recent rulings of the English and Dutch courts. These courts have considered whether the sale of generic drugs may be regarded as an infringement of a second medical use patent in case where the facts of the case showed that these drugs have actually been used as in the indications covered by this patent (i.e. off-label use). The author of this paper wishes to give an answer to the following question  whether it is appropriate to limit the scope of the second medical use patent, where medicinal products based on the substance are subject to public reimbursement, in order to provide wider access to these products.
Geodata  A New Object of Intellectual Property?
It should be pointed out that there has recently been a constantly high level of interest in technical sciences, partly driven by the daily public need for geo-information (GI) and by the mere availability of so many geographically relevant applications. It should be emphasised that, though the extensive geoinformation literature in the area of technical sciences takes many positions and though their references to IPR are ever-increasing, the IPR issues related to GI are expressed in clumsy and very general terms, accepting entirely as dogma and as shibboleth beyond any doubt that digital maps (along with digital geodata2) fall under copyright protection. This appears to be only a manifestation of a much greater problem, that of copyright protection for data as such, which is just now becoming an issue of common interest to both academics and European lawmakers.
Spośród przepisów karnych ustawy z 30.06.2000 r.  Prawo własności przemysłowej największe znaczenie w praktyce ma art. 305 p.w.p. Penalizuje on czyny związane ze zjawiskiem tzw. piractwa w dziedzinie znaków towarowych. Warunkiem sine qua non prawidłowej realizacji swojej funkcji przez znak towarowy jest zapewnienie należytej ochrony wyłączności używania takiego oznaczenia przez uprawniony do tego podmiot. Oczywiste jest, że wraz ze wzrostem znaczenia takich oznaczeń w obrocie powinna również zostać wzmocniona ich ochrona, w tym przy wykorzystaniu instrumentów prawa karnego. Temu właśnie celowi służy regulacja zawarta w art. 305 p.w.p. Zgodnie z ust. 1 powołanego artykułu, Kto, w celu wprowadzenia do obrotu, oznacza towary podrobionym znakiem towarowym, zarejestrowanym znakiem towarowym, którego nie ma prawa używać lub dokonuje obrotu towarami oznaczonymi takimi znakami, podlega grzywnie, karze ograniczenia wolności albo pozbawienia wolności do lat 2. W pozostałych dwóch przepisach art. 305 p.w.p. przewidziany jest wypadek mniejszej wagi (ust. 2) oraz kwalifi kowany typ czynu przestępnego, w którym okolicznością uzasadniającą surowszą odpowiedzialność karną (zagrożenie karą pozbawienia wolności od 6 miesięcy do lat 5) jest uczynienie sobie przez sprawcę z popełnienia przestępstwa określonego w ust. 1 prezentowanego artykułu stałego źródła dochodu albo dopuszczenie się tego czynu przestępnego w stosunku do towaru o znacznej wartości. Konstrukcja jurydyczna przestępstw określonych w art. 305 p.w.p. nie jest wolna od problemów wykładniczych. W ramach niniejszych uwag chcielibyśmy skoncentrować się na jednym z nich. Chodzi o rozstrzygnięcie kwestii, czy karnoprawna ochrona gwarantowana tym artykułem obejmuje także unijny znak towarowy (wcześniej  wspólnotowy znak towarowy).
Five Years After Its Modernisation: Canadian Copyright Law Poised for Its Reviev
The Dynamic and Unsettled Evolution of Parallel Importing
Orphan Works as a Twentieth Century Black Hole  is There a Need for Adoption of legal Solutions at the International Level?
Development of Copyright Legislation in the Russian Empire and its Enforcement on Ukrainian Lands
Criminal law protection of EU trade marks under Art. 305 of the Industrial Property Law
Five Years After Its Modernisation: Canadian Copyright Law Poised for Its Review
When Canada implemented the WIPO treaties in 2012, it mandated a parliamentary review to be done every fi ve years. As the end of 2017 approaches, this paper looks at a number of court decisions that interpret provisions that were specifi cally included at the time to govern Internet uses of works. Because they directly affect the working of copyright law in the country, this paper also looks at some procedural developments that have taken place in response to the growing awareness of the international dimensions of copyright regulation.
This article discusses the dynamic and unsettled evolution of intellectual property rules relating to parallel importing. It focuses on the changes in the United states policy as a result of Supreme Court decisions that now allow for the parallel importation of copyright and patented goods into the United States and compares this to the approaches in the European Union and elsewhere. The article explains how and why the international rules allow for jurisdictional variations and why those variations can be both desirable and problematically complicated.
Despite the fact that the orphan works problem is an international issue, neither the European Union nor the United States have been trying to fi nd a legal compromise in order to implement a minimal legal provision common for both Europe and the U.S. In this context it is doubtful whether legal solutions concerning orphan works at EU level can be considered effective. At the same time, the attempts to create legal norms across the Atlantic will not lead to fully restoring copyright rules in the context of orphan works.
The postulates presenting the relevance of adopting legal solutions with respect to orphan works at international level seem to be justifi ed based on the following circumstances: 1) the phenomenon of orphan works exists all over the world and is subject to legislation in numerous states, hence the proposal to regulate the issue in question at international level seems to be justified; 2) the problem of orphan works is directly linked to the creation and development of digital libraries; 3) the intangible and cross-border nature of the works and the fact that they may be exploited in many places simultaneously, given the global nature of the Internet, raises some doubts as to whether regional solutions can provide efficient protection of particular interests in the information technology era; 4) international agreements on intellectual property affect both domestic laws of the contracting states who are parties to the treaty and shape European Union law on the matter; 5) the existing body of international conventions leads to the formation of copyright law or similar rights on a global scale; 6) the copyright protection of works under Directive 2012/28/EU is global in nature; 7) fragmented regulations are not favourable in the view of legal certainty as a particular work may be considered an orphan work according to the provisions of one country but may not be granted the same status under the law of another; 8) access to works of scientifi c and cultural signifi cance would be facilitated, which would promote further scientifi c and cultural development as well as enhance public access to items of scientific and cultural interest, thus achieving the aims of legislators on the issue of orphan works.
The history of intellectual property of Ukraine is closely linked to the historical processes in those states in which Ukrainian lands had been included. This issue is neglected by Ukrainian scholars. A few of them have addressed this, but in a fragmentary way. This article focuses on the analysis of the formation of copyright legislation in the Russian Empire during the XVIII and XIX century. For this purpose legal acts of the Russian Empire as well as works of the representatives of the legal doctrine of that time have been studied. Special attention was paid to the search for and analysis of archive materials from the collections of the Central State Historical Archive of Ukraine and the State Archive of the Kyiv Oblast. It enabled highlighting the law enforcement practice within Ukrainian lands.
The author comes to the conclusion that the development of copyright law in the Russian Empire followed the same path as it had done in Europe, but somewhat later. The main feature of copyright legislation in the Russian Empire was its close link to censorship legislation. From 1828 until 1887 provisions regulating authors rights were part of the latter. The fi rst legal act concerning authors rights was included in the 1828 Censorship Statute. The Russian Empire separated itself from legal integration in the fi eld of copyright, namely in terms of the development of international cooperation in this sphere. The Russian Empire did not become a party to the Berne Convention. In the XIX century the most widespread theory in the Russian Empire was the theory of property of the results of intellectual activity. Authors rights were considered to be a type of ownership right. Ukrainian civil law specialists held more progressive views, similar to those dominant in the European legal doctrine. They called in question the reasonability of using the theory of property to authors rights. A separate place was distinguished for these rights in the system of civil law. Specialists emphasised moral rights as a component of authors rights. It was the 1911 Law that provided not only the protection of the economic rights of authors, but also of their moral rights. The1911 Copyright Law is considered to be the most progressive legal act in this sphere in the Russian Empire. Its provisions as well as the provisions of prior legislation are analysed in this article.
This paper discusses the legal problems of second medical use patents and the substitution of medicinal products. It is inspired by two recent rulings of the English and Dutch courts. These courts have considered whether the sale of generic drugs may be regarded as an infringement of a patent on second medical use when the facts of the cases showed that these drugs have actually been used based on the indications covered by this patent (i.e. off-label use). The author of this paper wishes to give an answer to the following question  whether it is appropriate to limit the scope of the patent on second medical use, where medicinal products based on the substance are subject to public reimbursement, in order to provide a wider access to these products. The author proposes to consider whether the following solutions should be adopted. First, it seems reasonable to allow patent holders, in case of a risk of direct or indirect infringement of their patents on second medical use, to agree with their competitors (manufacturers of generic products) on what safeguards and measures should be taken to minimise the risk of patent infringement. Second, education of physicians, pharmacists and administrative staff of hospitals is needed in order to ensure that specifi c products are the only ones that can be used based on a particular indication because of second medical patent existence. Third, Patent Law may include a specifi c exemption from physician liability in case of the off-label use of a product.
Recently the EU lawmaker has given a great deal of attention to European data economy, which can be seen in the documents of 10 January 2017: Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, Building a European Data Economy accompanied by the Staff Working Document. Thereby, a wider debate on the legal protectability of data is essential. The discussion related to the need for protection of the contents of a work (in particular, of an informational work) is not new, but the rapid development of new technologies and the phenomenon of big data took the problem of protectability of data to a new dimension. In this regard, there is a wide range of views, from advocating for securing a new legal construct for data protection, to critical ones. The analysis of the legal nature of a digital map, taken by this author, proved that the legal protection of digital informational works (by example of a digital map) is vague with regard to both the work as a whole and its components. The analysis of the premises of copyright protection led her to raise a postulate de lege ferenda to cover geodata with a new neighbouring right. The legal regulation of the right has been modelled by her in a two-fold way. The fi rst model was drafted after phonograms/videograms or broadcasting rights based on Polish legal regulations, which provide an enumeration of the fi elds of exploitation of non-material goods. The second model was drafted in a synthetic manner characteristic of rights to fi rst editions and critical editions. One of the two options should be adopted.
Option 1. introduces the defi nition of a signal and the exemplifi cation of the fi elds of exploitation. It can be modelled as follows:
1. A signal shall be the first fixing of the spatial data layer, raw or enhanced, irrespective of its copyrightability.
2. A producer of a signal shall be deemed to be the one under whose name or business name such signal has fi rst been made. If no such information is given, it is deemed that the producer is the owner of the devices recording the spatial data.
3. Without detriment to the rights of authors of spatial data, the producer of the signal shall have the exclusive right to manage and use the signal within the scope of:
1) fixation;
2) reproduction by a specifi c technique;
3) broadcasting by another person;
4) rebroadcasting;
5) making the fixation of the signal available on the market;
4. The right shall expire.. years following the year in which the signal was made.
1. Provisions of this Act shall apply to signals:
1) whose producer has its residence or seat in the territory of... (the Republic of Poland); or
2) whose producer has its place of residence or seat in the territory of the European Economic Area; or
3) which are protected on the basis of international agreements, within the scope off protection which results from such agreements.
Option 2. is modelled after the synthetic construction of the provision and may be drafted as follows:
The publisher who was the first to disseminate a signal carrying spatial data, raw or enhanced, irrespective of its copyrightability and of whether the signal has been disseminated in public, shall have the exclusive right to manage and use the signal across all fields of exploitation for a period of... years from the first date of making available or disseminating.
This author is aware of the fact that the above introduced concept is at its early stage of drafting and needs a wider in-depth analysis (possibly related to technological issues) with regard to: 1) the choice of the right legal construct on which to model the regulation; 2) estimation of the kind of data the regulation should refer to along with the explicit ratio legis as to why this kind of data deserves protection when other kinds do not; 3) explanation of the terms and introduction of defi nitions (e.g. signal, spatial data, raw data and enhanced data); 4) estimation of the fi elds of exploitation legally relevant for spatial data signal stream; 5) duration of protection (given the life span of data it may be 15 or 25 years); 6) adjustment of other provision of the Copyright Law (e.g. permissible use).
This articles seeks to answer the question whether criminal law protection under Art. 305 of the Industrial Property Law coveres, de lege lata in the Polish legal system, an European Union trade mark (previously a Community trade mark). The principle of protecting the rights in a EU trade mark should not give rise to controversies, because Council Regulation (EU) 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the European Union trade mark provides that protection of such trade marks is directly effective in the Republic of Poland. Thus it must be decided whether in such a case it is permissible to apply mutatis mutandis the Polish Industrial Property Law, including also the criminal provisions in the cases when international or Community regulations permit regulating certain issues in the national legal systems of individual Member States. An argument in favour of permitting broad protection of EU trade marks is the need to equate the legal situation of registered EU trade marks, as provided for in EU legislation, with that of trade marks registered in accordance with the national procedure. Adopting such an interpretation of provisions will, as a consequence, confi rm the conclusion that acquiring the rights from registration of an EU trade mark produces the same legal effects across the EU.
ISSN: 1689-7080 , Format: B5 , 104
Kod: KAM-6003:201703 Miejsce wydania: Warszawa