97 research outputs found
A monista felfogás érvényesülése a szerzői jogi törvényben
Get PDFExamining the history of copyright law, we can distinct two significant theories. The distinction is based upon the position of entitled parties. Two separated fields can be found among the rights of the author: personal and financial rights. It is no doubt that personal rights are inseparable from the author itself, these rights cannot become objects of commercial businesses. If we look at these rights a little bit closer, we can realize that personal rights of the author do not play significant role in earning money from an intellectual product. These rights ensure the integrity and originality of works. Separating the two theories we have to focus on financial rights. Trying to describe these rights we can see that no exact definition can be given to them because of the permanent development of printing and publishing technology. Due to the monist theory it can be said that financial rights are close to personal ones, they are inseparable from personality of the author. Transcribing this opinion to the language of law it means that the decent regulation should prohibit the transfer of these rights among living persons. In the Anglo-Saxon legal system experts think that financial rights have to take part in commercial trade if we want to acknowledge the achievement of authors.
In Hungary copyright law is on the point of the monist theory. The Act refers that financial rights of the author cannot be transferred and the author has no right to abandon them. If we get a closer look at the structure of the valid Act, we can say that monist theory is not consistent. It is possible to inherit financial rights. We need this rule if we would like to harmonize the system to the time of protection. The other relevant fact of crossing the prohibition is in connection with works created under labour frames. In this case the employer gets financial rights ex lege. To find the reason of this regulation we have to examine the nature and aim of labour relations. The employer gives payment to his employee, the author to establish and create works. In this situation it is natural that the author looses his financial rights. The problem is that in Hungary differences can be found between civil and labour law. If we try to give meaning to labour relations, misunderstandings and different point of views can reveal. The other problematic factor is that the Act does not bother with the question of succession.
In my study I present the pros and cons of both theories and gather those significant practical and theoretical fields of copyright law that can be limits of monist theory. I examine special rules for special works, rules of civil and labour law in connection with authors and give a short historical overview to see what can be the main directions of future developments.Examining the history of copyright law, we can distinct two significant theories. The distinction is based upon the position of entitled parties. Two separated fields can be found among the rights of the author: personal and financial rights. It is no doubt that personal rights are inseparable from the author itself, these rights cannot become objects of commercial businesses. If we look at these rights a little bit closer, we can realize that personal rights of the author do not play significant role in earning money from an intellectual product. These rights ensure the integrity and originality of works. Separating the two theories we have to focus on financial rights. Trying to describe these rights we can see that no exact definition can be given to them because of the permanent development of printing and publishing technology. Due to the monist theory it can be said that financial rights are close to personal ones, they are inseparable from personality of the author. Transcribing this opinion to the language of law it means that the decent regulation should prohibit the transfer of these rights among living persons. In the Anglo-Saxon legal system experts think that financial rights have to take part in commercial trade if we want to acknowledge the achievement of authors.
In Hungary copyright law is on the point of the monist theory. The Act refers that financial rights of the author cannot be transferred and the author has no right to abandon them. If we get a closer look at the structure of the valid Act, we can say that monist theory is not consistent. It is possible to inherit financial rights. We need this rule if we would like to harmonize the system to the time of protection. The other relevant fact of crossing the prohibition is in connection with works created under labour frames. In this case the employer gets financial rights ex lege. To find the reason of this regulation we have to examine the nature and aim of labour relations. The employer gives payment to his employee, the author to establish and create works. In this situation it is natural that the author looses his financial rights. The problem is that in Hungary differences can be found between civil and labour law. If we try to give meaning to labour relations, misunderstandings and different point of views can reveal. The other problematic factor is that the Act does not bother with the question of succession.
In my study I present the pros and cons of both theories and gather those significant practical and theoretical fields of copyright law that can be limits of monist theory. I examine special rules for special works, rules of civil and labour law in connection with authors and give a short historical overview to see what can be the main directions of future developments
A szabadalmi jogi szerződés és hatásai a hazai jogban
Get PDFSignificant changes have happened on the field of intellectual property law in the last few years. The emphasis placed on the material relations and economy became stronger. These changes caused that creations of the man came into the limelight. Of course the legal background became also very important.
We can feel the re-regulation of this legal field. Legal institutions became regulated in new Acts to be adjusted modified circumstances. There were several causes of the necessity of these changes. First of all, the new economic and social environment after the change of the regime claimed to modify the legal materials. On the other hand the international environment changed rapidly and it is still in progress. So the Republic of Hungary had to face with the obligations that are stated in international treaties and we had to put a strong emphasis on our member status in the European Union: EU regulations and directives. By now we can tell that re-codifying this area is over, we can only expect to small modification in the near future.
Modifications in most of the cases prepared for the future. But it does not mean that we can count on a very crystallized legal material. In the dynamically developing world of IP law it is not rare to use smaller modifications. We have to examine the legal practice too, that helps us finding the correct way in the fast changing economical and social relations. Performing the harmonization duty, legislator could not always take into consideration the national significances, legal practice. The lack of examining these circumstances can cause modifications in the legal material.
The Patent Law Treaty adopted at Geneva on June 1st, 2000. The provisions of the Treaty and the Regulations shall apply to national and regional applications for patents for invention and for invention and for patents of addition, which are filed with or for the Office of a Contracting Party. The Patent Law Treaty became applicable on April 28th, 2005.
Hungary joined the Treaty at the beginning, because of the need in 2008 to change the Hungarian patent law. The Treaty suggests the European Patent Convention, however in many ways it is the complementary. The Treaty gives types of applications permitted to be filed as international applications under the Patent Cooperation Treaty, divisional applications of the types of applications referred to in item.
Earlier the rules of Hungarian patent law were complicated, the process of registry was less favorable for the patentee. The harmonization of process rules effects that the patentee cannot lose his patent rights. The new rules introduce an electronic process in patent law, which makes the process easier, cheaper, and faster. But not all the procedures became electronic: only the lodgment of petition. In the future that should be better to reach electronic procedure on every level.
The harmonization of patent rules means liberalization, the notification will be easier and faster, which effected growth in the trust of business. Process rules need more harmonization in the future, and hopefully the final goal will be one global process at in all member states of the European Union. Significant changes have happened on the field of intellectual property law in the last few years. The emphasis placed on the material relations and economy became stronger. These changes caused that creations of the man came into the limelight. Of course the legal background became also very important.
We can feel the re-regulation of this legal field. Legal institutions became regulated in new Acts to be adjusted modified circumstances. There were several causes of the necessity of these changes. First of all, the new economic and social environment after the change of the regime claimed to modify the legal materials. On the other hand the international environment changed rapidly and it is still in progress. So the Republic of Hungary had to face with the obligations that are stated in international treaties and we had to put a strong emphasis on our member status in the European Union: EU regulations and directives. By now we can tell that re-codifying this area is over, we can only expect to small modification in the near future.
Modifications in most of the cases prepared for the future. But it does not mean that we can count on a very crystallized legal material. In the dynamically developing world of IP law it is not rare to use smaller modifications. We have to examine the legal practice too, that helps us finding the correct way in the fast changing economical and social relations. Performing the harmonization duty, legislator could not always take into consideration the national significances, legal practice. The lack of examining these circumstances can cause modifications in the legal material.
The Patent Law Treaty adopted at Geneva on June 1st, 2000. The provisions of the Treaty and the Regulations shall apply to national and regional applications for patents for invention and for invention and for patents of addition, which are filed with or for the Office of a Contracting Party. The Patent Law Treaty became applicable on April 28th, 2005.
Hungary joined the Treaty at the beginning, because of the need in 2008 to change the Hungarian patent law. The Treaty suggests the European Patent Convention, however in many ways it is the complementary. The Treaty gives types of applications permitted to be filed as international applications under the Patent Cooperation Treaty, divisional applications of the types of applications referred to in item.
Earlier the rules of Hungarian patent law were complicated, the process of registry was less favorable for the patentee. The harmonization of process rules effects that the patentee cannot lose his patent rights. The new rules introduce an electronic process in patent law, which makes the process easier, cheaper, and faster. But not all the procedures became electronic: only the lodgment of petition. In the future that should be better to reach electronic procedure on every level.
The harmonization of patent rules means liberalization, the notification will be easier and faster, which effected growth in the trust of business. Process rules need more harmonization in the future, and hopefully the final goal will be one global process at in all member states of the European Union. 
- …
