Creative vision as a legal category: concept, legal nature, correlation with related categories
https://doi.org/10.17803/2311-5998.2023.105.5.154-161
- Р Р‡.МессенРТвЂВВВВВВВВжер
- РћРТвЂВВВВВВВВнокласснРСвЂВВВВВВВВРєРСвЂВВВВВВВВ
- LiveJournal
- Telegram
- ВКонтакте
- РЎРєРѕРїРСвЂВВВВВВВВровать ссылку
Full Text:
Abstract
The article considers the main views set out in the scientific literature, as well as in judicial practice, regarding the interpretation of the creative component in the creation of objects of intellectual activity. The meaning of creative work in the creation of such objects is analyzed — from pre-revolutionary lawyers to the modern understanding. The author distinguishes between mechanically created objects and creative objects, identifies two criteria that are necessary to recognize the object created by creative way: objective and subjective. The understanding and correlation of such categories as “creativity”, “creative work”, “creative vision”, “single creative idea”, “creative conception” is analyzed. It is the use of such categories that allows the court to establish the protectability of objects of exclusive rights, to distinguish complex and composite objects, as well as objects of independent creation and repetition of someone else’s work. The author of the article comes to the conclusion that for the definition of creativity as one of the components of the legal qualification necessary for the protectability of the object the most comprehensive is the concept of “creative vision”.
About the Author
N. A. DorokhovaRussian Federation
Natalia A. Dorokhova, Associate Professor of the Department of Civil Law, Cand. Sci. (Law)
9, ul. Sadovaya-Kudrinskaya, Moscow, 125993
References
1. Valeeva N. G. Grazhdansko-pravovoi status rezhisserov-postanovshchikov kak ispolnitelei osobogo roda / pod red. O. A. Kuznetsovoi, V. G. Golubtsova, G. Ya. Borisevich [i dr.] // Permskii yuridicheskii al'manakh. Ezhegodnyi nauchnyi zhurnal. - 2018. - № 1. - S. 195-203.
2. Vitko V. S. Ponyatie formy proizvedeniya v avtorskom prave. - M. : Statut, 2020. - 268 s.
3. Grin' E. S. Ob"ekty avtorskikh prav v industrii mody // IS. Avtorskoe pravo i smezhnye prava. - 2018. - № 6. - S. 39-44.
4. Kopylov A. Yu. Tvorchestvo kak uslovie okhranosposobnosti proizvedeniya // Imushchestvennye otnosheniya v Rossiiskoi Federatsii. - 2019. - № 12. - S. 56-62.
5. Krasavchikov O. A. Kategorii nauki grazhdanskogo prava // Izbrannye trudy : v 2 t. - M. : Statut, 2005. - T. 2. - 494 s.
6. Mikhailova A. S. K voprosu o notariate i sovremennom tsifrovom iskusstve // Notarius. - 2022. - № 2.
7. Nesterov A. V. Kriterii tvorchestva: yuridicheskii aspekt // Rossiiskii sud'ya. - 2018. - № 1. - S. 31-37.
8. Churilov A. Yu. K voprosu o tvorcheskom kharaktere truda kak kriterii okhranosposobnosti ob"ektov avtorskogo prava // IS. Avtorskoe pravo i smezhnye prava. - 2021. - № 1. - S. 21-26.
9. Shershenevich G. F. Avtorskoe pravo na literaturnye proizvedeniya. - Kazan' : Tipografiya Imperatorskogo universiteta, 1891. - 313 s.
Review
For citations:
Dorokhova N.A. Creative vision as a legal category: concept, legal nature, correlation with related categories. Courier of Kutafin Moscow State Law University (MSAL)). 2023;(5):154-161. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17803/2311-5998.2023.105.5.154-161
ISSN 2782-6163 (Online)