Hylly
Henkilönnimi
Nimeke- ja vastuullisuusmerkintö Antitrust regulation in the area of IP : Russian judicial practice
Julkaistu
Ulkoasutiedot
Sarjamerkintö ei-lisäkirjausmuodossa Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, ISSN 1747-1532 ; 10 (2)
Huomautus sisällöstä, tiivistelmä tms. The article concerns the interaction between competition law and IP law. Russian legislation provides absolute immunity from extending antitrust prohibitions over the exercise of exclusive IP rights. However, this inflexible legislation does not provide any discretion for the courts, resulting in inadequate consequences and disordered judicial practice. This paper analyses the most interesting cases in Russian practice which have received an ambiguous and disputable court resolution. The divergence between the legislative model and court practice is due to the diversity of disputes that call for a wide range of solutions. Given the absence of a flexible legal framework, courts are sometimes forced to evade the legislative provisions or make inappropriate legal treatments of them. The current model of legal regulation does not facilitate economic efficiency, while unpredictable judicial practice caused by inflexible law puts rightholders in a situation of great uncertainty. In order to eliminate these imperfections, it is necessary to elaborate and implement a new model of regulation based on the optimal balance between private and public interests. This model has to comply with requirements of flexibility, effectiveness and legitimacy.
Asiasana - Kontrolloimaton
*00002078nab a22002654a 4500
*00110176
*00520201106111823.0
*007tu
*008150818s2015\\\\xx\|||||\||||\|||||0eng|c
*035 $a22790
*035 $a(PLib-conv)0000022790
*0410 $aeng
*090 $aOMA:SA-JO70
*1001 $aZhuravlev, Mikhail S.
*24510$aAntitrust regulation in the area of IP :$bRussian judicial practice /$cMikhail S. Zhuravlev.
*260 $c2015.
*300 $a127-132.
*4901 $aJournal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice,$x1747-1532 ;$v10 (2)
*520 $aThe article concerns the interaction between competition law and IP law. Russian legislation provides absolute immunity from extending antitrust prohibitions over the exercise of exclusive IP rights. However, this inflexible legislation does not provide any discretion for the courts, resulting in inadequate consequences and disordered judicial practice. This paper analyses the most interesting cases in Russian practice which have received an ambiguous and disputable court resolution. The divergence between the legislative model and court practice is due to the diversity of disputes that call for a wide range of solutions. Given the absence of a flexible legal framework, courts are sometimes forced to evade the legislative provisions or make inappropriate legal treatments of them. The current model of legal regulation does not facilitate economic efficiency, while unpredictable judicial practice caused by inflexible law puts rightholders in a situation of great uncertainty. In order to eliminate these imperfections, it is necessary to elaborate and implement a new model of regulation based on the optimal balance between private and public interests. This model has to comply with requirements of flexibility, effectiveness and legitimacy.
*653 $aIMMATERIAALIOIKEUS
*653 $aVENÄJÄ
*653 $aSÄÄNTELY
*8102 $aJournal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice,$x1747-1532 ;$v2
*852 $hSA-JO70$cZHURAVLEV
*979 $a0000022790
*999 $aMikroMarc$b[Article]$x7
^
Tästä teoksesta ei ole arvioita.
Näpäytä
kun haluat kirjoittaa ensimmäisen arvion.