CONTENT OF THE CONCEPT "CREATIVE LABOR" IN THE RUSSIAN DOCTRINE AND JUDICIAL PRACTICE

Vyacheslav Vitko

doi:10.26668/revistajur.2316-753X.v2i69.5680

CONTENT OF THE CONCEPT "CREATIVE LABOR" IN THE RUSSIAN DOCTRINE AND JUDICIAL PRACTICE

Vyacheslav Vitko

Resumo

Copyright law applies not to all results of human intellectual activity, but only to those that meet certain criteria of protectability. Proceeding from this, it is of theoretical and practical importance to study the approaches of the doctrine and judicial practice to the disclosure of work protectability criteria. As a rule, if the criteria are specified in the law, their content is usually not disclosed. For this reason, the clarification of the essence of the criteria falls on judicial practice and civil doctrine. The purpose of the paper is to determine the criterion of "originality" in the Russian civil doctrine and judicial practice. The study employs formal-legal and systemic-structural methods, content analysis of various publications, and comparative-legal methods. As a result, the content of the criterion of originality is formulated and recommendations are given for the specification of terminology in the Russian legislation.

Palavras-chave

creative labor; originality; work of authorship; copyright law.

Texto completo:

PDF (English)

Referências

Antimonov, B.S., Fleishits, E.A. (2015). Avtorskoe pravo [Copyright], in: Fleishits E.A. Selected works on civil law. Moscow: Statute.

Belov, V.A. (2003). Grazhdanskoe pravo: Obshchaia i Osobennaia chasti: Uchebnik [Civil law: General and Special parts: Textbook]. Moscow: Yurinfor Center.

Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works. (September 9,1986). World Intellectual Property Organization. Retrieved from: https://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/ip/berne

Böhler, H.M. (2017). EU Copyright Protection of Works Created by Artificial Intelligence Systems. Bergen: The University of Bergen.

Collis v Cater. (1898). Stoffell and Fortt Ltd. Retrieved from: http://classic.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/LawCite?cit=%281898%29%2078%20LT%20613

Dozortsev, V.A. (2005). Intellektualnye prava: Poniatie. Sistema. Zadachi kodifikatsii: Sbornik statei [Intellectual rights: The concept. System. Codification tasks: Collection of articles]. Moscow: Statute.

Gavrilov, E.P. (2018). Kriticheskii analiz norm, kasaiushchikhsia prava sledovaniia [Critical analysis of the norms concerning the right to follow]. Patents and licenses. Intellectual property rights, 6, 34.

Hariani, K., Hariani, A. (2011). Analyzing “Originality” in Copyright Law: Transcending Jurisdictional Disparity. 51 IDEA, 491. Retrieved from: https://wenku.baidu.com/view/d030713467ec102de2bd8968.html

Infopaq International A/S v Danske Dagblades Forening (2009). Retrieved from: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:62008CJ0005:EN:HTML

Kopylov, A.Yu. (2019). Creativity as a condition for the protectability of a work. Property relations in the Russian Federation, 12(219), 60.

Kopylov, A.Yu. (2021). The character of the work as an object of copyright: candidate dissertation in legal sciences. Tomsk.

Koretskii, V.I. (1959). Avtorskie pravootnosheniia v SSSR [Copyright relations in the USSR]. Stalinabad: Publishing House of the Academy of Sciences of the TajSSR.

Lindholm, J., Kaburakis, A. (October 4, 2011). Cases C-403/08 and C-429/08 FA Premier League Ltd and Others v QC Leisure and Others; and Karen Murphy v Media Protection Services Ltd. Retrieved from:

Liu, D. (2014). Deming “Of originality: originality in English copyright law: past and present”. European Intellectual Property Review, 36(6), 376-389.

Matveev, A. (2020). Usloviia okhranosposobnosti ispolnenii kak obektov smezhnykh prav [Conditions of the protectability of executions as objects of related rights]. Intellectual property. Copyright and related rights, 4, 7.

Mikhailov, S.V. (2019). Prakticheskoe znachenie soderzhaniia prezumptsii avtorstva [The practical significance of the content of the presumption of authorship]. Economy and law, 9, 57.

Morgunova, E.A. (2008). Avtorskoe pravo: Uchebnoe posobie. [Copyright: Textbook]. Moscow: NORMA.

Rahmatian, A. (2013). Originality in UK copyright law: The old “skill and labour” doctrine under pressure. In IIC International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law (Vol. 44, pp. 4–34). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40319-012-0003-4.

Rakhmatulina, R.S. (2020). Kontseptualnye osnovy postroeniia sistemy obektov avtorskogo prava [Conceptual foundations for the construction of a system of copyright objects]: doctoral dissertation in legal science. Moscow.

Resolution of the Court for Intellectual Rights on the case № A08-3825/2019. (March 16, 2020). Retrieved from: https://sudact.ru/arbitral/doc/oSdROlMm0OgV/

Resolution of the Court for Intellectual Rights on the case № A40-80402/2015. (October 5, 2016). Retrieved from: http://www.consultant.ru/cons/cgi/online.cgi?req=doc&base=SIP&n=25174#mVYg1ySZQzVPDrZB

Rosati, E. (2013). Originality in EU copyright: Full harmonization through case law. Originality in EU Copyright: Full Harmonization through Case Law (pp. 1–272). Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781782548942.

Ruling of the Judicial Collegium for Civil Cases of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on the case № 5-KG21-14-K2 (September 18, 2019). https://legalacts.ru/sud/opredelenie-sudebnoi-kollegii-po-grazhdanskim-delam-verkhovnogo-suda-rossiiskoi-federatsii-ot-27042021-n-5-kg21-14-k2-3-4662019/

Ruling of the Judicial Collegium for Civil Cases of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on the case № 3-466/201931. (April 27, 2021). Retrieved from: https://www.vsrf.ru/lk/practice/cases/11044494

Ruling of the Judicial Collegium for Civil Cases of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on the case № № 5-KG15-58. (June 23, 2015). Retrieved from: http://supcourt.ru/stor_pdf.php?id=1351458

The European Parliament and the Council. (March 11, 1996). Directive 96/9/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 1996 on the legal protection of databases. OJ, (L 77), 20–28. Retrieved from: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A31996L0009

Vitko, V. (2016). O priznakakh proizvedeniia [About the signs of the work of authorship]. Intellectual property. Copyright and related rights, 12, 12-25.

World Intellectual Property Organization. (2004). WIPO Intellectual Property Handbook: Policy, Law and Use.

Zenin, I.A. (2015). Problemy rossiiskogo prava intellektualnoi sobstvennosti: izbrannye trudy [Problems of Russian Intellectual property law: selected works]. Moscow: Statute.

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.26668/revistajur.2316-753X.v2i69.5680