Оn the Distinction Between the Legal Status of an Intellectual Property Rights Holder and an Entrepreneur

Abstract

The article examines the problematic issues of correlation and delimitation of the legal status of an individual entrepreneur and an individual subject to intellectual property rights and develops proposals for improving the legislative regulation of these issues. It is noted that the peculiarity of an individual’s participation in economic relations is also related to the fact that after state registration as an entrepreneur, such a person combines two legal statuses: as an individual – a holder of personal non-property and property rights; as an individual entrepreneur – a participant in economic relations. At the same time, in practice, the legal status of an individual in which person acts in certain legal relations is often unclear.
Based on the analysis of scientific approaches and case law, the author formulates conclusions regarding the correlation and delimitation of the legal status of an individual entrepreneur and an individual subject to intellectual property rights and improvement of legal regulation of these issues. First, it is proposed to enshrine in the economic procedure legislation the rule that if a dispute in intellectual property relations arises with the participation of a patent holder – an individual entrepreneur who exercises its property rights to an intellectual property object in the field of economic relations, a dispute regarding the protection of such rights should be considered in economic proceedings, regardless of whether the plaintiff/defendant is an individual or an entrepreneur. Secondly, the author proposes to legislatively regulate the property relations of spouses regarding the ownership of property rights to intellectual property objects, since the rules on the right of joint ownership of things cannot be applied to these relations by analogy. The legislative approach to regulating these relations should take into account: the intangible nature of intellectual property; the specific nature of actions related to their use (industrial property is intended for use in business activities); the need for the entity that decides the legal fate of the intellectual property to have special knowledge and experience, etc. The interests of the other spouse should be considered by legislating its right to receive part of the income generated by their use of intellectual property, part of the funds received from their alienation or transfer for temporary use. At the same time, if property rights are acquired with funds received from business activities and used in such activities, they should be considered personal property of the entrepreneur.