TRANSFORMATION OF THE BASIC PRINCIPLES OF INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY PROTECTION IN CROSS-BORDER RELATIONS IN THE PRESENT-DAY CONDITIONS

The author has investigated the basic principles of industrial property protection in their dynamic development in cross-border relations. The author elucidates the territorial principle of industrial property protection in the context of the necessity to overcome it. It is noted that in most industrial property cases the principle of territoriality (territorial independence of protection in respect of objects of industrial property) is more often used as compared with copyright cases.
In fact, States create certain conditions for overcoming the (partial) territorial principle of protection when, at the international level, international protection mechanisms are being developed to protect industrial property. The creation of such mechanisms obliges the States to recognize declaratory documents (international applications) and single sign-ons (international registrations), to provide protection to the facility that has been granted protection abroad (e.g. in the case of appellation of origin or geographical indication registered in the country of origin). Indeed, such an overcoming is conditional, but it always reflects the interests of applicants and rights holders and seems to be extremely important in the modern context of globalization, expanding markets and cross-border technology exchange.
At the same time, at the current stage of development of the system of the legal regulation of industrial property in cross-border relations, the principle of national treatment on the basis of unified action of international mechanisms applied for the industrial property protection has been partly transformed into the principle of the international treatment extending the common rules for establishing rights to industrial property on actors from a large number of countries.
It would be possible to speak about overcoming the territorial principle of protection if the fundamental principle of protection of industrial property — the principle of national treatment — were transformed into the principle of international treatment.
The author highlights an important character of the principle of conventional priority and the need for its extension to other objects of industrial property except for those in respect of which priority is not inherently possible (appellations of origin, geographical indications, indications of origin). The problem of implementation of the principle of exhibition priority has been explored separately.

1. Bodenhausen G. Parizhskaya konventsiya po okhrane promyshlennoy sobstvennosti : kommentariy [Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property: Commentary]. Tr. from French. by N. L. Tumanova; Ed. by Prof. M. M. Boguslavskiy. Moscow, Progress Publ., 1977. (In Russ.)

2. Vorozhevich A. S. Pravovaya okhrana izobreteniy i poleznykh modeley : uchebnoe posobie dlya magistrov [Legal protection of inventions and utility models: A textbook for Master’s Students]. Moscow, Prospekt Publ., 2017. (In Russ.)

3. Grishaev S. P. Kommentariy k Parizhskoy konventsii ob okhrane promyshlennoy sobstvennosti [Commentary to the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property]. RLS “Garant”, 2012. (In Russ.)

4. Lutkova O. V., Terentieva L. V., Shakhnazarov B. A. Osnovnye problemy okhrany intellektualnoy sobstvennosti v mezhdunarodnom chastnom prave : uchebnoe posobie dlya magistrantov [The main problems of intellectual property protection in private international law: A textbook for Master’s students]. Moscow, Prospekt Publ., 2017. (In Russ.)

5. Shakhnazarov B. A. Modernizatsiya prava intellektualnoy sobstvennosti RF v usloviyakh chlenstva v VTO [Modernization of intellectual property rights of the Russian Federation in terms of membership in the WTO]. Lex russica. 2013. No. 3. (In Russ.)