International Cooperation And Differences Across Countries Case Study
2.5.2. International cooperation and differences across countries.
In 1883 in Paris was concluded the first international agreement in the sphere of industrial property right protection, which was named “Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property” according to the website of World Intellectual Property Organization. Convention was covering almost everything in terms of industrial property: patents, utility models, trademarks, service marks, trade names, industrial designs, geographical indications and the repression of unfair competition. Also the international agreement was several times reviewed, changed, amended and last time on 28 of September 1979. As it is written on the official website of WIPO, “this international agreement …show more content…
Applying all the above mentioned to Russia as a case study it becomes clear that all 3 reasons according to Lerner are appropriate to more or less extent: historical origins of the legal system in general and long-standing feudal inheritance have in complex with internal political situation and especially with the centralized power during the long period of time in USSR a huge impact on the delayed development of intellectual property rights protection. As it was already mentioned, additional driver for patent legislation and patent system development was movement toward capitalist economy and that movement/ stage of development is mostly seen in Russia only in 1990-s, in transition period, when the socialist regime together with the planned economy gave away to the market economy and that is why it is also of major interest to track this changes over the transition period. As all the 3 reasons of Lerner are suitable in this in particular case study and as relative economic strength is still at the level of developing countries it assumes lagging or not quite well developed system of intellectual property rights …show more content…
Russia and USSR as a case study.
3.1. Historical overview of patent legislation and patent system development.
3.1.1. Historical development of patents in the pre-soviet time (in tsarist Russia).
The history of Russian scientific-technical activities and their legal protection recedes into the past until the 18th century. In Russia the legal form of the patent was also developing from feudal privilege and property right protection document for invention was bearing this name even until the Russian revolution of 1917. Privilege document itself as the private monopoly developed from feudal charter to the nobility. Until the 16th century privilege documents in the form of charter in most cases were issued to monastery and not so often to private party. The majority of privilege charters were issued ensuring the right to pursue tax free trade or some craft.
Since the end of 16th century privilege charters were mostly granted to organization rather than to person, e.g. to manufacture, or for the purposes of useful or mineral resources mine, for instance. By the beginning of 18th century industrial privileges started to replace privilege charters on the purposes of tax free trade. Such industrial privileges were aiming to ensure and protect the right on the establishment of new manufactures, on trading of newly acquired goods or on development of deposits of useful
In 1883 in Paris was concluded the first international agreement in the sphere of industrial property right protection, which was named “Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property” according to the website of World Intellectual Property Organization. Convention was covering almost everything in terms of industrial property: patents, utility models, trademarks, service marks, trade names, industrial designs, geographical indications and the repression of unfair competition. Also the international agreement was several times reviewed, changed, amended and last time on 28 of September 1979. As it is written on the official website of WIPO, “this international agreement …show more content…
Applying all the above mentioned to Russia as a case study it becomes clear that all 3 reasons according to Lerner are appropriate to more or less extent: historical origins of the legal system in general and long-standing feudal inheritance have in complex with internal political situation and especially with the centralized power during the long period of time in USSR a huge impact on the delayed development of intellectual property rights protection. As it was already mentioned, additional driver for patent legislation and patent system development was movement toward capitalist economy and that movement/ stage of development is mostly seen in Russia only in 1990-s, in transition period, when the socialist regime together with the planned economy gave away to the market economy and that is why it is also of major interest to track this changes over the transition period. As all the 3 reasons of Lerner are suitable in this in particular case study and as relative economic strength is still at the level of developing countries it assumes lagging or not quite well developed system of intellectual property rights …show more content…
Russia and USSR as a case study.
3.1. Historical overview of patent legislation and patent system development.
3.1.1. Historical development of patents in the pre-soviet time (in tsarist Russia).
The history of Russian scientific-technical activities and their legal protection recedes into the past until the 18th century. In Russia the legal form of the patent was also developing from feudal privilege and property right protection document for invention was bearing this name even until the Russian revolution of 1917. Privilege document itself as the private monopoly developed from feudal charter to the nobility. Until the 16th century privilege documents in the form of charter in most cases were issued to monastery and not so often to private party. The majority of privilege charters were issued ensuring the right to pursue tax free trade or some craft.
Since the end of 16th century privilege charters were mostly granted to organization rather than to person, e.g. to manufacture, or for the purposes of useful or mineral resources mine, for instance. By the beginning of 18th century industrial privileges started to replace privilege charters on the purposes of tax free trade. Such industrial privileges were aiming to ensure and protect the right on the establishment of new manufactures, on trading of newly acquired goods or on development of deposits of useful