Fairy tales in the circle of children's reading. List of sources used

According to the Constitution of the Russian Federation, intellectual property is protected by law (clause 1 of Article 44). The basic law of the country refers the legal regulation of intellectual property to the jurisdiction Russian Federation(paragraph “o” of Article 71). Thus, the protection of the results of the intellectual activity of the individual is proclaimed and enshrined at the constitutional level.

The main provisions relating to intellectual property, the system of its objects, their state registration, protection and protection measures are contained in the fourth part of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation (hereinafter referred to as the Civil Code of the Russian Federation), which replaced the list of individual regulatory legal acts in the field of legal protection and protection of intellectual property. property.

According to article 1225 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the results of intellectual activity and equated means of individualization of legal entities, goods, works, services and enterprises to which legal protection(intellectual property) are:

• 1) works of science, literature and art;
• 2) programs for electronic computers (programs for

• 3) databases;
• 4) performance;
• 5) phonograms;
• 6) communication on the air or by cable of radio or television programs (broadcasting

broadcasting or cable broadcasting organizations);

• 7) inventions;
• 8) utility models;
• 9) industrial designs;
• 10) selection achievements;
• 11) topology of integrated circuits;
• 12) production secrets (know-how);
• 13) trade names;
• 14) trademarks and service marks;
• 15) names of places of origin of goods;
• 16) commercial designations.

Part 2 of the same article repeats the constitutional provision that intellectual property is protected by law.

Thus, modern intellectual property legislation provides protection for several rather heterogeneous groups of objects that are the results of intellectual activity (works, inventions, etc.) or means of individualization of legal entities, goods, works, services and enterprises (commodity signs, trade names, etc.).

Before proceeding to the concept of protection of rights to intellectual property objects, it is necessary to determine the relationship between such concepts as "legal protection" and "legal protection". This is traditionally one of the debatable issues in the scientific legal literature, and we propose to consider it in relation to intellectual property.

Most researchers are inclined to believe that "protection" and "protection" are different legal categories.

It seems to us logical the position of scientists who consider the establishment of a general legal regime as protection, and under the protection of law they understand the system of means aimed at preventing offenses and eliminating their consequences.

At the same time, the formulation of A.M. Orekhov, who interprets the concept of intellectual property protection from socio-philosophical positions. So, by "protection of intellectual property" he understands its protection from someone else's encroachments, as well as the creation of conditions for obtaining various types of remuneration from an individual (or group of individuals) - the creator of a particular intellectual property.

The position of I.A. Gemini about the protection of the right as its real implementation. “In accordance with the tradition that has developed in Russian legal practice, it is customary to distinguish between the protection of rights (the establishment of a general legal regime) and the protection of rights (measures that are taken in cases where civil rights are violated or challenged). If the law gives the right, then it must also give the means of its protection. Actually, the protection of the right is nothing else than its real, in necessary cases, compulsory implementation.

The legal protection of intellectual property objects seems to us to be a broader concept in comparison with the concept of "protection" and includes the entire list of measures of state and legal regulation that allow for the normal development of public relations in the field of intellectual resources and aimed at realizing the rights and legitimate interests of persons who are both manufacturers of an intellectual product and its consumers. The category "legal protection" applies either to the entire concept of "intellectual property" (the results of intellectual activity and equated means of individualization of legal entities, goods, works, services and enterprises), or to a specific group of intellectual property objects (for example, to means of individualization of goods ), or to a specific object of intellectual property (for example, to the name of the place of origin of goods).

When it comes to the protection of intellectual property rights, it means a situation with a violated right, where certain public and (or) private interests are affected. Therefore, the use of the term "legal protection" is natural not in relation to an intellectual property object (or the entire system of intellectual property objects protected by law), but in relation to the rights to this object. Taking into account the application of the sectoral principle of legal regulation, the protection of rights to objects of intellectual property to some extent provides a certain group of interests, more precisely, a certain ratio of interests. Thus, we have approached the problem of various methods (or levels) of legal protection of intellectual property rights based on the sectoral principle.

The current legislation provides various ways protection of rights to objects of intellectual property. These are, first of all, civil-law, as well as administrative-legal and criminal-legal methods, which consist in establishing responsibility for violations in the field of intellectual property.

Note that the protection of rights to various intellectual property objects (types of objects) is specific both in terms of the scope of protection and in its content. In the future, this provision will be considered within the framework of the system of administrative and legal protection of rights to objects of intellectual property.

Before characterizing the concept of administrative and legal protection of intellectual property rights and its place in the system of general legal protection, it is necessary to reveal the historiography of the issue.

The problems of legal protection and protection of rights to intellectual property objects have become the object of research by many scientists. First scientific works devoted to the protection of intellectual property were written back in tsarist Russia, these issues were actively studied in the so-called " Soviet period”, this scientific direction is also developing in the modern period, which is characterized by an expansion of the range and depth of research, as well as their practical orientation.

Among the pre-revolutionary researchers, V.V. Rozenberg and Ya.S. Rosen.

In the Soviet period, these issues were studied in various aspects by such scientists as S.I. Raevich, A.P. Pavlinskaya, V.M. Sergeev, A.N. Aduev, N.I. Konyaev, V.P. Shatrov , Yu.I. Svyadosts, L.P. Salenko, E.A. Arievich and others.

Among modern scientists in the field of legal protection and protection of intellectual property, it is possible to single out separate groups specializing in certain areas of research.

Thus, general issues of intellectual property protection are covered in the works of V.A. Dozortsev and A.P. Sergeyev.

Great contribution to the development of issues in the field copyright introduced by I.A. Gemini. One of the leading experts specializing in the problems of legal regulation of intellectual property is E.P. Gavrilov.

Among other scientists, one should also mention I.A. Gringolts, V.O.

Kalyatina, E.A. Pavlov, S.P. Grishaev, who studied the problems of copyright and related rights.

Patent law issues were studied by V.I. Dementiev, V.I.

Eremenko, L.A. Trakhtengerts, N.K. Finkel.

A number of authors devoted their works to the legal protection and protection of means of individualization. Among them, S.A. Gorlenko, V.V. Orlov, A.P. Rabets, I.A. Petrova, O.A. Gorodova, E.A. Zaitsev, D.A. Belov, A.N. Grigorieva.

The works of O.L. Alekseeva.

The problems of formation and development of the system of legal protection of intellectual property rights in the European Union were studied by A.I. Abdullin.

The works of M.M. Boguslavsky and A.L. Makovsky.

In the context of the development and adoption of the fourth part of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, most of the research in the field of intellectual property concerned the civil law aspects of its protection. Nevertheless, it is possible to name the authors who in their works covered the issues of administrative-legal and criminal law protection of rights to objects of intellectual property. Thus, the administrative and legal aspects of the protection of intellectual property objects were studied by D.E. Salnova, I.L. Zaitseva, A.E. Filimonov, V.A. Lokhbaum, Yu. Gulbin, V. Pogulyaev. Among the authors who considered the issues of criminal law protection in the field of intellectual property, one should single out A.I. Galchenko , G. Glukhov , L. G. Machkovsky , E.V. Tolstaya.

AT last years such a direction in the topic under consideration as the protection of intellectual property rights during cross-border movement is being actively developed. This is connected, first of all, with the creation and functioning of the Customs Union of Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan. The issues of formation and development of the mechanism for the protection of intellectual property rights as one of the most important functions of the customs authorities at the present stage will be considered in detail in the third chapter of the work. This function customs authorities of the Russian Federation is investigated by V.V. Astanin, M. Tyunin, E. Trunina, V.V. Dmitriev, M.V. Dolgova, E.Yu. Izmailova, A. Nikitina and others. Of particular value in this regard are the studies of practical scientists who are officials of the customs authorities and consider practical aspects problems of protection of rights to intellectual property objects when moving across the customs border. These include articles by O.M. Ashurkova, S.N. Shurygina, L.I. Muratova, E.V. Galiullina.

Unfortunately, there are very few works devoted to the so-called "departmental aspect" of the protection of intellectual property rights. Such publications are interesting and useful from a practical point of view. Among such authors-practitioners we will name A. Palamarchuk, who studies the issues of protection of exclusive rights within the framework of prosecutorial supervision, V.V. Doroshkov, who analyzes the judicial practice of protecting intellectual property.

There are also isolated studies devoted to the use of exclusive rights in the framework of the antimonopoly

were considered in the publications of D. Gavrilov, R. Popov, A. Krasnov. Also, works devoted to the relationship between the protection of intellectual property rights and the protection of consumer rights appear extremely rarely. Among them, we highlight the article by S.V. Butenko.

In connection with the upcoming Winter Olympics in our country, the interest of scientists and practitioners in the problems of protecting Olympic and Paralympic symbols is growing. Among the authors of numerous scientific publications on this topic, we will name O.A. Gorodova, A. Egorov, V.B. Serdyukov, Ya.V. Serdyukov.

In recent years, there have been many publications related to the topic of the so-called "exhaustion of rights". This is primarily due to the controversial judicial practice in the field of legal protection of intellectual property rights when moving goods across the customs border. Issues of protecting the rights of copyright holders in export-import transactions will be considered in the third chapter. We note the fact that some authors who study these issues suggest different variants"exhaustion" of "exhaustion" questions. We see the solution to the problem in the application of a systematic approach that combines the reform of legislation, the development of uniform judicial practice, and the formation of specialized institutions of civil society. This aspect is of particular relevance in the context of the creation of a single economic space on the territory of the Customs Union of Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan and the unification of the legislation of the three countries, including in the field of protection of intellectual property rights.

Summing up a small historiographic analysis, we note that, despite the diversity of aspects of the problem of intellectual property protection, the issues of administrative and legal protection are considered by a few authors narrowly and locally, which, in our opinion, does not allow us to single out this level of protection as an independent system. This system includes, as subjects, bodies that carry out administrative and legal functions to protect the rights to intellectual property objects, the intellectual property objects themselves.

property subject to protection at the administrative-legal level, and a protection mechanism that has its own specifics under certain conditions (type of intellectual property object, conditions for using an intellectual property object, etc.). Most of the works on the research topic consider one or another element of the system of administrative and legal protection of rights to intellectual property objects, due to the classification of objects (protection of the Olympic and

Paralympic symbols, etc.), the classification of subjects (protection of intellectual property rights by customs authorities, prosecutorial supervision in the field of intellectual property legislation, etc.) and the conditions for implementing the protection mechanism (protection during cross-border movement, protection of rights in conditions of unfair competition, etc.) .

The allocation of a system of administrative and legal protection of rights to objects of intellectual property will solve a number of theoretical and practical problems.

The first ones are related to the definition of the object composition (classification of intellectual property objects subject to administrative and legal protection), the subject composition (the system of bodies exercising administrative and legal protection; the system of authors and other right holders; the system of public organizations; the system of ordinary consumers of products using objects of intellectual property ) and the conditions for the implementation of the mechanism of administrative and legal protection (identification and suppression of administrative offenses, the application of measures of administrative and legal responsibility).

The tasks of a practical orientation are to determine the conditions for the effectiveness of mechanisms for the administrative and legal protection of rights to objects of intellectual property and to ensure a balance of private and public interests as a result of the effectiveness of the functioning of the system under consideration.

Let us determine the place of the considered system of administrative and legal protection of rights to objects of intellectual property in the structure of the system of general legal protection of intellectual property rights. To highlight the features of this level of protection, we give general characteristics methods of protection of rights to objects of intellectual property in accordance with the industry principle.

The protection of intellectual property rights in accordance with the current Russian legislation is carried out through civil law, administrative law and criminal law methods.

According to Article 1248 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, disputes related to the protection of violated or contested intellectual rights are considered and resolved by the court.

At the same time, the legislation also provides for an administrative procedure for the protection of intellectual property rights. It is used exclusively in cases provided for by the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, namely, in relations related to the filing and consideration of applications for the grant of patents for inventions, utility models, industrial designs, selection achievements, trademarks, service marks and appellations of origin of goods, with the state registration of these results of intellectual activity and means of individualization, with the issuance of the relevant title documents, challenging the provision of these results and means of legal protection or its termination.

The legislator names the federal executive authorities for intellectual property (Rospatent), selection achievements, the State Atomic Energy Corporation "Rosatom" and other federal executive authorities authorized by the Government of the Russian Federation as state bodies exercising the protection of intellectual rights in an administrative manner. Decisions of these bodies come into force from the date of adoption, and they can be challenged in court in accordance with the procedure established by law. It should be noted that the administrative procedure for protecting intellectual property rights is inherent not only in civil law methods of protection, but also in administrative law, which will be discussed later.

According to paragraph 1 of Article 1250 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, intellectual rights are protected by the methods provided for by civil law, taking into account the essence of the violated right and the consequences of violating this right.

Protection of intellectual rights can be carried out using:

• 1) general ways of protecting civil rights - recognition of the right, restoration of the situation that existed before the violation of the right, and suppression of actions that violate the right or create a threat of its violation, compensation for damages, compensation moral damage etc. (Article 12 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation);
• 2) special methods of protection provided for by part four of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation.

Thus, general methods of protection are applied in case of violation of the author's personal non-property rights, and the protection of his honor, dignity and business reputation is carried out in accordance with general rules Art. 152 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation.

Requirements for the protection of intellectual property rights are presented by interested parties, namely right holders, organizations managing rights on a collective basis, as well as licensees who have received an exclusive license (Article 1254 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation).

Special methods of civil law protection are provided by the legislator for violations of exclusive rights and, in accordance with Article 1252 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, are carried out, in particular, by presenting a requirement:

• 1) on the recognition of the right - to a person who denies or otherwise does not recognize the right, thereby violating the interests of the right holder;
• 2) on the suppression of actions that violate the right or create a threat of its violation - to the person committing such actions or making the necessary preparations for them;
• 3) on compensation for losses - to a person who unlawfully used the result of intellectual activity or a means of individualization without concluding an agreement with the right holder (non-contractual use) or otherwise violated his exclusive right and caused him damage;
• 4) on the seizure of the material carrier from the infringer of the exclusive right - to its manufacturer, importer, custodian, carrier, seller, other distributor, unscrupulous purchaser;
• 5) on the publication of a court decision on the committed violation, indicating the actual right holder - to the violator of the exclusive right.

The specificity of civil law methods of protection is based on the basic principles of civil law, the purpose of these methods is to ensure, first of all, the interests of authors and other right holders (private interests). Ensuring public interests in civil law protection is indirect.

Administrative-legal and criminal-legal methods also reflect industry principles and ensure that the interests of authors and other right holders, users of exclusive rights (private), an indefinite circle of persons and the state (public) are observed.

These aspects are inextricably linked with each other and are, to a certain extent, a prerequisite and a consequence of each other.

In this regard, the opinion of V.A. Dozortsev about a specific feature inherent only in exclusive rights and weakening their absolute nature, which is a system of restrictions on such rights aimed at balancing the interests of authors, other right holders, individual users of exclusive rights and the whole society as a whole. This includes the limited duration of exclusive rights, their territorial nature, lists of cases of free (without the consent of the copyright holder and without additional remuneration) use of specific objects of exclusive rights in dedicated special laws, as well as cases of issuance of compulsory licenses provided for by law.

In the context of escalating security problems and improving the quality of life, the public law aspect of protection is of particular relevance, which necessitates research in the field of administrative and criminal protection of intellectual property rights.

According to A.P. Sergeev, although administrative and criminal law measures to combat offenses in this area are not the main ones, sometimes they turn out to be more effective means of influencing violators.

Illegal use of someone else's trademark, service mark, appellation of origin of goods or designations similar to them for homogeneous goods, if this act has been committed repeatedly or caused major damage, constitutes a crime under Part 1 of Article 180 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (hereinafter referred to as the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation) .

Criminal law also provides for liability for violation of copyright and related rights, if this act caused major damage to the author or other right holder (Article 146 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), for the illegal use of an invention, utility model or industrial design, disclosure without the consent of the author or applicant of the essence of the invention, useful model or industrial design before the official publication of information about them, the appropriation of authorship or coercion to co-authorship, if these acts caused major damage (Article 147 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), etc.

Civil law, administrative law and criminal law methods of protecting rights to intellectual property objects have certain similar features. All of these methods are single system general legal protection of intellectual property rights. These methods, identified according to the industry principle, can also be represented as a kind of protection levels. At the same time, the levels of civil-legal and criminal-legal protection are beyond the scope of this work and will be considered only in a comparative context in relation to administrative-legal protection.

Let us highlight the main features of administrative and legal methods of protection that distinguish them from other methods.

• 1. Administrative and legal methods, unlike civil law methods of protection, are more aimed at protecting public interests.
• 2. In comparison with criminal law methods, the means of administrative legal protection have a wider range of action.

The delimitation of criminal responsibility from administrative can be carried out not only according to the degree of public danger (harmfulness) of the act, but also according to the subjective criterion. Thus, expanding coverage

administrative liability is due both to the amount of damage (administrative offenses are less dangerous and more common) and to the subject composition (only individuals are brought to criminal liability, to administrative - citizens, legal entities, officials).

3. This level of protection implies a more effective opportunity to influence the situation in the field of intellectual property. So, if it is difficult to influence the activity of the position of authors and other right holders who protect their rights (this is due to significant time costs, a certain level of legal awareness, etc.), then expand the powers of certain state bodies that identify and suppress

intellectual property offenses as quickly as possible.

Based on the above, we will give a definition of the concept of administrative and legal protection of rights to objects of intellectual property.

property.

Administrative and legal protection of rights to intellectual property objects is the law enforcement and law enforcement activities of specially authorized state bodies in order to identify, suppress administrative offenses in the field of intellectual property, restore violated rights to intellectual property objects, bring the perpetrators to administrative responsibility and (or) create conditions to bring them to another type of legal liability.

Administrative and legal protection of intellectual property rights is based on economic, political, organizational and legal guarantees.

Economic guarantees imply a certain level of economic development, the active development of market mechanisms and entrepreneurship, the expansion of domestic and foreign economic relations, a stable financial and monetary system, an increase in the welfare of citizens, an increase in the quality of life, and much more.

Political guarantees provide for certain qualitative characteristics of the political system of society: the priority of the individual and citizen in society and the state; recognition of human rights and freedoms as the highest value, ideological diversity, strong and stable state power, the principle of separation of powers, the independence of the judiciary in society, and much more.

Organizational guarantees consist in the creation and functioning of a stable system of law enforcement, controlling, registering, inspecting, supervising and other state and public organizations. These are, first of all, the judiciary, as well as Rospatent, the prosecutor's office, internal affairs bodies, customs authorities, antimonopoly authorities and others. The Russian Authors' Society (RAO), the All-Russian Society of Intellectual Property (WIPO) and others should be mentioned as public organizations capable of influencing the effective system of administrative and legal protection of intellectual property rights. With the development of protective mechanisms in relation to intellectual property in society, the role of their activities increases significantly.

Legal guarantees can be divided into two groups: legislative and law enforcement. The first is to establish a certain level of legislation in the field of intellectual property, consistent with international standards and rules. The second group of guarantees is related to law enforcement practice and is based on its improvement and unification.

Based on the foregoing, we draw some conclusions.

The Russian Federation has a constitutional principle of protection of intellectual property. The main legal act

regulating public relations in the field of intellectual property is the fourth part of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. Its adoption became the basis for the process of codification of legislation in the field of intellectual property, which consists in combining

existing norms, as well as their improvement.

The current Russian legislation provides protection for a whole system of intellectual property objects, which includes the results of intellectual activity and equivalent means of individualization of legal entities, goods, works, services and enterprises.

Taking into account the position on the relationship between the concepts of "legal protection" and "legal protection", we present the legal protection of intellectual property objects as a system of measures of state and legal regulation aimed at ensuring the normal development of public relations in the field of intellectual property and the optimal ratio of private and public interests in the field of intellectual property. creation and use of the results of intellectual activity.

The category "legal protection" is applicable either to the entire conceptual block "intellectual property", to separate group objects of intellectual property, or to a specific object of intellectual property.

The concept of “protection” is essentially narrower than the concept of “protection” and is applicable in conditions of violation of an established and protected right. In this regard, it is logical to use it in relation to intellectual property rights.

The system of legal protection of rights to objects of intellectual property includes a number of levels, allocated according to the sectoral principle. Various levels protection is provided by certain interest groups. Thus, the ratio of private and public interests at different industry levels of protection is different.

In scientific research on the issues of legal protection and protection of intellectual property, a number of areas can be identified. In general, they are differentiated depending on the object of protection (copyright, means of individualization). Less clearly, one can identify the sectoral classification (civil-legal protection, administrative-legal methods). In the modern period, research in the field of legal regulation of the protection of intellectual property rights during cross-border movement, as well as the study of comparative legal aspects of protection, have received particular relevance. This is due to the processes of formation and functioning of the Customs Union of Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan as a new form of integration, as well as the development of international economic cooperation, the most important resource of which has become the intellectual component.

Review scientific literature on the issues of administrative and legal protection of rights to objects of intellectual property allows us to conclude that it is “pointy”, local in nature. To build a holistic picture of the scientific study of the problem using an integrated approach, it is necessary to single out as an object of study the system of administrative and legal protection of rights to intellectual property. In this regard, the problem arises of determining the structure of this system, its functions, the characteristics of its object and subject compositions, the mechanism of its functioning, and ensuring its effectiveness.

The national system of legislation provides for civil-law, administrative-legal and criminal-law methods of protecting rights to objects of intellectual property.

Civil law protection of intellectual property in accordance with the Civil Code of the Russian Federation is carried out through general methods of protection of civil rights and special methods of protection provided for by part four of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation for the protection of exclusive rights. A feature of civil law protection is the priority provision of private interests in the protection of intellectual property rights.

Administrative-legal and criminal-legal methods ensure the observance of the interests of authors and copyright holders, specific users of exclusive rights (private interests), an indefinite circle of persons and the state (public).

Recognizing civil law methods of protection as the main ones, one cannot fail to note the effectiveness of the impact of administrative and criminal methods of protection.

The distinguishing features of administrative and legal methods of protection, which distinguish them from other methods, are their dominant focus on protecting public interests (in comparison with civil law methods), a wider range of action (in comparison with criminal law methods), the possibility of more effective influence on development of public relations in the field of intellectual property.

Administrative and legal protection of rights to objects of intellectual property is the activity of state bodies in order to identify, suppress offenses, restore rights to objects of intellectual property, bring the perpetrators to administrative responsibility and

Smirnov A.P. The relationship between the concepts of "protection of rights" and "protection of rights" Electronic resource. http://sun.tsu.ru/mminfo/000063105/33l/image/33l-123.pdf. Konyaev N.I. The right to a trademark and an industrial design. Kuibyshev, 1984. Dozortsev V.A. Intellectual rights: Concept. System. Problems of codification: Collection of articles. - Research Center for Private Law - M.: Statute, 2005. Electronic resource. http://www.twirpx.com/file/273631/. Date arr. 07/18/2011; Dozortsev V.A. The concept of exclusive right // Problems of modern civil law / Ed. Rakhmilovich V.A., Litovkin V.I. - M.: Gorodets, 2000; Dozortsev V.A. The concept of exclusive right // Legal world. 2000. No. 3; Dozortsev V.A. Market of ideas // Law. 1993. No. 2 Dozortsev VA Disputes over copyright cases. - In the book: Commentary on judicial practice for 1980. M.: Yurid. lit., 1981, p. 33-52; Dozortsev V.A. Copyright. - In the book: Problems of modern copyright. Interuniversity. Sat. scientific works. Sverdlovsk: Ural State University, 1980, p. 124-143; Dozortsev V. A. Trends in the development of Soviet socialist copyright. - In the book: Problems of Soviet copyright. M.: VAAP, 1979, p. 189-202; Dozortsev V.A. Author's contract and its types. -Owls. state and law, 1977, no. 2, p. 43-50 and others.

This issue of the Analytical Bulletin is devoted to the analysis of the state and directions for improving domestic legislation in the field of protection and use of intellectual property.
The articles of the collection provide a brief overview of the most significant problems of legal relations in the field of using the results of intellectual activity. The experience of work on the formation of the intellectual property market and innovation structure at the federal and regional levels is analyzed.
Concrete solutions are proposed to eliminate the existing "gaps" in the legislation. The relevance of increasing the efficiency of the use of intellectual property for the successful socio-economic development of Russia in modern conditions is noted.
The materials of the bulletin may be useful to members of the Federation Council, legislative and executive bodies of state power of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation in their legislative activities, as well as to the scientific community.

• IN AND. Matvienko, Chairman of the Federation Council legislative problems in the field of protection and use of the results of intellectual activity
• L.B. Narusova, First Deputy Chairman of the Federation Council Committee on Science, Education and Information Policy Realization of the intellectual potential the most important condition for the successful development of Russia
• D.G. Vladimirov, Deputy Head of the Department of Parliamentary Programs of the Analytical Department of the Office of the Federation Council, Candidate of Economic Sciences Legal protection of intellectual property objects in the Russian Federation: background
• S.A. Schukina, Advisor to the Department of Parliamentary Programs of the Analytical Department of the Office of the Federation Council Legal regulation of copyright in the Russian Federation
• V.N. Lopatin, Director of the Republican Research Institute of Intellectual Property, Chairman of the National Technical Committee for Standardization "Intellectual Property", Expert of the European Commission, Doctor of Law, Professor Priorities and problems of the formation of the national market of intellectual property as a condition innovative development Russia
• G.M. Golobokova, Head of the Department for Innovation Policy of the Administration of the Magadan Region, Doctor of Economics, Professor The role of universities in the implementation of the innovation strategy and the formation of the intellectual property market
• A.A. Fatkulin, Vice-Rector for Science and Innovation of the Far East federal university, doctor of technical sciences, professor
  M.I. Zvonarev, Head of the Department for Intellectual Property, Far Eastern Federal University, Candidate of Technical Sciences, Associate Professor Development of patent and licensing activities as a tool for the innovation infrastructure of the Far Eastern Federal District
• M.A. Nepomiluyeva, student high school contemporary social sciences(Faculty of Moscow State University) Problems of protection of intellectual property in the sphere of the military-industrial complex of the Russian Federation
• Recommendations of the parliamentary hearings "Problems of legal regulation of relations in the field of legal protection and use of the results of intellectual activity created at the expense of the federal budget"

Worked on the release:

I.V. Bocharnikov, Head of the Department of Parliamentary Programs of the Analytical Department of the Administration of the Council of the Federation, Doctor of Political Sciences, Managing Editor of the Bulletin
D.G. Vladimirov, Deputy Head of the Department of Parliamentary Programs of the Analytical Department of the Office of the Federation Council, Candidate of Economic Sciences, compiler of the Bulletin
V.G. Grechikhin, Chief Consultant of the Department of State Construction of the Analytical Department of the Office of the Federation Council
L.N. Timofeev, Advisor to the Department of Parliamentary Programs of the Analytical Department of the Office of the Federation Council

Problems of protection of intellectual property

Over the past five years, the activity of participants in civil circulation, associated with the protection of their intellectual rights, and public legal awareness in this area have grown markedly. This, in turn, led to numerous changes in legislative regulation, a variety of judicial practice, an increase in the quality of registration and transfer of rights to the results of intellectual activity and means of individualization (hereinafter referred to as RIA / MI). In connection with the rapidly developing practice of resolving disputes in this area, of course, numerous issues that need to be resolved also come to the surface. Let's consider the most relevant of them.

Lack of clear criteria for calculating and recovering the amount of compensation for violation of exclusive rights. In accordance with the existing regulation, for violation of the exclusive right to most RIA/MI, the right holder, instead of recovering damages, has the right to demand compensation, calculated either in the amount of 10 thousand to 5 million rubles, or in double the amount of the cost of the right to use RIA/SI, or in double the cost of goods/services. At the same time, the right holder may, at his own discretion, choose in what form he wishes to collect compensation.

In terms of calculations, the main difficulties arise when claiming compensation in the first form. This is primarily due to the fact that the law lacks clear criteria for calculating such compensation. Often, the amount of the claim is stated by the right holder quite arbitrarily, without an objective independent assessment of the exclusive right, which may lead to abuse of rights.

The opposite situation is also not uncommon, when courts, on the contrary, arbitrarily underestimate the amount of compensation sought.

Until recently, the question of whether it is permissible for courts to reduce the amount of compensation below the lower limit (10 thousand rubles), including when overall size the amount of compensation to be recovered will be less than 50% of the amount minimum dimensions all compensation for the violations committed.

In December last year, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation published Resolution No. 28-P, in which it indicated that this was possible if there were several facts of violation individual entrepreneur exclusive rights of one right holder to one object of intellectual property. At the same time, when determining the amount of compensation, the court must take into account the financial situation of the defendant - IP; the fact of committing an offense for the first time; the degree of reasonableness, prudence and conscientiousness; actions shown by him when committing an offense and other circumstances. Despite these clarifications, the issue of the admissibility of reducing the amount of compensation below the lower limit still remained open in relation to legal entities.

Lack of protection of the rights of directors. Another important gap in domestic regulation is the lack of copyright protection for theater directors, similar to the existing copyright protection for audiovisual directors.

However, in this moment The draft law, with appropriate amendments, is already under consideration in the State Duma of the Russian Federation.

The problem of protecting the right to inviolability of works. Very often in practice the question arises of distinguishing between the right to rework a work (which refers to the exclusive right) and the right to inviolability of the work (which, in turn, refers to the personal non-property rights of the author).

in legislation and judicial practice there are no clear criteria for distinguishing between processing, that is, a new work created on the basis of an existing one, from a work that has been amended that does not entail the creation of a new work. This question is established only on the basis of expertise and is therefore very subjective.

In addition, the author, whose right to inviolability has been violated, according to the law, has the right, in particular, to demand compensation for moral damage, as well as a ban on using the work in a distorted form. At the same time, the legislator does not make the possibility of satisfying the requirement to ban the use of the work dependent on whether the violation entailed any Negative consequences for the author, for example, loss or damage to business reputation (in some countries this requirement exists). In practice, this state of affairs leads to the fact that the satisfaction of the requirements for the prohibition of the use of the work may be clearly disproportionate to the violation committed.

The issue of parallel imports of original goods. At present, the problem with the legalization of parallel imports of goods has not yet been resolved.

In accordance with the existing regulation, labeled goods imported into the territory of the Russian Federation without the consent of the copyright holder are recognized as counterfeit even if they are original and the copyright holder himself marked them with a trademark, and entail liability on a par with the import of fakes.

It seems that with regard to original goods it would be more reasonable to limit the possibility of applying liability to violators without fault, as well as such liability measures as seizure and destruction.

Trolling. Equally important is the issue of abuse of intellectual property rights by right holders, which can be expressed in trademark registration actions only with the intention of restricting competition in the market; artificial extension of the term or scope of patents; artificially extending the term of copyright protection (for example, by artificially retroactively including a co-author after the death of the author to extend the term of the exclusive right to a work).

Lack of uniform law enforcement practice in challenging the granting of protection of IP objects and the transfer of rights to them. First of all, it should be noted different approaches in resolving disputes with courts (including the Intellectual Property Court) and the Chamber of Patent Disputes in terms of standards of proof and procedural regulation.

In addition, a big problem is the uncertainty of some terms of registration of objects and transfers of rights, as well as consideration of requests and disputes.

The inefficiency of the system of collective management of copyrights. Currently, there are no really working mechanisms for the collective protection of the rights of right holders.

Existing accredited organizations have not confirmed their effectiveness, including due to the lack of transparent reporting to right holders; arbitrary determination of the amounts of remuneration and fees, which for the most part settle in such organizations and do not reach the right holders; the lack of a clear definition of the functions and powers of such organizations; lack of competition.

There are numerous discussions on possible ways to reform existing system, including through the creation of a single organization, a new system of annual audit of such activities, public control. One can only hope that new system protecting rights holders will be more effective.

www.eg-online.ru

Actual problems of legal protection of intellectual property rights

Section: Jurisprudence

XXXVII Student International Correspondence Scientific and Practical Conference "Youth Scientific Forum: Social and Economic Sciences"

Actual problems of legal protection of intellectual property rights

Legal protection in the field of intellectual property has been and remains one of the priorities for any developed state, and is also a powerful stimulator of progress not only in the cultural, but also in all other areas of the development of society. The development of Russian legislation in this direction was caused by the active use of works of science, culture, art, objects of related rights and other exclusive rights in civil circulation. But at the same time, this gave rise to a number of negative consequences, such as: rather large monetary and time costs for the recognition of copyright, the conflict of interests between authors and other individuals and / or legal entities, a huge number of counterfeit products and fakes, illegal placement of intellectual property results in various branches of communication (this is especially noticeable on the Internet). And, despite the fact that a huge amount of resources is spent on the development of this branch of law, it itself develops much faster and more unpredictably, unlike others. legal areas. Based on the above factors, we can conclude that the high relevance of the issue of protecting intellectual property rights is indisputable.

Almost all problems in the legal protection of intellectual property can be divided into three categories: personnel, structural and motivating.

Personnel problems include, mainly, the lack of experts and specialists for the evaluation of intellectual property, as well as the identification of counterfeit products. Despite this, there is a lack of awareness of the population in this branch of law, from which only a small part of them can independently protect their rights. This factor results in low legal literacy (due to which copyright holders, intentionally or through negligence, do not sufficiently inform ordinary consumers and thus become offenders, and consumers themselves do not express a desire to study the law on their own); lack of fair restoration of the violated right; the absence of any motivation, the unwillingness of the right holders themselves to apply legal measures to the infringer (due to their ignorance of the legal regulation of intellectual property and / or underestimating its practical significance).

The same category of problems can include a subcategory - bureaucratic, which comes from legal ignorance: the legislator does not provide material support for the implementation and development of intellectual property protection, since he does not see the critical negative consequences that are clearly expressed in other branches of law. And therefore, there is no real and full-scale fight against intellectual offenses. As an example, one can cite not only the absence of criminal cases for this category, but also a huge number of examples when legal entities are engaged in illegal "raider" seizures, the growth of organizational and transnational crime.

The next global problem is structural, holistic. After the transition of our country to a market economy, fierce competition and division began, “sharing” not only property, but also the results of intellectual property that were created by the past generation, because of which no one thought about creating legal norms that would limit power and the freedom of those who participated in it. Legislation on the protection and protection of intellectual property rights is still in its infancy and in the modern world does not play a special role in regulating the relevant relations. The development of this industry slowed down even more when Russia joined the WTO and took on enough a large number of additional international obligations without any reservations, which gave rise to a number of problems, and although a lot of time has passed since 2012, some problems have not yet been fully resolved. And that is why most of the interpretation of intellectual property rights, including the protection of these rights, did not come from state institutions, but from textbooks. But the legislator does not regulate the activities of the work of experts in this field, does not set uniform standards that everyone must adhere to, in addition, there are no reference encyclopedias and other special publications. And therefore modern textbooks are not equivalent, they contain different, and often even contradictory concepts and provisions.

And last problem by list, but not by value - this is motivating. He spoke quite fully about her. Secretary of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, Judge of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, Chief Researcher of the Republican Scientific Research Institute of Intellectual Property (RNIIIS), Doctor of Law, Professor Vladimir Doroshkov "... n Despite the measures taken by the country's leadership, there is still no active rise in scientific and innovative activity in the Russian Federation, the number of applications for inventions, products of the Russian industry (except for military equipment) is not competitive. In many respects, this is a consequence of the fact that scientific, innovative and other creative activities are not properly stimulated in the country.” V. Doroshkov refers to the fact that a huge number of various patents, industrial designs and other results of intellectual activity are imported into our country, and there are practically no imports from it, and thus 90–95% of all technologies are foreign, or are made according to a foreign model. Further, the doctor of science emphasizes the urgency of this problem and what may be the negative consequences associated with this “... in this regard, it seems necessary to develop a system of specific measures aimed at stimulating scientific, innovative and other activities to create and use the results of intellectual activity, including a system of tax benefits, loans, etc. These circumstances hinder the improvement of legal processes and legislation.

In conclusion, I would like to say that the legislator, unfortunately, does not see any serious consequences in this shortcoming and continues its straightforward path to develop the human rights sphere in the criminal areas and the civil one, completely forgetting about intellectual property. But due to the poor development of this area and the insufficient qualifications of law enforcement agencies who look at it “through the fingers”, a fairly large number of scientists see no reason to continue their research if they know that their rights will not be protected and they will have to spend a huge amount effort and time to defend their rights on their own. A similar situation is with gifted people, especially young students, who can create a new invention, maybe even make a breakthrough in science, but no one will need their innovation because they could not find good enough and stable financial support. Unfortunately, many entrepreneurs and investors are currently not interested in investing in such projects - they consider them unstable, which cannot "shoot". According to their logic, it is better for them to invest their money and investments under the old system and receive a more stable income without risking anything. Also in recent times due to unstable economic system in the country, many are afraid to engage in research, and the state does not sponsor or financially support them in any way, does not give guarantees. In order for young experimenters who are not afraid of risks to return to Russia again, it is necessary, first of all, to actively reform the legislation in the field of protection of intellectual property rights. Secondly, the state must clearly show that it is interested in technological development, that nothing threatens scientists, and that the legislator will not support this development. Today, the Russian Federation devotes almost all of its resources to maintaining international relations, but let's hope that soon she will pay attention to this problem.

Intellectual Property: Topical Issues of Patent and Copyright Law in Russia

What legal framework and regulatory documents for the protection of intellectual property exist in Russia, and to what extent are intellectual property rights secured by law today?

To date, in Russia, all the main legal norms governing the institution of intellectual property are codified in the form of a single document - the Fourth Part of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, which entered into force on January 1, 2008. After this event, according to the Federal Law of December 18, 2006 N 231-FZ “On the Enactment of Part Four of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation”, numerous laws and regulations that previously regulated legal relations in the field of intellectual property became invalid. Among them are the Laws of the Russian Federation "On Copyright and Related Rights", "On Trademarks, Service Marks and Appellations of Origin", "On the Legal Protection of Programs for Electronic Computers and Databases", "On the Legal Protection of Topologies of Integrated Circuits", "On Breeding Achievements", the Patent Law of the Russian Federation, the Law on Architectural Activities, the Law on Geodesy and Cartography, other regulations, numerous decrees of the President of the Russian Federation. Thus, part 4 of the Civil Code is intended to replace all the above legal acts and systematize the legal regulation of the institution of intellectual property.

It should be noted that the codification of intellectual property law is a very important step on the way to improving the legal norms in this area. First, the codification of legislation is a form of lawmaking in which legal norms acquire the highest degree systematization, consistency, consistency, completeness. Secondly, according to many experts, the adoption of Part 4 of the Civil Code in many respects met the objectives of achieving compliance with the national legislation of Russia and the international one. The fourth part of the Civil Code harmonizes to a greater extent with European standards in this area. Although there are other points of view on this matter.

How do we comply with intellectual property laws today?

The situation with the observance of legislation in the field of intellectual property cannot be called anything other than catastrophic. The vast majority of the population still has a sincere lack of understanding of why you should pay for the use computer programs, computer games, video films, musical works. The rights of such categories of authors as photographers, musicians, performers are especially actively violated.

Although the situation has improved somewhat recently due to Russia's desire to join the WTO, piracy continues to be a common problem in all areas of intellectual property. IA Bliznets in his book "Intellectual Property and the Law. Theoretical Issues" notes that in many other countries the situation with respect for copyright and related rights is no better. It is generally accepted that manufacturers of audio and video products and computer programs bear the biggest losses from piracy. According to the Association of Computer Software Manufacturers, the level of piracy in Germany is 50%, in France - 57%, in the UK and Finland - 43%, Switzerland and the USA - 35% and in China - 98%.

Does Russia support the idea of ​​creating a patent court?

First of all, it should be noted that the very idea of ​​the need to create and operate a specialized intellectual property court has been voiced by experts for a long time. I can say with confidence that the vast majority of lawyers working in the field of intellectual property, as well as legal theorists, support the idea of ​​creating a patent court in Russia. The argument usually boils down to the assertion that modern society, in which relations in the field of intellectual property are dynamically developing, there must be justice, the qualification of which will fully correspond to the level of complexity of patent disputes. Often, arbitration courts and courts of general jurisdiction are simply physically (loaded with other civil affairs) cannot understand the peculiarities of patent law.

Is it possible to register a patent without putting it on "public display"? That is, is the open publication of a patent mandatory?

The law provides for a mandatory procedure for publishing information on the grant of a patent for an invention, utility model, industrial design. There is nothing negative in this. Moreover, such a procedure serves as an additional measure to protect the rights of authors.

It has been established that the federal executive authority for intellectual property publishes in the official bulletin information on the grant of a patent for an invention, utility model or industrial design, including the name of the author (if the author has not refused to be mentioned as such), the name or name of the patent owner, the name and formula invention or utility model or a list of essential features of an industrial design and its image.

After the publication of information on the grant of a patent for an invention, utility model or industrial design, any person has the right to familiarize himself with the application documents and the information search report.

How to dispose of the invention to several authors?

The law establishes that citizens who have created an invention, utility model or industrial design by joint creative work are recognized as co-authors.

Each of the co-authors has the right to use the invention, utility model or industrial design at its own discretion, unless otherwise provided by agreement between them. Each of the co-authors has the right to independently take measures to protect their rights to an invention, utility model or industrial design.

The relationship of persons to whom the exclusive right belongs jointly shall be determined by an agreement between them.

How to protect an invention from counterfeit use abroad?

This problem is the most difficult at present. As a rule, the ability to protect one's rights in a foreign state is directly related to the existence of two or multilateral international cooperation agreements. But even if there are none, then in any case, you should contact the judicial and law enforcement foreign state where the fact of violation was recorded.

What should I do if a patented invention is being misused?

Among the general advice, the following can be recommended: first of all, it is necessary to record the very fact of the violation, i.e. fact of misuse of the invention. To do this, you can resort to such methods of fixation as photo-video filming, drawing up acts and protocols. We should also not forget about the use of testimonies as evidence of violations. After that, you can safely proceed to the claim (pre-trial) stage and demand on a voluntary basis to stop violating rights and pay compensation. If mutual understanding cannot be reached, then you should apply to the court with a lawsuit, as well as to law enforcement agencies with a complaint or statement.

Can an idea be patented?

Not every idea can be recognized as the object of patent rights. One can say even more categorically: it is not ideas that are patented, but specific results of intellectual activity in the scientific and technical field that meet the requirements of the Civil Code for inventions and utility models (and in the field of artistic design - for industrial designs). In other words, if an idea can be presented in the form of an invention, utility model or industrial design, then such a result of intellectual activity can be protected by a patent, and even then, only if the conditions for patentability are met.

In particular, an invention is granted legal protection if it is new, involves an inventive step and is industrially applicable. Compliance of the invention with the patentability criteria is determined by the authorized state body.

Where is it most difficult to enforce copyright?

Undoubtedly, the most difficult thing to protect copyright on the Internet. This is caused, first of all, by the specifics of the virtual space, its global nature, the huge speed of information exchange, and the fact that information is expressed in digital form. The problem is so acute that a number of experts express the opinion that traditional national systems of legislation cannot effectively regulate relations in the field of copyright on the Internet at all.

According to Pamela Samuelson, professor of law at the University of Pittsburgh USA, despite the sincere desire of rights owners and legislators to expand existing legal regimes to protect copyright in cyberspace, one should recognize the possibility that the law will not be able to protect them in the digital environment to the same extent as in material world. As Nicholas Negroponte, head of the MIT Multimedia Lab, said, “Access to bits (i.e., works in digital form) is fundamentally different from access to atoms (i.e., the tangible embodiment of works, such as books or CDs). -disks). He is one of those who do not see a bright future for traditional copyright law.

Addressing the above problems, the Commission of the European Community, back in July 1995, adopted the "Green Book of Copyright and Related Rights in the Information Society".

In this case, we should talk about the liability provided for by the legislation for copyright infringement. Currently, criminal, administrative and civil liability is provided for such violations. Depending on the degree of public danger of the violation, the amount of harm caused to the authors of works, one or another type of liability is applied. In particular, within the framework of civil legislation, it is provided that in cases of violation of the exclusive right to a work, the author or other right holder has the right to demand, at his choice, from the violator, instead of compensation for damages, payment of compensation:

In the amount of ten thousand rubles to five million rubles, determined at the discretion of the court;

At twice the cost of copies of the work, or at twice the cost of the right to use the work, determined on the basis of the price that, under comparable circumstances, is usually charged for the legitimate use of the work.

I believe that on paid sites it is much easier to organize a mechanism for controlling and protecting copyrights. The payment system for the right to use the site may provide for a mechanism to clearly identify the user. For example, such measures as registration with passport data, conclusion of an offer agreement for the use of site resources, payment for services for the use of site resources through official institutions (banks, post offices, etc.) will be very useful. All this will make it possible to exclude such a sign of virtual space as anonymity, which often does not play a role. last role when choosing: to violate copyright or not!

On free sites, as a rule, there is no effective system for registering users, which in itself is a favorable condition for all kinds of violations.

Today, information is a major business asset. Every company has in its information system database in one form or another. If the data is stolen, made public, or the very fact of theft becomes known, then damage to the company's image or trademark will be added to the financial losses. How can a company keep what it has?

The question, it seems to me, is not in the field of jurisprudence. The problem of safety and prevention of theft of information is more of a technical and organizational problem. As for traditional measures, I can suggest using information encryption systems, as well as organizing a secure system for accessing company employees' information in order to avoid information leakage.

How to protect the rights to the original design development?

Article 1259 of the Civil Code provides that the objects of copyright are works of science, literature and art, regardless of the merits and purpose of the work, as well as the way it is expressed, including works of painting, sculpture, graphics, design, graphic stories, comics and other works of fine art. art. Thus, the rights to a design work are already protected by law. If the author wishes to receive additional protection of his rights, and save himself from possible attempts in the future to challenge his right of authorship, then I recommend using such protection methods as depositing a work and registering intellectual property objects. This can be done through a notary public or through the services of numerous copyright societies. I would recommend using a notarial method of protection.
In addition, in some cases, designs may be protected by law as industrial designs.

The right of authorship, that is, the right to be recognized as the author of an invention, utility model or industrial design, is inalienable and non-transferable. It will remain with the author even if he transfers to another person the exclusive right to an invention, utility model or industrial design.

The exclusive right to use an invention, utility model or industrial design may be transferred to another person - the Patent holder. The conditions for the use of an invention, utility model or industrial design, including the payment of remuneration, are regulated by an agreement on the alienation of an exclusive right.

If an invention, utility model or industrial design was created by an employee in connection with the performance of his job duties or a specific task of the employer, then in this case, the exclusive right to the service invention, service utility model or service industrial design and the right to obtain a patent will belong to the employer, unless otherwise provided by an employment or other contract between the employee and the employer.

If the employer obtains a patent for a service invention, service utility model or service industrial design, or decides to keep information about such an invention, utility model or industrial design secret and informs the employee about it, or transfers the right to obtain a patent to another person, or does not receives a patent on the application filed by him for reasons depending on him, the employee is entitled to remuneration. The amount of remuneration, the conditions and procedure for its payment by the employer are determined by the agreement between him and the employee, and in the event of a dispute - by the court.

Receipt of responsibility for the child Material (Grade 5) on the topic: Receipt of responsibility for parents Preview: MBOU Aleksandrovskaya OOSh Notification of parents (legal representatives) of […]

Course work

MAIN PROBLEMS OF PROTECTION OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS

Introduction.. 3

Chapter 1. The system of legislation on the protection of intellectual property.. 5

1.1. Intellectual property: concept and types.. 5

1.2. International legislation on the protection of intellectual property. eleven

1.3. Intellectual property as an object of protection under Russian law. fourteen

Chapter 2. Problems of protection of intellectual property rights in Russia.. 20

2.1. Analysis of the problems of protection of trade secrets.. 20

2.2. The problem of protection of works and phonograms on the Internet. 27

Conclusion.. 33

The development of the private law concept of property was completed only at the end of the classical period (III century AD), the usual designation of property since that time, according to many jurists, is the term proprietas . Some lawyers, for example, D.V. Dozhdev, is considered as the most general designation of property rights the term dominium. This term is used by Dozhdev for both the authority itself and the objects to which it applies. Concerning proprietas, then this word is used exclusively in the chapter on usufruct.

Classical jurisprudence understood property as the unlimited and exclusive legal domination of a person over a thing, as a right free from restrictions in its essence and absolute in its protection.

At the same time, the right to own ( jus possidendi) provided for the right of the owner, which consists in the fact that the owner has the right to actually possess his thing, the right of the owner can exercise not only personally, but also transfer the right of possession to other persons (for example, under a contract), while retaining the right of ownership to the thing. Right of use ( jus utedi) consisted in the fact that the owner has the right to extract useful qualities from the thing, to receive income and increments from it. Right of disposal ( jus abutendi) consisted in the fact that the owner could determine the legal fate of the thing, i.e. alienate, bequeath, establish easements in favor of other persons, etc. To decide the legal fate of a thing means to determine it legal status, change it at your own discretion, etc., i.e. change or terminate the relationship of ownership.

In Russia, the term “property” was first used only in the second half of the 18th century, under Catherine II (whereas before that, the tsar, who personified the state, could arbitrarily seize any property from any of his subjects). In the 19th century, an understanding of the powers of the owner as a "triad" of possibilities was formed. For the first time it was legislatively enshrined in 1832 in Art. 420 v. X part 1 of the Code of Laws of the Russian Empire, from where it then traditionally passed into the Civil Codes of 1922 and 1964, into the Fundamentals of Civil Legislation in 1961 and 1991, and into the current Civil Code of the Russian Federation.

The institution of property in domestic legislation was formed gradually. The Civil Code of the RSFSR of 1922 contained only a few articles devoted to this institution, and Article 52 distinguished between property: a) state (nationalized and municipalized), b) cooperative, c) private.

In the Fundamentals of Civil Legislation of the USSR and the Union Republics, the institution of property rights was significantly expanded and already contained 13 articles.

In Soviet literature, property from the point of view of its economic essence was defined through such categories as relations of production, appropriation, possession, use and disposal. For the first time, the definition of the essence of ownership through appropriation is presented by A.V. Venediktov. He also pointed out the ambiguity of the concept of appropriation: appropriation as a labor process, a process of metabolism between man and nature; appropriation as the totality of all social production relations and, finally, appropriation as the attitude of an individual or collective towards the means and products of production as if they were their own. S.N. Bratus considered property as a state of appropriation of material goods, since property fixes the distribution of prerequisites and results of social production. N.D. Yegorov believed that property is public attitude, formed as a result of the elimination of individuals (by the collective, society) of all third parties from the material goods appropriated by them.

Fundamentals of Civil Legislation 1961, Civil Code of the RSFSR 1964, Civil Codes of the Union Republics 1963-1964. and the Constitution of the USSR of 1977 unambiguously fixed the leading role and supremacy of state property. The state regulated and planned everything, including the development of other forms of ownership.

Serious changes in approaches to the institution of property rights, its content and regulation occurred with the adoption in 1990 of the Law "On Property in the USSR". The law established that property in the USSR appears in the forms of ownership of citizens, collective and state property (Article 4). In addition, it was allowed to create on their basis mixed forms of ownership, including the ownership of joint ventures with the participation of Soviet and foreign legal entities and citizens. At the same time, the term “intellectual property” appeared for the first time. Article 2 of the Law "On Property in the USSR" stated that "relations in the creation and use of inventions, discoveries, works of science, literature, art and other objects of intellectual property are regulated by special legislation of the USSR, Union and autonomous republics."

How does the Convention Establishing WIPO define intellectual property?

What are the key features of IP identified by leading lawyers?

Name the main groups of IP objects and disclose the composition of these groups.

Describe the main phases innovation process and name the time of appearance of certain IP objects in it.

What is the distinguishing feature of copyright?

What is the difference between the acquired rights to inventions, utility models and know-how from the rights to copyright objects?

Lecture 4. Main problems of intellectual property regulation in the country. Brief description of inventions in the USSR and the problems of "implementation" of developments

The discussion that has taken place in Russia in recent years about who is the subject of the right to intellectual property (IP), created primarily at the expense of the state budget - the state or the economic entity-developer, to a certain extent reflects the complexity of the legal nature of the institution "intellectual property". property”, the difference in the interpretation of this concept in Russian and foreign patent law, the shortcomings of the current Russian legislation, as well as the lack of economic mechanisms and traditions of IP management in general.

The problem of ownership of IP objects is one of the basic problems of development in Russia market economy. For an investor, especially a foreign one, a technology developer and an economic entity planning to use it, the issue of ownership is the main point at the heart of the decision to invest in research and development or to acquire the created technology. The ambiguity or controversy of the legal nature of intellectual property and its owner as a subject of legal relations creates uncertainty and uncertainty in legal and economic relations, which hinders investment and innovative activity.

Settlement of issues related to the rights to intellectual property created at the expense of budget funds, is especially important in light of the development of links between science and industry. Since today about 70% of scientific organizations are state-owned and largely funded from the budget, in cooperation with industry and to stimulate investment on its part, the issue of intellectual property should be resolved on a clear legal basis that is not subject to controversial interpretation. As long as this is not the case, there will be no single “innovation chain”. According to various estimates, 8% to 10% of innovative ideas and projects are used in Russia, while 95% of innovations are implemented in Japan, and 62% in the USA 26 .

Particular attention to IP objects created in whole or in part at the expense of the state budget is by no means accidental: it is state funding that remains one of the main sources of support for scientific research and development. It accounts for over 55% of total domestic R&D spending. At the same time, according to experts, about 90% of the existing objects of intellectual property were created in full or in part at the expense of budget funds.

At present, the legislative and economic environment is such that it remains uncertain how the state will dispose of intellectual property that it may own, how to involve it in economic circulation, ensuring the use of IP to modernize the technological base of the Russian economy and significantly increase the competitiveness of domestic goods.

Economic and legal ambiguity is also characteristic of the situation of mixed financing, when funds are allocated from several sources, and this method of financing R&D is currently the most common. Therefore, the improvement of the current legislation in the field of protection and consolidation of rights to intellectual property created at the expense of budgetary funds, as well as the formation of mechanisms that stimulate its commercialization, are urgent tasks today. At the same time, the legal protection of IP objects, which is often emphasized, is a necessary but not sufficient condition for the effective use of the results of intellectual activity, even if they are in state ownership. Preferential assignment of IP rights to the state will not and cannot solve the problem of its commercialization.

It should be noted that these problems originate in Soviet system inventive and implementation activities, therefore, it makes sense to analyze the features of the then existing system of legal and economic regulation of the processes of creating and implementing inventions.

In the USSR, the system of creation, legal protection and use of inventions was an important part of the legal and economic system of the country and was considered as a tool for accelerating scientific and technological progress (STP), because. allowed "to create machines, devices, materials and technological processes that surpass the best domestic and world achievements in their technical and economic indicators" 27. Inventive business was one of the elements of the socialist economic system and its task was to ensure planned growth and improvement of production based on scientific and technological progress . The specificity of the socialist system consisted in the complete centralization of management of both the actual inventive activity and the processes of introducing new developments. The legal concept of "intellectual property" as an institution of a market economy, of course, did not exist, and the invention was not considered a commodity. Therefore, the fact of its creation and even legal protection did not give rise to the creator of the invention (author or developer organization) of exclusive rights to it. Such a right could belong only to the state, and the invention was automatically assigned to it and entered into public use. Under the conditions of public ownership of the means of production, the state considered inventions as state property, which was expressed in the form of titles of protection, the main of which was the copyright certificate for the invention.

The institution of copyright certificate, which is characteristic only for the socialist (administrative) system of the economy, was introduced by the “Regulations on Inventions” on June 30, 1919, signed by V.I. Lenin. This decree formulated the basic socialist principles for the protection of inventions.

A feature of the Soviet period was also that the development of the sphere of activity under consideration was primarily subordinated to the task of ensuring the functioning of the military-industrial complex (MIC). The main number of inventions was obtained in the industrial sector of science and in academic institutions, which were largely involved in defense research. In the country as a whole, 75% of the research and development carried out were related to the "defense industry". No more than 3% of all inventions were created in universities and polytechnic institutes 28 . Thus, the best ideas were used mainly to build up the country's defense potential.

Theoretically, the legislation of the USSR declared the equal right of the author “at his choice to demand either recognition of only his own authorship, or recognition of his authorship and granting the exclusive right to the invention. In the first case, an author's certificate was issued for the invention, in the second case, a patent” 29 . In practice, more than 95% of inventions were protected by copyright certificates 30 .

Thus, it was the state that was the only subject of the right to use inventions protected by copyright certificates, and all inventions were the common property of the state and society. Naturally, such inventions were not fixed in the ownership of the enterprise (organization) that created it. The latter could only act as an applicant in whose name a certificate of invention was issued.

User organizations were given the right to simply use the invention. Granting (delegating) the right to unlimited and unhindered use to any and every enterprise (organization), the state did not endow them with exclusive rights. Therefore, no permission (license) was required to use such inventions.

The author, "choosing" such a form of protection as a copyright certificate, refused to own, use and dispose of the rights to the invention, thereby transferring exclusive rights to the state. In this case (as if “for this”) the author could “demand… to grant him the rights and benefits provided for by the current legislation” 31 . In practice, additional payments were very small, and the "average" size of the author's remuneration was 50 rubles.

The state treated the patent form of protection negatively. Patents were usually obtained by foreign applicants. The state also sold licenses abroad at fairly low prices. In this case, the authors of the invention and the organizations in which they worked received modest bonuses.

As an exception, Soviet citizens could obtain a patent, but only "for a joint invention created in connection with the performance of an official assignment in the implementation of economic cooperation between Soviet organizations and organizations foreign countries» 32 . For some types of inventions, a patent could not be issued at all - only an author's certificate 33 . The number of patents was small: for example, between 1981 and 1988 only 16 patents were issued to Soviet applicants.

Thus, the transfer of inventions for use by domestic contractors was carried out in the Soviet era in the form of "implementation" of inventions. Since the exclusive right to use inventions nominally belonged to the state, in practice this meant that the state granted the right to use any invention to any enterprise, organization, institution without any permission from the developer organization and the conclusion of licensing agreements.

The centralized “introduction” of inventions into industry usually took place in a directive manner, since in the absence of competition, industrial enterprises were not interested in the introduction, and no one asked buyers whether they liked the products or not. As a result, the problem of "implementing" the results of research and development was one of the most painful in the Soviet economy. Accordingly, the implementation time was very long, especially in comparison with the same time for the commercialization of developments in the capitalist countries. Whereas in countries such as the United States and Germany, the commercialization period (calculated as the period of time between the moment of filing an application for an invention and the date of the first use of the invention in the economy) was a little over a year in 1990, in the USSR it was equal to four years 34 .

To accelerate the introduction of developments in the USSR, special organizational forms were created - scientific and production associations (NPO), and later - intersectoral scientific and technical complexes (ISTC). It was an attempt to overcome departmental and organizational barriers by uniting "under one roof" research organizations and industrial enterprises. This did not fundamentally solve the problem, because The principles of the command economy also applied to these structures, but the effect of the activities of NGOs was still there: for example, the implementation period in such organizations was not four, but three years.

The weak susceptibility of production to innovations was often officially interpreted as an indicator of the low efficiency of science and its isolation from the demands of production. In fact, the quality of the inventions was very uneven. The fact is that data on inventive activity were used as an important indicator in social competitions that were organized between various organizations of departments, for example, in the system of the Ministry of Higher Education. In addition, the calculation was subject to economic efficiency from the introduction of inventions. The place in social competition also depended on this, and also partly the amount of remuneration to inventors. It was necessary to calculate economic efficiency according to very complicated methods, and not all organizations strictly followed them.

In the struggle for victory in the socialist competition, quantity was much more important than quality, and no one thought about the commercial potential of inventions. There was a practice of informal communication between scientists and officials of the State Committee for Inventions, the latter could give advice on correcting the design of the application and the procedures for its passage - so that the copyright certificate for any invention was received. Therefore, statistical data 35 on inventive activity in the USSR (Table 3) should be treated with great caution, taking into account the above factors.

At the end of the 80s. it became clear that the socialist economic system was failing, and it was necessary to create a new legal environment to accelerate the introduction of inventions. On May 31, 1991, the USSR Law "On Inventions in the USSR" was adopted, which laid the legal basis for the transition to market mechanisms in the field of creation and use of industrial property, as well as for protecting the economic interests of their developers - business entities. The unified patent form of protection of inventions served as such a basis.

A patent, as a title of protection of an exclusive right, gave its owner “the opportunity to use the invention at his own discretion… and also to prohibit the use of the invention… without the consent of the patent owner” 36 . Property relations regarding the use of inventions protected by patents thus acquired a commercial character. This Law, in essence, has been harmonized with the main provisions of the patent laws of industrialized countries.

Instead of the administrative concepts of “implementation” and “use” (under the invention law of the USSR), the concept of “exclusive right to use” and “transfer of the right to use” an invention 37 (under the patent law of the USSR) was introduced, which began to mean “introduction to economic circulation of a product manufactured using a patented invention, as well as the use of a method protected by a patent. The concept of "license agreement" was also introduced, which was a form of transfer of rights to use the invention. All these norms, to one degree or another, later became part of the Patent Law of the Russian Federation.

Table 3

Indicators of invention and rationalization in the national economy of the USSR for 1975–1988.

The law did not last long. After the collapse of the USSR, a crisis situation developed, when in all the newly independent states, including Russia, there were no laws on the protection of industrial property.

Attempts to create an interstate patent system, the adoption of the Convention (or even the Interim Agreement) on the protection of industrial property have not yielded any results. The newly independent states took the path of creating national patent laws.

Ministry of Education of the Republic of Mordovia

GBOU RM SPO (college) "Zubovo-Polyansk Pedagogical College"

Test

By discipline: "Children's Literature"

Extramural studies

Specialty: 050144 "Preschool education"

4th year students: Larionova T.V.

Lecturer: Andronov V.G.

"Zubovo-Polyana"

Topic 3. Fairy tales in children's reading.

1. Distinctive features of a fairy tale.

2. Fairy-tale hero of Russian fairy tales.

3. Poetics of a fairy tale.

4. Analysis of the fairy tale "Havroshechka".

5. The meaning of a fairy tale in the upbringing of children.

Literature:

Anikin. V. P. Russian folk proverbs, sayings, riddles and children's folklore. –M., 1987.

Anikin V.P. Russian folktale. A guide for the teacher. -M., 1989.

Nagishkin D.N. Fairy tale and life. -M., 1997.

Litvinov Z.M. Folk-poetic creativity in publications for children.

In book. Questions of children's literature. -M., 1983.

1. Distinctive features of a fairy tale.

Fairy tales originated in ancient times. Traces of them are found in the earliest written sources, and they appear wherever there is a language. We are obviously faced with a variant of the problem facing archeology and comparative linguistics - the need to make a choice between the independent evolution (or, more precisely, spontaneous generation) of similar phenomena; origin from a common prototype; and distribution (at different times) from one or more centers of culture. Any disputes most often depend on the fact that the disputants (one side or both) are trying to oversimplify the phenomenon. The dispute between the adherents of the three listed theories is no exception. The history of fairy tales is probably more complex than the history of the physical development of the human race, and as complex as the history of language. All three methods - the spontaneous generation of plots, origin from a common great religion and borrowing - obviously played a role in the formation of the complex structure of the tale.

Of the three methods of spontaneous generation of plots, this is the main, the most important, and therefore, naturally, the most mysterious. For the creator of fairy tales, more precisely, the storyteller, the other two methods are, to a certain extent, a step backwards. The theory of "borrowing" or migration in the space of works of art, including fairy tales, simply transfers the question of the origin of this type of art to another place. In this alleged center of culture, from where the borrowing comes, is the point where the creator-demiurge once lived. The same happens with the mythological theory of a single ancestral religion and ancestral language: following this path into the depths of centuries, we will eventually reach the ancient first order. If, however, we assume that from time to time, independently of each other, similar ideas, plots and techniques arose in different places, then we should admit the existence of not one, but several demiurges, which, however, will not bring us any closer to understanding their gift.

2. Fairy-tale hero of Russian fairy tales.

In a fairy tale, a different, special, mysterious world appears before the listener than in fairy tales about animals. Unusual fantastic heroes act in it, goodness and truth defeat darkness, evil and lies.

"This is a world where Ivan Tsarevich rushes through a dark forest on a gray wolf, where the deceived Alyonushka suffers, where Vasilisa the Beautiful brings a scorching fire from Baba Yaga, where a brave hero finds the death of Kashchei the Immortal" ..1

Some of the fairy tales are closely related to mythological representations. Such images as Frost, Water, Sun, Wind are associated with the elemental forces of nature. The most popular of Russian fairy tales are: "Three Kingdoms", "Magic Ring", "Finist's Feather - Clear Falcon", "The Frog Princess", "Kashchei the Immortal", "Marya Morevna", "The Sea King and Vasilisa the Wise", " Sivka-Burka", "Morozko", etc.

The hero of a fairy tale is courageous, fearless. He overcomes all obstacles in his path, wins victories, wins his happiness. And if at the beginning of the tale he can act as Ivan the Fool, Emelya the Fool, then at the end he necessarily turns into a handsome and well done Ivan Tsarevich. A.M. drew attention to this at one time. Bitter:

"The hero of folklore -" fool ", despised even by his father and brothers, always turns out to be smarter than them, always the winner of all worldly adversities."2

The positive hero is always helped by other fairy-tale characters. So, in the fairy tale "Three Kingdoms" the hero gets out on White light with the help of a wonderful bird. In other fairy tales, Sivka-Burka, the Gray Wolf, and Elena the Beautiful help the heroes. Even such characters as Morozko and Baba Yaga help the heroes for their diligence and good manners. In all this, people's ideas about human morality and morality are expressed.

Next to the main characters in a fairy tale, there are always wonderful helpers: the Gray Wolf, Sivka-Burka, Obyedalo, Opivalo, Dubynya and Usynya, etc. They have wonderful means: a flying carpet, walking boots, a self-assembled tablecloth, an invisibility hat. Images of goodies in fairy tales, helpers and wonderful objects express folk dreams.

The images of women-heroines of fairy tales in the popular imagination are unusually beautiful. They say about them: "Neither in a fairy tale to say, nor to describe with a pen." They are wise, possess magical power, possess remarkable intelligence and resourcefulness (Elena the Beautiful, Vasilisa the Wise, Marya Morevna).

Opponents of positive heroes - dark forces, terrible monsters (Kashchei the Deathless, Baba Yaga, famously one-eyed, Serpent Gorynych). They are cruel, treacherous and greedy. This is how the idea of ​​the people about violence and evil is expressed. Their appearance sets off the image of a positive hero, his feat. The storytellers did not spare colors to emphasize the struggle between light and dark beginnings. In its content and in its form, a fairy tale bears elements of the miraculous, the unusual. The composition of fairy tales is different from the composition of fairy tales about animals. Some fairy tales begin with a saying - a playful joke that is not related to the plot. The purpose of the saying is to grab the attention of the audience. It is followed by the opening that begins the story. It takes listeners to fairy world, denotes the time and place of the action, the situation, the characters. The fairy tale ends with an ending. The narrative develops sequentially, the action is given in dynamics. Dramatically tense situations are reproduced in the structure of the tale.

In fairy tales, episodes are repeated three times (Ivan Tsarevich fights with three snakes on the Kalinov Bridge, Ivan saves three beautiful princesses in the underworld). They use traditional artistic means of expression: epithets (good horse, valiant horse, green meadow, silk grass, azure flowers, blue sea, dense forests), comparisons, metaphors, words with diminutive suffixes. These features of fairy tales resonate with epics and emphasize the brightness of the narrative.

3. Poetics of a fairy tale.

Fairy tales have a strict and harmonious composition. It mainly rests on the unity of the idea that permeates the entire story. At the same time, the plot can become very complex, include many side moves, but all the actions in the fairy tale are based on the protagonist's striving for the goal. Very often, when the hero is close to the goal, the story suddenly takes a turn for failure, a new cycle of adventure and search begins. The fairy tale is invariably resolved with a favorable outcome for the positive hero.

The best fairy tales are characterized by the traditional formulas of saying, beginning, narration and ending. Sometimes a fairy tale begins with a saying that is not connected with the plot of the fairy tale. The purpose of the saying is to show the skill of the storyteller, to prepare the audience for listening to the tale. A saying is an optional part of a fairy tale, it can be short: “It was at sea, on an okiya, on Buyan Island, in the middle of the water where trees grew,” or expanded: “The fairy tale begins from Sivka, from Burka, from the things of the kaurka. On the sea, on the ocean, on the island of Buyan, there is a baked goby, crushed onion near it; three young men walked, went in and had breakfast, and then they go - they boast, they amuse themselves. This is a saying, a fairy tale will be ahead!

The saying is followed by a fabulous beginning, which, with its uncertainty, removes the question of the reliability of events. Zachin indicates a fantastic place (“In a certain kingdom, in a certain state”), a fantastic time (“Under Tsar Peas”) and names the heroes (“Once upon a time there was a king and he had three sons”). After the beginning, the main narrative part of the tale follows. The story is told through multiple artistic techniques, one of them is fabulous formulas or common places: “soon the fairy tale is told, but not soon the deed is done”, “the morning is wiser than the evening”, “such beauty that it is impossible to say in a fairy tale, not to describe with a pen”, etc. The structure of the fairy tale is subordinated to the creation of dramatically tense situations, which emphasizes the repetition of events. Most often, the event is repeated three times - the trinity of the action, perhaps a three-fold repetition of the episode with an increase in the effect, this technique gives the tale a characteristic epic, slowness in the development of the action. There are many repetitions in the story.

Fairy tales are sometimes very large in volume, which is facilitated by the use of the “piling up of homogeneous actions” technique. In the fairy tale "Marya Morevna" this technique is used repeatedly, as if several plots are connected in it. The ideological orientation of the fairy tale also determined the contrasting depiction of the hero's virtues and the vices of his enemies, therefore contrast is one of the main artistic devices in the fairy tale. Psychological characteristics are elementary, some are always positive, others are negative. There are few actors, only those who take an active part in the action. The characters of the heroes do not change, they are manifested not in reasoning, but in action, in deeds. The fairy tale does not stop at the direct idealization of the hero and heroine.

For fairy story characteristic is the technique of “reflected action”, based on the fact that if the hero at the beginning of the tale generously helps someone, then later he is paid with kindness (“Magic Ring”, “According to pike command""). In fairy tales, there is also the technique of “stepwise narrowing of the image” (for example, a description of the place where Koshchei’s death is hidden - from the description of the island where the oak grows ... to the tip of the needle). In dramatically intense places, the tale resorts to repetition of description, to rhymed parallelism (“the horse runs, the earth trembles”, “drives it with a pestle, sweeps it with a broom”). The tale makes extensive use of retardation, a slowdown in the development of the action, which is facilitated by the use of repetitions, the trinity of the action, as well as a dramatic and lively dialogue that is repeated without changes throughout the narrative.

The fairy tale usually ends with an ending, which, like a saying, is often playful, rhythmic, rhyming: “I was there too, drinking honey-wine, flowing down my lips, it didn’t get into my mouth”, “here is a fairy tale, but I have a bunch of bagels”. The purpose of the ending is to return the listener from the fairy-tale world to the real one. Sayings, beginnings and endings have a fairly stable text and are a kind of formula.

The language of a fairy tale is close to colloquial speech, it uses, as in all folklore works, constant epithets (blue sea, dense forest), tautological combinations (wonderful, marvelous, miraculous), fused synonyms (path-path, sadness-longing). The text of the tale is full of proverbs, sayings, riddles.

4. Analysis of the fairy tale "Havroshechka".

This is a kind fairy tale about the hard life of the orphan Khavroshechka. Despite all the hardships and insults caused to her, the main character is always kind, patient and obedient - it is precisely this moral purity that is always sung in Russian fairy tales. The full version of the tale is built according to all the requirements of this genre: firstly, it begins with the saying “There are good people in the world, there are worse, and there are those who are not ashamed of their brother”, and secondly, the narration is conducted in slow motion thanks to three times repeating storylines (the sisters go to spy on Khavroshka three times, she puts their eyes to sleep three times), thirdly, repetitions are accompanied by a quantitative increase in the eyes (first one, then two, then three eyes), which creates a special tension of action. The language of the fairy tale is folk, there are many colloquial words and expressions, for example: froze, beaten, scolded, ordered, worked, hard, live, live, etc. In addition, there are many rhyming phrases in the text, which creates a special melodiousness and musicality of the narration: “she weaves, she spins, she cleans up, she is responsible for everything”, “to sit at the gate and look out into the street”, “me they beat, they scold, they don’t give bread, they don’t tell them to cry”, “The sisters wanted to knock them down - the leaves of the eye fall asleep, they wanted to pick them off - they unravel the braids”. The smoothness and melodiousness of the content are words with a diminutive meaning: a cow, a neck, an eye, a cow-mother, Tiny-Havroshechka, bones, apples, twigs, etc. There are places in the text where the definition is placed after the word being defined, for example: pouring apples, golden leaves - this also creates a special melodiousness of the tale.

In the abridged version, there is no saying, there is no description of the fact that Khavroshechka was left an orphan, and what hardships fell to her lot in people. In addition, the tale has been remade, and instead of three daughters - One-Eyes, Two-Eyes and Three-Eyes - we see only one daughter. Khavroshechka does not lull her eyes, and her daughter herself pretends to be asleep. There is no slowness, tension of action, all events take place quickly, without strong feelings of the characters. There are much fewer colloquial words and expressions than in the full version of the content of the tale. There are not enough rhyming expressions that would give the text a special melodiousness and musicality. A small number of words with a diminutive meaning also do not serve the smoothness and melodiousness of the content. Dialogues between Khavroshechka and the cow are shortened, the grief that the orphan experiences when saying goodbye is not felt. The description of how Khavroshechka looked after the bones of the cow, and then the description of the apple tree, is also given in an abbreviated version. Scantly, in a few words, a picture is given of how the sister rushed to pick an apple for the young man, without a detailed description, without details of how the apple tree did not allow her to do this. And although the ending sounds the same as in the full version: “And they began to live well, it’s hard not to know,” but after reading the tale, there is no satisfaction, a sense of justice from the fact that Khavroshechka was rewarded according to her merits for her persecution and ordeal, because how this text does not cause strong emotions and experiences in the process of reading.

Thus, we managed to find out that the shortened version of the fairy tale “Kroshechka-Havroshechka” has lost its originality, melodiousness, and musicality. In addition, the scarcity of content, the rapid development of the action makes this work less interesting, meaningful, and does not evoke strong empathy for the heroine in the reader.

5. The meaning of a fairy tale in the upbringing of children.

Fairy tales have been known to us since childhood and have been passed down from generation to generation for thousands of years. Fairy tales are just an inexhaustible storehouse of folk wisdom, on which our ancestors were brought up. The magical world of fairy tales, their intricate plots and fairy-tale characters that children like so much can be used to solve a number of problems: educating children in everything good and positive, striving for education, developing an independent personality and general behavior correction. The child is very emotional, so any , even a petty problem in our opinion, is a serious test for him. He is looking for help from his parents, but often we are limited to smart phrases thrown in passing, which such a baby is simply incomprehensible to. The child closes in on himself, left alone with his problem, which he is simply not able to solve on his own. This is how a feeling of inferiority develops, communication problems, both with relatives and with peers, new fears appear. However, we, parents, bear a great responsibility for the mental state of our child, but often we cannot independently find an approach to him, reach out to the bowels of his subconscious. How to find and convey to the child a way out of the current situation and prevent unnecessary worries? This will help the connection of the magical world of fairy tales with the real world of the child, which connects his events, thoughts, behavior with fairy-tale characters. Having deciphered the hidden meaning of the fairy tale, an experienced psychologist will be able to see all possible ways to solve the child's problems and apply all the wisdom hidden in the fairy tale to his behavior in the future. Although fairy tales begin to interest the baby only by the age of two, even from the cradle, simple stories can be told to him, since it is with them that the child begins to get acquainted with the outside world. Why are fairy tales so interesting to a child? They have a simple and always understandable plot for him - this does not make the baby think hard about the events; a fairy tale always suggests the right ways to solve a problem, personifying good and evil, and, as a rule, a child always presents himself as a positive hero, while distinguishing what is good. You can tell and discuss with the child an existing fairy tale; draw with him the most liked moment; invent a fairy tale on your own, in which all events and characters will be similar to real world child and where, in the end, the fairy-tale hero wins and finds a solution to all problems; stage a fairy tale both by yourself and with the help of puppet toys. Carried away by the story, the child will be grateful to you for your support, and the happy ending of the tale will give him confidence in own forces, gives hope for the speedy resolution of his problems. Indeed, in fairy tales there is always a way out of a difficult situation, there is always the right to choose and there is always the possibility of one's own unique creativity. The longer your child believes in miracles, the more optimistic and joyful his reality will be.

Description of work

Fairy tales originated in ancient times. Traces of them are found in the earliest written sources, and they appear wherever there is a language. We are obviously faced with a variant of the problem facing archeology and comparative linguistics - the need to make a choice between the independent evolution (or, more precisely, spontaneous generation) of similar phenomena; origin from a common prototype; and distribution (at different times) from one or more centers of culture.