Статья 'Свободное использование как ограничение исключительных прав ' - журнал 'Юридические исследования' - NotaBene.ru
по
Journal Menu
> Issues > Rubrics > About journal > Authors > About the Journal > Requirements for publication > Council of editors > Redaction > Peer-review process > Peer-review in 24 hours: How do we do it? > Policy of publication. Aims & Scope. > Article retraction > Ethics > Copyright & Licensing Policy > Publication in 72 hours: How do we do it? > Digital archiving policy > Open Access Policy > Open access publishing costs > Article Identification Policy > Plagiarism check policy
Journals in science databases
About the Journal

Публикация за 72 часа - теперь это реальность!
При необходимости издательство предоставляет авторам услугу сверхсрочной полноценной публикации. Уже через 72 часа статья появляется в числе опубликованных на сайте издательства с DOI и номерами страниц.
По первому требованию предоставляем все подтверждающие публикацию документы!
MAIN PAGE > Back to contents
Legal Studies
Reference:

Free use as a limitation of exclusive rights

Sagdeeva Liya Vladimirovna

Postgraduate at the Department of Civil Law and Procedure of The Institute of Legislation and Comparative Law under the Government of the Russian Federation

614077, Russia, Perm', ul. Arkadiya Gaidara, 5-66

liya.sagdeeva.94@mail.ru
Другие публикации этого автора
 

 

DOI:

10.25136/2409-7136.2017.9.23950

Review date:

07-08-2020


Publish date:

31-08-2017


Abstract.

The idea of limitation immanently exists within law as one of social regulators of relations within society. The very fact that people should coexist, presupposes the necessity to take into account mutual interests, therefore dialectical categories of freedom and necessity and the related manifestations of freedom and limitations in law were studied by philosophers and legal theorists. The research subject of the present article is free use as an example of the institution of limitations of subjective civil rights with respect to exclusive right. The author considers the current legislation of the Russian Federation and foreign countries, legal positions of Russian courts and courts of foreign jurisdictions. The author considers the scholars’ positions on the issues of limitations of rights and title encumbrance. The research methodology is determined by the specificity of the research subject. It includes the set of general scientific research methods (analysis, synthesis, comparison). The author concludes that an exclusive right is always seen as limitless, and any limitations of right and title encumbrances (free use, exhaustion, compulsory license, prior user right and right of use after patent expiration) should be proved and can’t be interpreted broadly. Free use understanding in the legislation of the countries of Continental Europe differs from understanding in the countries of common law containing the “fair dealing” and “fair use” doctrines. However, the “fair dealing” doctrine, acting in Great Britain, Australia and Canada, presupposes the formalized list of actions, which are classified as faithful (free) use of objects of exclusive rights without author’s (or another rightholder’s) permission. To certain extent, it is akin to free use understanding within the Civil Code of the Russian Federation and legislation of other countries of Continental Europe. Besides, there’s a similarity of free use within the intellectual property institution with public easement as a limitation of property right. In this context, free use is considered by the author as a limitation of right rather than title encumbrance. 

Keywords: fair dealing doctrine, fair use doctrine, free use, title encumbrance, limitation of right, intellectual property, property right, exclusive right, public easement, three-step test
This article written in Russian. You can find full text of article in Russian here .

References
1.
Shershenevich G.F. Uchebnik russkogo grazhdanskogo prava. T. 1. C. 278.
2.
Pobedonostsev K.P. Kurs grazhdanskogo prava. Pervaya chast': Votchinnye prava. M.: Statut, 2002. C. 198.
3.
Opredelenie Konstitutsionnogo Suda RF ot 02.07.2015 № 1539-O // SPS «Konsul'tant Plyus».
4.
Duke Law Journal, Copyright Fair Use: Case Law and Legislation, Vol. 1969, No. 1 (Feb., 1969), pp. 73-109, Published by: Duke University School of Law. URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/1371458?seq=1#page_scan _tab_contents (data obrashcheniya: 25.07.2017).
5.
L. R. Patterson, Folsom v. Marsh and Its Legacy, Vol. 5, Issue 2 (1998), pp. 431-452. URL: http://digitalcommons.law.uga.edu/jipl/vol5/iss2/4 (data obrashcheniya: 24.07.2017).
6.
Folsom v. Marsh (C.C.D.Mass. 1841) (No.4,901). URL: https://h2o.law.harvard.edu/cases/5238 (data obrashcheniya: 24.07.2017).
7.
Lenz v. Universal Music Corp., No.13-16106 (9th Cir. 2015) URL: http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca9/13-16106/13-16106-2015-09-14.html (data obrashcheniya: 25.07.2017). 34 s.
8.
Band J. and Gerafi J., The Fair Use/Fair Dealing Handbook (March 2015), American University Program on Information Justice and Intellectual Property. URL: http://infojustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/fair-use-handbook-march-2015.pdf (data obrashcheniya: 25.07.2017). 76 s.
9.
The Football Association Premier League Ltd. v. Ploni and others in Hebrew), Tel Aviv District court, Judge Agmon-Gonen, Sept. 2, 2009. URL: https://www.law.co.il/media/computer-law/premier_league2.pdf (data obrashcheniya: 25.08.2017). 68 s.
10.
Pro Sieben Media A.G. v Carlton Television Ltd & Anor 1998) EWCA Civ 2001, 1999) WLR 605, 1999) 1 WLR 605. URL: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/1998/2001.html (data obrashcheniya: 25.07.2017).
11.
D’Agostino G., Healing Fair Dealing? A Comparative Copyright Analysis of Canadian Fair Dealing to UK Fair Dealing and US Fair Use, CLPE Research Paper 28/2007 Vol. 03 No. 04 (2007). URL: http://www.pijip-impact.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Giuseppina-DAgostino-Healing-Fair-Dealing-.pdf (data obrashcheniya: 02.08.2017). 59 s.
12.
CCH Canadian Ltd. v. Law Society of Upper Canada, 2004) 1 S.C.R. 339, 2004 SCC 13. URL: https://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/2125/index.do (data obrashcheniya: 03.08.2017). 90 s.
13.
Hugenholtz P. Bernt and Senftleben Martin R.F., Fair Use in Europe. In Search of Flexibilities (2011) URL: https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties /download/912 (data obrashcheniya: 26.07.2017). 30 s.
14.
Makovskii A.L. O kodifikatsii grazhdanskogo prava (1922 – 2006). M.: Statut, 2010. 736 s.
15.
Gavrilov E.P., Eremenko V.I. Kommentarii k chasti chetvertoi Grazhdanskogo kodeksa Rossiiskoi Federatsii (postateinyi). M.: Ekzamen, 2009. S. 39.
16.
Postanovlenie Suda po intellektual'nym pravam ot 25.11.2013 № S01-113/2013 po delu № A76-13283/2012 // SPS «Konsul'tant Plyus».
17.
Reshenie AS g. Moskvy ot 31.05.2017 po delu № A40-5830/16-91-46 // SPS «Konsul'tant Plyus».
18.
Reshenie AS g. Moskvy ot 12.07.2012 po delu № A40-120769/11 51-1089 // SPS «Konsul'tant Plyus».
19.
Sukhanov E.A. Problema veshchnykh prav // Sukhanov E.A. Grazhdanskoe pravo Rossii – chastnoe pravo. M.: Statut, 2008. c. 261.
20.
Maleina M.N. Publichnye servituty // Zakonodatel'stvo. 2004. № 12. c. 9–10.
21.
Maleina M.N. Obremenenie chastnym ili publichnym servitutom zdanii i sooruzhenii // Khozyaistvo i pravo. 2006. № 7. s. 105–108.
22.
Mikryukov V.A. Ogranicheniya i obremeneniya grazhdanskikh prav. M.: Statut. 2007. 255 s.
23.
Sergeev A.P. Ogranicheniya isklyuchitel'nykh prav po zakonodatel'stvu rossiiskoi federatsii: v poiskakh razumnogo balansa interesov // Mezhdunarodnyi kommercheskii arbitrazh i voprosy chastnogo prava: Sbornik statei. M.: Statut, 2015. s. 184.
Link to this article

You can simply select and copy link from below text field.


Other our sites:
Official Website of NOTA BENE / Aurora Group s.r.o.
"History Illustrated" Website