پیوندهای مفید
اخبار و اعلانات
آمار
| تعداد نشریات | 158 |
| تعداد شماره‌ها | 6,240 |
| تعداد مقالات | 67,867 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 115,409,677 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 90,178,913 |
ریسک قراردادی بی‌اعتباری گواهی‌های اموال فکری در حوزة مالکیت صنعتی | ||
| مطالعات حقوق خصوصی | ||
| مقاله 5، دوره 53، شماره 3، آبان 1402، صفحه 445-464 اصل مقاله (1.07 M) | ||
| نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22059/jlq.2024.358394.1007765 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| محسن صادقی* 1؛ میترا محتشمی2 | ||
| 1دانشیار، گروه حقوق خصوصی و اسلامی، دانشکدة حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران. | ||
| 2دانشجوی، دکتری حقوق خصوصی، مؤسسة عالی آموزش و پژوهش مدیریت و برنامه‌ریزی، تهران، ایران. | ||
| چکیده | ||
| اموال فکری حوزة مالکیت صنعتی برای برخورداری از حمایت قانونی نیازمند ارزیابی در مراجع ثبت و اخذ گواهینامه است. گواهینامة صادره مبتنی بر اصل صحت و اعتبار است؛ لیکن این اصل قانونی همواره با عدم قطعیت روبه‌روست؛ بدین‌مفهوم که هر ذی‌نفع مجاز است تا ابطال گواهینامه را از دادگاه تقاضا کند. ازاین‌رو صحت اعتبار گواهینامه یکی از ریسک‌های قراردادهای مرتبط با اموال فکری است؛ به‌طوری‌که با اعلام بی‌اعتباری گواهی و اثر قهقرایی وارد بر آن، معاملات مبتنی بر آن مال فکری، وضعیت حقوقی متفاوتی خواهند داشت. این مقاله که با روش تحلیلی- توصیفی تدوین و از طریق مطالعة کتابخانه‌ای تهیه شده و به‌دنبال بررسی ریسک قراردادی بی‌اعتباری گواهی اموال فکری در حوزة مالکیت صنعتی است. نتیجة پژوهش ارائة اقدامات احتیاطی مانند شرط وارانتی، شرط عدم چالش اعتبار و شرط تضمین تمدید اعتبار در قراردادها با هدف تخصیص ریسک و کاهش هزینة حادثه قراردادی است. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها | ||
| ابطال گواهینامه؛ اثر قهقرایی؛ ریسک بی‌اعتباری؛ شرط عدم چالش؛ وارانتی | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| A Contractual Risk of Invalidity of Intellectual Property Certificates in the Field of Industrial Property | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| Mohsen Sadeghi1؛ Mitra Mohtashami2 | ||
| 1Associate Professor, Faculty of Law, University of Tehran. Tehran. Iran. | ||
| 2PhD Student in Private Law, The Institute for Management and Planning Studies Tehran.Iran. | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| This article investigates the contractual risks associated with intellectual property certificate invalidation in industrial property. To enjoy legal protection, intellectual property, including inventions, trademarks, and industrial designs, must be evaluated by the registration authority, and a certificate must be obtained. The certificate, issued based on the principles of authenticity and validity, becomes susceptible to uncertainty as beneficiaries can request its cancellation from the court, posing a significant risk to contracts related to intellectual property. The declaration of invalidity and its retroactive effect alter the legal status of transactions grounded in intellectual property, introducing complexities and challenges. This article explores the challenges posed by intellectual property certificate invalidation, aiming to provide a comprehensive understanding of the risks and offer preventive measures to mitigate potential contractual accidents. This research addresses the contractual risk associated with the invalidation of intellectual property certificates in industrial property. The legal principle of authenticity and validity of these certificates, a prerequisite for legal protection, introduces uncertainty. Concerns arise about the legal status of transactions based on the related intellectual property, given the potential for any beneficiary to challenge the certificate's validity in court. The main issue is the retroactive effect of a judgment that declares the certificate invalid, which affects the legal status of previous transactions. Invalidating the certificate presents a significant contractual risk because parties unaware of this possibility during contract drafting may lose privileges, such as compensation for damages. This study aims to clarify the intricacies of invalidating intellectual property certificates and offer practical solutions for managing this contractual risk effectively. This study adopts a descriptive-analytical method, leveraging a comprehensive library review to investigate the contractual risks of intellectual property certificate invalidation. The analytical approach allows for exploring legal principles, previous research, and risk management strategies within industrial property contracts. In examining the retroactive effect of certificate invalidation, the study dives into the legal intricacies and establishes a conceptual foundation for understanding the associated contractual risks. The research aligns with a risk management approach, aiming to identify proactive measures to address these risks effectively. The primary question is identifying legal solutions to mitigate the risks associated with intellectual property certificate invalidation in industrial property contracts. The hypothesis posits that implementing preventive measures, such as warranty conditions and non-challenge clauses, can effectively manage these risks. The research comprehensively understands the legal landscape surrounding intellectual property certificate validity, offering practical insights into risk allocation and cost reduction through contractual safeguards. The theoretical framework of this research is grounded in the principles of intellectual property law, particularly in industrial property. Authenticity and validity serve as a foundational element, forming the basis for legal protection. The theoretical framework also considers the retroactive effect of judgments declaring certificate invalidity, acknowledging the profound impact such judgments can have on the legal landscape of intellectual property transactions. By delving into the intersection of legal risk and contractual risk, the research establishes a theoretical foundation for understanding the complexities associated with the invalidation of intellectual property certificates. Research Questions include: what are the legal implications of declaring intellectual property certificates invalid in industrial property contracts? How does the retroactive effect of judgments declaring certificate invalidity impact prior transactions? What legal solutions can be identified to mitigate the contractual risks associated with intellectual property certificate invalidation? Hypotheses include the retroactive effect of intellectual property certificate invalidation significantly alters the legal status of prior transactions. Proactive measures, such as warranty conditions, non-challenge clauses, and credit extension guarantees, can effectively mitigate the contractual risks associated with intellectual property certificate invalidation. The research comprehensively explains the contractual risk introduced by intellectual property certificate invalidation. It identifies the theoretical underpinnings of the problem, emphasizing the importance of the authenticity and validity principles in industrial property contracts. The retroactive effect of judgments declaring certificate invalidity is analyzed, revealing its potential to impact the legal standing of past transactions. The research suggests preventive measures, including warranty conditions, non-challenge clauses, and credit extension guarantees, as practical strategies to allocate risk and reduce the costs of contractual accidents associated with intellectual property certificate invalidation. In conclusion, this research sheds light on the contractual risks arising from the invalidation of intellectual property certificates in industrial property. The theoretical framework, rooted in the principles of authenticity and validity, provides a solid foundation for understanding the complexities of legal protection in intellectual property transactions. The retroactive effect of judgments declaring certificate invalidity emerges as a critical factor, potentially altering the legal landscape of prior transactions. By addressing research questions and hypotheses, the study underscores the importance of proactive measures, such as warranty conditions and non-challenge clauses, to effectively mitigate the identified contractual risks. The achievements of this research contribute to the existing body of knowledge by offering a comprehensive analysis of the legal implications and risks associated with intellectual property certificate invalidation. The suggested preventive measures serve as valuable insights for legal practitioners, policymakers, and stakeholders in industrial property. Ultimately, this research enhances our understanding of the intricate relationship between legal and contractual risks, paving the way for more informed and resilient approaches to managing intellectual property risks in contractual agreements. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها [English] | ||
| Revocation of Certificate, Retroactive Effect, Invalidity Risk, Not Challenging Term, Warranty, Certificate Validity, Legal Risks, Non-Challenge Condition | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
منابع
الف) فارسی
http://www.iriplawjournal.ir/article_141893_2d53cf2ffac20d749bd6ae37c07eb030.pdf، (10 دی 1401).
ب) خارجی
19. Florida Jury Instructions/ Civil / 411 Substantive Instructions/ 411.3 Clear and Convincing Evidence, available at https://www.formsworkflow.com/form/details/116741-florida_ji-411-3-clear-and-convincing-evidence, (Accessed 7 July 2023). 20. Liping, H., & Zhang, L. (2011). Research on the Relationship between Invalid Patent and the Validity of Patent Contract. Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Innovation & Management, 897-900. Available at https://www.pucsp.br/icim/ingles/downloads/papers_2011/part_5/part_5_proc_10.pdf , (Accessed 16 June 2021). 21. Marchese, D. (2009). warranties and covenants in IP licenses«, Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, 4(3), 190–202, https://doi.org/10.1093/jiplp/jpn252. 22. Mustafa, Z. (2018). Unjustified Patent Enforcement, MIPLC Master Thesis http://www.miplc.de/research/ Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=3417103. 23. Ritchie, L. (2008). Reconciling Contract Doctrine with Intellectual Property Law: An Interdisciplinary Solution. Santa Clara High Technology Law Journal, 25(1), 105-157, Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.scu.edu/chtlj/vol25/iss1/5. (Accessed 16 June 2022). 24. Seaman, C.B., (2015) . Empirical Studies Relating to Patents - Presumption of Validity, Research Handbook on the Economics of Intellectual Property Law Vol. 2 – Analytical Methods, 1-22. Available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2671581 (Accessed 30 September 2022) . 25. Server, A. C., Peter, S. (2011). Licensee Patent Validity Challenges Following MedImmune: Implications for Patent Licensing. Hastings Science & Technology Law Journal, 243-440, Available at https://www.wilmerhale.com/-/media/b4e8be636e474d2dbbce02e03f88cde2.pdf, (Accessed 5 December 2022). 26. Trzaskowski Jan. (2005). Legal Risk Management – Some Reflection”s, seminar on the management of legal risks, Oslo University. Available at http://www.legalriskmanagement.com/PUBLICATIONS/2005_LRM.pdf , (Accessed 30 September 2022). 27. UNIDO, (2022), Warranties in Technology Transfer Transactions, Partially adapted from the "Training Manual on Technology Transfer", available at http://www.1000ventures.com/technology_transfer/tt_warranties_byunido.html#Annex. (Accessed 20 September 2022). | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 153 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 162 |
||