Individualization of Legal Objects by the Example of Goods: A Historical Digression

Sherbak, Natalia

doi:10.18254/S207987840030893-1

English

Home>Issue 4 (138)>Individualization of Legal Objects by the Example of Goods: A Historical Digression

Individualization of Legal Objects by the Example of Goods: A Historical Digression

Table of contents

Annotation Estimate Publication content

References Comments

Individualization of Legal Objects by the Example of Goods: A Historical Digression

Annotation

PII

S207987840030893-1-1

DOI

10.18254/S207987840030893-1

Publication type

Article

Status

Published

Authors

Natalia Sherbak Send message

Affiliation:
Lomonosov Moscow State University
Kutafin Moscow State Law University
Address: Russian Federation, Moscow

Edition

Volume 15 Issue 4 (138)

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to study the legal mechanisms of individualization of goods, which make it possible to specify the standards for granting protection to trademarks as means of individualization of goods (services), mainly in the historical aspect. The goods sold in civil circulation are generally homogeneous, due to the similarity of the urgent needs existing in society. Therefore, manufacturers (sellers) want to stand out from competitors by individualizing their products (services) in order to attract visitors, consumers and be remembered by them, thereby creating competitive advantages for themselves and for their business.

Keywords

means of individualization of goods (services), trademarks, functions of trademarks, types of trademarks, generally known trademarks, registration models, convention priority, exhibition priority, intersection of legal regimes of works and trademarks, international trademark registration, national office

Received

29.01.2024

Publication date

15.06.2024

Number of characters

40809

Number of purchasers

Views

114

Readers community rating

0.0 (0 votes)

Cite Download pdf 200 RUB / 1.0 SU

To download PDF you should pay the subscribtion

GOST	Sherbak N. Individualization of Legal Objects by the Example of Goods: A Historical Digression // ISTORIYA. – 2024. – V. 15. – Issue 4 (138). URL: https://history.jes.su/s207987840030893-1-1/. DOI: 10.18254/S207987840030893-1
MLA	Sherbak, Natalia "Individualization of Legal Objects by the Example of Goods: A Historical Digression." ISTORIYA. 15.4 (138) (2024). DOI: 10.18254/S207987840030893-1
APA	Sherbak N. (2024). Individualization of Legal Objects by the Example of Goods: A Historical Digression. ISTORIYA. vol. 15, no. 4 (138) DOI: 10.18254/S207987840030893-1

Full text is available to subscribers only

Subscribe right now

Only article and additional services

Subscription benefits

200 RUB / 1.0 SU

Whole issue and additional services

Subscription benefits

820 RUB / 10.0 SU

All issues and additional services for 2024

Subscription benefits

5000 RUB / 50.0 SU

References

1. Afanas'eva E. G. Kumulyativnaya okhrana sredstv individualizatsii: velikan Blenderbor, poleznaya smes' ili zloupotreblenie pravom // Pravo intellektual'noj sobstvennosti. № 1 (42). 2022. S. 61—68.

2. Biryulin V. I., Dudushkin S. V., Kalinovskij V. E. Tovarnye znaki v Rossijskoj Federatsii. Sbornik. M.: Arbat-Inform, 2004.

3. Vorozhevich A. S. Granitsy isklyuchitel'nykh prav, predely ikh osuschestvleniya i zaschity: diss. … dokt. yur. nauk: 12.00.03. M., 2021.

4. Zajtseva E. A. Pravovaya okhrana obscheizvestnykh tovarnykh znakov: diss. … kand. yur. nauk: 12.00.03. M., 1998.

5. Orlova V. V. Pravovaya okhrana obscheizvestnykh tovarnykh znakov v Rossijskoj Federatsii. M.: Inform.-izdat. tsentr Rospatenta (INITs), 2004.

6. Pozdnyakova E. A. Pravo intellektual'noj sobstvennosti: uchebnik i praktikum dlya akademicheskogo bakalavriata / 2-e izd., ispr. i dop. M.: Yurajt, 2018.

7. Pravo intellektual'noj sobstvennosti. Uchebnik. V 4 t. / pod obsch. red. d. yu. n., prof. L. A. Novoselovoj. T. 3. Sredstva individualizatsii. M.: Statut, 2018.

8. Rozhkova M. A. O dopustimosti ispol'zovaniya terminov «Torgovaya marka», «Servisnyj znak» i «Proizvodstvennaya marka» // Zhurnal rossijskogo prava. 2015. № 4 (220). S. 46—53.

9. Sherbak N. Historic Changes in Copyright: From Absolute Monopoly to Complete Denial (Copyleft) // ISTORIYA. 2022. Vol. 13. Issue 9 (119). URL: https://history.jes.su/s207987840022916-6-1/ DOI: 10.18254/S207987840022916-6

10. Calboli I. Overlapping trademark and copyright protection: A call for concern and action // University of Illinois Law Review. 2014. Vol. 2014 (1). P. 25—34.

11. Krieger D. J. The broad sweep of aesthetic functionality: A threat to trademark protection of aesthetic product features // Fordham Law Review. 1982. Vol. 51. Is. 2. Article 5. P. 345—386.

12. McKenna M. P. Separability as Channeling: A Cautionary Tale // Transition and Coherence in Intellectual Property Law: Essays in Honour of Annette Kur / ed. by N. Bruun, G. B. Dinwoodie, M. Levin, A. Ohly. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2020. P. 344—351.

13. Mende C. S., Isaac B. When Copyright and Trademark Rights Overlap // Overlapping Intellectual Property Rights / ed. by N. Wilkof., S. Basheer. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012. P. 137—212.

14. Posner R. A., Landes W. A. The economic structure of intellectual property law. Cambridge, MA; L.: Belknap Press, 2003.

15. Selvakumar M. D. Overlap of Trademarks with Other Intellectual Property Rights: The Strategies of Global Brands // Beijing Law Review. 2022. Vol. 13. P. 429—448.

16. Smith L. S. Implementing a Registration System for Famous Trademarks // Trademark Reporter. 2003. Vol. 93. P. 1097—1152.