DOI: https://doi.org/10.21564/2225-6555.2019.15.169639

Problems of existing models of protection of computer programs in Ukraine

Олена Вікторівна Піхурець, Марія Анатоліївна Тіхонова

Abstract


The law enforcement and legislative practice of most states followed the path of protecting computer programs by copyright law. It happened because the model of copyright protection of the computer programs is cheaper and faster procedure than patent protection. Patent protection, on the other hand, requires a fairly expensive and lengthy examination of a computer program for global innovation, during which the object itself may become obsolete and unpopular with potential users. Therefore, the copyright method of protecting computer programs has received preferential recognition.

But a computer program does not have its own material form and it has a dynamic nature (it can be changed quickly enough by adding or rewriting the code), besides this - any computer program is first of all some information that does not allow us to speak about this object exclusively as an object of copyright the rights. In addition, when we say that a computer program is protected by copyright, we do not put an equal sign between a computer program and, for example, a literary work. We believe that a computer program is like a literary work. And from this it follows that the model of protection offered by copyright is not quite suitable for a computer program. For example, the idea itself embodied and implemented in a computer program is not the object to copyright protection, and an external form of computer program can be rewritten by another programming language or changed by an unscrupulous user, etc. To solve such problems, the copyright model of protection of the computer programs is opposed to the model of protection of these ones by the rules of patent law. For patent law, the main criterion for the division of objects into protected and unprotected is their technical or non-technical nature. But the goal of any computer program is to control the equipment and get a certain result from it. Therefore, if we take into account this thesis, a computer program can be viewed as a technical solution, and therefore as an object of patent protection.

The proposed article discusses the possibilities of protecting computer programs by patent law. Both positive and negative aspects of such protection are researched. It is concluded that in Ukraine today no conceptual, methodological and legal approaches have been developed to protect computer programs as such using the rules of patent law. But in themselves, under certain conditions, computer programs and some of their components may be the object to patent protection

Keywords


computer program; copyright; patent law; object of protection

References


Pro avtorske pravo i sumizhni prava: Zakon Ukrainy vid 23.12.1993 r. № 3792-ХІІ. (1993). Vidomosti Verkhovnoi Rady Ukrainy, 13, art. 64.

Pro okhoronu prav na vynakhody i korysni modeli: Zakon Ukrainy vid 15.12.1993 r. № 3769-XII. (1994). Vidomosti Verkhovnoi Rady Ukrainy, 7, art. 33.

Vojnikanis, Е.A. (2013). Pravo intellektual’noj sobstvennosti v cifrovuyu epohu: paradigma balansa i gibkosti. Moscow: ID «Yurisprudenciya» [in Russian].

Tsyvilnyi kodeks Ukrainy: Zakon Ukrainy vid 16.01.2003 r. № 435-IV. (2003). Ofitsiinyi visnyk Ukrainy Official Gazette of Ukraine, 11, 7.

Act on Copyright and Related Rights (Copyright Act, as amended up to Act of September 1, 2017). URL: http://www.wipo.int/wipolex/ru/text.jsp?file_id=474263.

Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (Chapter 48, incorporating amendments up to the Digital Economy Act 2017). URL: http://www.wipo.int/wipolex/ru/text.jsp?file_id=474030.

Hospodarskyi kodeks Ukrainy: Zakon Ukrainy vid 16.01.2003 r. № 436-IV. (2003). Ofitsiinyi visnyk Ukrainy Official Gazette of Ukraine, 11, art. 462.

Directive 2009/24/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the legal protection of computer programs (Codified version). URL: http://www.wipo.int/wipolex/ru/text.jsp?file_id=208107.

Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS Agreement). URL: http://www.wipo.int/wipolex/ru/other_treaties/details.jsp?group_id=22&treaty_id=231.

WIPO Copyright Treaty (WCT) (Authentic text) (adopted in Geneva on December 20, 1996). URL: http://www.wipo.int/wipolex/ru/treaties/text.jsp?file_id=295157.

Davies, S. (1998). Computer Program Claims. European Intellectual Property Review, 11, 429433.

Newman, J. (1997). The Patentability of Computer-related Invention in Europe. European Intellectual Property Review, 12, 701708.

Kaya, Т. (2007). A comparative analysis of the patentability of computer software. Ankara Law Review, vol. 4, 1, 4381.

Vashchynets, I. (2004). Problemy udoskonalennia prav avtora na rozpovsiudzhennia u chynnomu zakonodavstvi Ukrainy. Intelektualna vlasnist, 1, 11–17 [in Ukranian].

Zhuvanov, D. (2003). Yaku formu pravovoi okhorony obraty dlia komp’iuternoi prohramy. Intelektualna vlasnist, 9, 37–41 [in Ukranian].

Kondrat'eva, E.A. (2014). Objekty intellektual'nyh prav: osobennosti pravovoj ohrany. Moscow: Statut [in Russian].

Svoja nosha ne tjanet: portfolio «Laboratorii Kasperskogo» popolnilos' dvumja desjatkami patentov. URL: http://www.kaspersky.ru/about/news/product/2014/svoya-nosha-ne-tyanet [in Russian].

Rishennia Apeliatsiinoho sudu m. Kyieva vid 16.09.2015 r. Sprava № 752/9813/13. URL: http://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/50793926.

Borovskaja, E.A., Ermakovich, S.L., Kudashov, V.I., Losev, S.S., Uspenskij, A.A. (2010). Pravovaja ohrana komp'juternyh programm i baz dannyh. S.S. Losev, A.A. Uspenskij (Eds.). Minsk [in Russian]

Schramm, C. (1957). Die shopferische Leistung . C. Heymanns Verlag. 266 р. URL: http://www.heymanns-download.de/schramm-der-patentverletzungsprozess/.

Sergeev, A.P. (2003). Pravo intellektual’noj sobstvennosti v Rossijskoj Federacii. Moscow: OOO «TK Velbi» [in Russian].

Zhukov, V.I. (1985). Matematicheskoe obespechenie elektronno-vychislitel’noj tekhniki: ohrana avtorskim i izobretatel’skim pravom. Aktual’nye problemy yuridicheskoj nauki na etape razvitogo socializma. Kratkie tezisy dokladov i nauchnyh soobshchenij respublikanskoj nauchnoj konferencii, 16–18 oktyabrya 1985 g.Kharkov: Khar’kovskij yur. in-t [in Russian].

European Patent Convention 1973. URL: https://wipolex.wipo.int/ru/text/312166.

Ramazanova, K.K. (2017). Mezhdunarodnyj opyt patentovaniya komp’yuternyh programm. Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta MVD Rossii, 182183 [in Russian].

Patents Act 1977 (Chapter 37, incorporating amendments up to Patents Regulations 2000). URL: https://wipolex.wipo.int/ru/text/330537.

Shtennikov, V.H., Zyablova, A.Yu. (2014). Perspektivy patentovaniya komp’yuternyh programm. URL: http://elar.urfu.ru/bitstream/10995/41060/1/pzeiu_2014_53.pdf [in Russian].

K voprosu o patentosposobnosti programm dlya EVM v Velikobritanii. (1974). Patentnoe delo za rubezhom, 10, 35 [in Russian].

Scheuber, A. (1981). Zur Patentierbarkeit von Hardware. Software. «Mitteilungen», 12, 232235.

BGH, 22.06.1976-X ZB 23/74. Dispositionsprogramm. URL: https://www.jurion.de/urteile/bgh/1976-06-22/x-zb-23_74/.

T 0258/03 (Auction method/HITACHI) of 21.4.2004. URL: https://www.epo.org/law-practice/case-law-appeals/recent/t030258ep1.html.

T 0928/03 (Video game/KONAMI) of 2.6.2006. URL: https://www.epo.org/law-practice/case-law-appeals/recent/t030928eu1.html.

T 0154/04 (Estimating sales activity/DUNS LICENSING ASSOCIATES) of 15.11.2006. URL: https://www.epo.org/law-practice/case-law-appeals/recent/t040154ep1.html.

T 1173/97 (Computer program product/IBM) of 01.07.1998. URL: https://www.epo.org/law-practice/case-law-appeals/recent/t971173ex1.html.

European Patent Office. URL: https://www.epo.org/index.html.

Patent Act Germany. URL: http://www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/text.jsp?file_id=401424.

Gene, Quinn. (2013). A Guide to Patenting Software: Getting Started. Patent Bar Review, February, 16. URL: http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/02/16/a-guide-to-patenting-software-getting-started/id=35629/.

T 2539/12 (Searching a hierarchically structured database/SOFTWARE AG) of 18.01.2018. URL: https://www.epo.org/law-practice/case-law-appeals/recent/t122539eu1.html.

Zhuvanov, D., Stohnii, Ye. (2003). Yaku formu pravovoi okhorony obraty dlia komp’iuternoi prohramy. Intelektualna vlasnist, 9, 37–42 [in Ukranian].

Ladnyk V. Dotsilnist i mozhlyvist okhorony komp’iuternykh prohram normamy patentnoho prava. Intelektualna vlasnist. 2002. № 9. S. 12–16 [in Ukranian].

Pro zatverdzhennia Pravyl skladannia i podannia zaiavky na vynakhid ta zaiavky na korysnu model: nakaz Ministerstva osvity ta nauky Ukrainy vid 22.01.2001 r. № 22. (2011). URL: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/z0173-01.

Ofitsiinyi sait Ukrainskoho instytutu intelektualnoi vlasnosti (UKRPATENT). URL: http://base.uipv.org/searchINV/search.php?action=viewdetails&IdClaim=223529 [in Ukranian].

Mashukov, V.M. (1998). Komp’yuternoe pravo: prakticheskoe rukovodstvo. L’vov: Avers [in Russian]

Pasko, T.H. Komp’iuterni prohramy ta yikh pravova okhorona. URL: http://ukrainepravo.com/legal_publications/essay-on-it-law/it_law_pasko_pc_software_legal_ protection/ [in Ukranian].

Pro derzhavnu reiestratsiiu avtorskoho prava i dohovoriv, yaki stosuiutsia prava avtora na tvir: Postanova Kabinetu Ministriv Ukrainy vid 27.12.2001 r. № 1756. (2001). URL: http://zakon2.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/1756-2001-%D0%BF/print1533629715956042.

Pro zatverdzhennia Polozhennia pro Reiestr vyrobnykiv ta rozpovsiudzhuvachiv prohramnoho zabezpechennia: nakaz Ministerstva osvity i nauky, molodi ta sportu Ukrainy vid 22.03.2012 r. № 332. (2012). URL: http://search.ligazakon.ua/l_doc2.nsf/link1/RE20871.html.


GOST Style Citations




Article Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

Metrics powered by PLOS ALM


Copyright (c) 2019 Theory and practice of jurisprudence

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

ISSN 2225-6555