Determination of efficiency and admissibility restraints in the concerted practices with intellectual pr operty rights

  • Oleksandr Khudenko Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv
Keywords: Antimonopoly Committee of Ukraine, antimonopoly regulator, concerted practices, intellectual property rights, restraints, efficiently, admissibility

Abstract

In Ukraine concerted practices have various kinds, forms and ways of execution. Nonetheless, some concerted practices are related to the intellectual property rights in that sense, that they concern use or disposition of intellectual property rights. EU competition legislation does not determine a special block exemption for concerted practices with intellectual property rights, but it provides general block exemption for efficiency and admissibility of the concerted practices as whole. Ukraineʼs legislation on protection of economic competition includes the special block exemption for concerted practices with intellectual property rights. This provision based on the article 17 Germanyʼs Act against restraints on competition, which had been abolished in July 2005. Nowadays, national block exemption for concerted practices with intellectual property rights aim on restraints of economic activity, but intellectual property legislation provide only restraints of use or disposition intellectual property rights. Restraints of economic activity may be called «naked» in that sense, that they donʼt have any arguments for admissibility. Anyway, we propose to rewrite national block exemption for concerted practices with intellectual property rights without the list of restraints. In addition, we propose to determine the efficiency and admissibility restraints in the concerted practices with intellectual property rights as follows. Efficiency must be determined by assessing the proportionality of the participants received benefits and losses of consumers caused by such concerted practices. Admissibility can be determined by using the following criteria: type of concerted practice; participantsʼ market power; restraining participants; characteristics of intellectual property object; characteristics of restraints.

References

Zakonodavstvo Ukrainy u sferi zakhystu ekonomichnoi konkurentsii: Yurydychnyi zbirnyk. – 4-te vyd., dop. Ta rozshyrene. – K.: PP «Firma «Hranmna». – 2012. – 576 c.

Valytov S. S. Pravovoe rehulyrovanye konkurentsyy v Ukrayne / S. S. Valytov; NAN Ukraynы, Yn-t эkon.-prav.yssled. – Donetsk : Yuho-Vostok, 2009. – 306 s.

Pravoutvorennia v Ukraini: teoretyko-metodolohichni ta prykladni aspekty : monohrafiia / za zah. red. Boshytskoho Yu. L.. – K.: Vyd-vo Yevrop. un-tu, 2010. – 592 s.

Teoriia derzhavy i prava. Akadem. kurs : pidruchnyk / za red. O. V. Zaichuka, N. M. Onishchenko. – 2-e vyd., pererob. i dopov. – K.: Yurinkom Inter, 2008. – 688 s.

Gesetz gegen Wettbewerbsbeschränkungen (GWB) in der Fassung der Bekanntmachung vom 26 August 1998 (BGBl. I S. 2521, 2546) [Elektronnyi resurs]. – Rezhym dostupu : http://www.bgbl.de/banzxaver/bgbl/media/F6DDCDB9C6E34BB934067725EFCACA5B/bgbl198s2521_28973.pdf.

U. S. Department of Justice & Federal Trade Commission, Antitrust Guidelines for the Licensing of Intellectual Property (Apr. 6, 1995). [Elektronnyi resurs]. – Rezhym dostupu : http://www.justice.gov/atr/public/guidelines/0558.htm.

Rozporiadzhennia Antymonopolnoho komitetu Ukrainy vid 12 liutoho 2002 r. «Pro zatverdzhennia Typovykh vymoh do uzghodzhenykh dii subʼiektiv hospodariuvannia dlia zahalnoho zvilnennia vid poperednoho oderzhannia dozvolu orhaniv Antymonopolnoho komitetu Ukrainy na uzghodzheni dii subʼiektiv hospodariuvannia» // Ofitsiinyi visnyk Ukrainy. – 2002. – № 11. – St. 543.

Dakhno Y. Y. Yntellektualnaia sobstvennost v SShA. Anhlo-rusckyi hlossaryi po yntellektualnoi sobstvennosty / Dakhno Y. Y. – K.: Tsentr uchebnoi lyteraturы, 2012. – 280 s.

Pozner Rychard A. Ekonomichnyi analiz prava / Pozner Rychard A. – K.: «Akta», Aspen Publishers, 2003. – 862 s.
Published
2019-02-22
How to Cite
Khudenko, O. (2019). Determination of efficiency and admissibility restraints in the concerted practices with intellectual pr operty rights. Administrative Law and Process, (1(11), 187-194. Retrieved from https://applaw.net/index.php/journal/article/view/203
Section
Special administrative law