Issue 3 (13) 2011

LIMITS OF REALIZATION OF SUBJECTIVE CIVIL LAW ON KNOW-HOW

LIMITS OF REALIZATION OF SUBJECTIVE CIVIL LAW ON KNOW-HOW

M.A. Glevich

Perm State National research University
15, Bukirev st., Perm, 614990
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Article is devoted a problem of delimitation of realization of the rights to know-how. Both in the theory, and in practice for the decision of the specified problem use criterion «uncertainty of confidential information to the third parties» in relative value. In the doctrine two approaches to definition of this criterion are revealed: subjective, based on the discretion of the legal owner, and objective at which uncertainty of data should be estimated on the basis of principles of objectivity, a rationality and justice taking into account quantity of the subjects, having by the information. Essential lacks of the specified approaches are revealed. The author also notices that in the doctrine concepts «uncertainty to the third parties» and «confidentiality» unreasonably mix up. On the basis of the established problems in work following questions are brought up: that is an essential sign of know-how:« confidentiality of the information » or its uncertainty to the third parties and what parity of these concepts; whether it is possible to consider degree of uncertainty of the classified information to the third parties as adequate and exact criterion of delimitation of confidentiality; whether there are alternative in relation to uncertainty of data to the third parties criteria of objective delimitation of existence of the rights to know-how. The author comes to a conclusion that« uncertainty to the third parties »is constantly changing condition of existence of the rights to know-how in corresponding borders of confidentiality, i.e. is quantitative criterion. Therefore «uncertainty to the third parties »cannot be essence of know-how, and is only its expression. The essence of know-how consists in confidentiality of data which make its maintenance. Besides, the author considers that application of such criterion as «uncertainty to the third parties», does not allow to define limits of realization of the rights to know-how and offers the variant of the decision of the specified problem which allows to define accurately borders of confidentiality and limits of realization of the rights corresponding to them on know-how.

Keywords: know-how; uncertainty; confidentiality; trade secret

Bibliograficheskij spisok

1. Belova D.A., Mozolin V.P. Osobennosti pravovogo rezhima nou-hau (sekreta proizvodstva) // Pravo i jekonomika. 2009. №4. S.44–49.

2. Golovackij R.E., Kornakov Ja. Kommercheskaja tajna: novelly pravovogo regulirovanija [Jelektronnyj resurs]. Dostup iz sprav.-pravovoj sistemy «Konsul'tant­Pljus».

3. Gordeeva I. Problemnye voprosy ohrany kommercheskoj tajny // Promyshlennaja sobstvennost'. 2010. №7. S. 24–33.

4. Gradobitova L.D., Isachenko T.M. Transnacional'nye korporacii v sovremen­nyh mezhdunarodnyh jekonomicheskih otno­shenijah. M.: ANKIL, 2002. 123 s.

5. Grazhdanskij kodeks Rossijskoj Federacii. Chast' 1: Feder. zakon Ros. Federacii ot 18 dek. 2006 №230-FZ // Sobr. zakono­datel'stva Rossijskoj Federacii. 2006. 25 dek.

6. Grafskaja N.S. Sovremennoe sostojanie, problemy i napravlenija razvitija mirovoj torgovli licenzijami: dis. … kand. jekon. nauk. M., 2007. 140 s.

7. Gribanov V.P. Predely osuwestvlenija i zawity grazhdanskih prav. M. : Ros. pravo, 1992. 205 s.

8. Dozorcev V.A. Intellektual'nnye prava: Ponjatie. Sistema. Zadachi kodifikacii. M.: Statut, 2005. 416 s.

9. Eremenko V.I. Sekret proizvodstva (nou-hau) kak ob#ekt iskljuchitel'nyh prav v sootvetstvii s chast'ju chetvertoj GK RF // Advokat. 2008. №5. S. 83–91.

10. Kanaevskij V.M. Grazhdansko-pravovaja ohrana informacii v rezhime kommercheskoj tajny v Rossii i SShA: dis. … kand. jurid. nauk. M., 2008. 197 s.

11. Karpova N.N. Intellektual'naja sobstvennost' v sisteme mirohozjajstvennyh svjazej: dis. … d-ra jekon. nauk. M., 2002. 374 s.

12. Kirilov V.I., Starchenko A.A. Logika M.: Prospekt, 2008. 233 s.

13. Malysheva G.K. Kommercheskaja tajna v zerkale zakona // Pravo i jekonomika 1999. №10. S. 20–24.

14. Marks K., Jengel's F. Sochinenija. M., 1961. T. 21. 782 s.

15. Obolenskij V.P. Rynok vysokih tehnologij – produkt innovacionnyh sistem // Vneshnejekon. bjul. 2003. №3.

16. O zawite konkurencii: Feder. zakon Ros. Federacii ot 26 ijulja 2006 g. №135-FZ // Ros. gaz. 2006. 27 ijulja.

17. O kommercheskoj tajne: Feder. zakon Ros. Federacii ot 29 ijulja 2004 g. // Ros. gaz. 2004. 5 avg.

18. Orlov V.V. Osnovy filosofii (chast' pervaja). Perm', 2001. 193 s.

19. Postanovlenie Vysshego arbitrazhnogo suda Rossijskoj Federacii ot 24 nojabrja 1998 g. №3900/98 [Jelektronnyj resurs]. Dostup iz sprav.-pravovoj sistemy «Konsul'tantPljus».

20. Postanovlenie Vosemnadcatogo arbitrazh­nogo apelljacionnogo suda ot 31 marta 2010 g. №18AP-580/2010 [Jelektronnyj resurs]. Dostup iz sprav.-pravovoj sistemy «Konsul'tantPljus».

21. Postanovlenie FAS Ural'skogo okruga ot 15 fevralja 2008 №F09-2395/08-S6 [Jelektronnyj resurs]. Dostup iz sprav.-pravovoj sistemy «Konsul'tantPljus».

22. Rozenberg V. Promyslovaja tajna. SPb., 1910.

23. Sinajskij V.I. Russkoe grazhdanskoe pravo. M.: Statut, 2002. 638 s.

24. Shishmareva E.V. Priznak kommercheskoj tajny – neizvestnost' informacii tret'im licam [Jelektronnyj resurs]. Dostup iz sprav.-pravovoj sistemy «Konsul'tant­Pljus».

25. Shishmareva E.V. Priznak kommercheskoj tajny – neizvestnost' informacii tret'im licam // Jurist. 2004. №8. S. 25–29.

26. Shtumpf G. Dogovor o peredache nou-hau. M.: Progress, 1976. 376 s.

27. Commission Draft Bill on Breach of Confidence [Jelektronnyj resurs]. URL: http://books.google.ru/books?id=x1eu0Y2oz8C&pg=PA327&lpg=PA327&dq=Law+Commission+Draft+Bill+on+Breach+of+Confidence.&source/ (data obrawenija: 17.06.2011).

28. Milgrim R.M. Milgrim on Trade Secrets. N.Y.: Mattew Bender, 1981. Vol. 1.

29. Nakoshi H. New Japanese Trade Secrets Act // Trademark Word. 1992. November. P. 26–30.

30. Saltman Engineering v Campbell Co., (1948) 65 RPC 203.

31. Trade Secrets Act as amended 1985 [Jelektronnyj resurs]. URL:http://euro.ecom.cmu.edu/program/law/08-732/TradeSecrets/utsa.pdf (data obrawenija:17.06.2011).

32. World Investment Report 2002: Transnational Corporations and Export Competitiveness. United Nations. N.Y. and Geneva, 2002. 347 p.

33. Yurui Z. The Protection of Trade Secrets: A new field in China's legal system // China Patents and Trademarks. 1996. №1.