Wyniki wyszukiwania - Biblioteka Nauki

1

Roszczenie o zapłatę wielokrotności wynagrodzenia w polskim prawie autorskim a prawo europejskie

100%

Balcarczyk J. , Okoń Z.

|

tom 21

|

nr 4

949 - 984

EN

The article investigates the way Directive 2004/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the enforcement of intellectual property rights was implemented to the Polish copyright law. It pays special attention to the provision of art. 79 sec. 1 of the Polish copyright law that provides for payment of double or, where the infringement is culpable, triple the amount of respective remuneration that would have been due as of the time of claiming it in exchange for the rightholder’s consent for the use of the work and analyzes whether it constitutes punitive damages that are prohibited by the above Directive. It explains the reasons rooted in economic analysis of law behind it and outlines some possible risks arising therefrom.

2

Particularities of Proving a Single and Continuous Infringement of EU Competition Rules

100%

Romić M. R.

|

tom 13

|

nr 22

FR

Une infraction unique et continue aux règles de concurrence de l’UE est une forme qualifiée d’infraction au droit de la concurrence de l’UE caractérisée par l’existence d’un projet commun aux entreprises ayant un objectif unique. Compte tenu de la spécificité de cette forme d’infraction, la preuve est différente de la procedure de preuve standard pour prouver les infractions aux règles de concurrence devant les tribunaux de l’UE. Cet article vise à donner un aperçu des règles de prevue à travers la jurisprudence de la Cour de justice de l’UE et à en analyser l’application dans la pratique.

EN

A single and continuous infringement of EU competition rules is a qualified form of infringement of EU Competition Law characterized by the existence of a global plan having a single objective between undertakings. Given the specificity of this form of infringement, proving it is somewhat different from the standard evidentiary process for proving infringements of competition rules before EU courts. This article aims to give an overview of the evidentiary rules through the case law of the Court of Justice of the EU and analyze their application in practice.

3

Procedura wymiaru i wykonania kar dyscyplinarnych wobec skazanych na karę pozbawienia wolności. Część II (art. 146 k.k.w.–art. 149 k.k.w.)

86%

Kwieciński A.

|

tom 30

191 - 206

EN

This is the second part of an analysis of issues related to the procedure concerning the levels and enforcement of disciplinary penalties against people serving prison sentences. The author continues his analysis of the issue of sentencing guidelines in disciplinary proceedings. In addition, he tackles the problem of fl exible modification of disciplinary penalties. A lot of attention is devoted to issues concerning statutory limitations and enforcement of disciplinary penalties as well as supervisory assessment of decisions taken in the course of disciplinary proceedings against inmates.

4

The Condition of Fault in Private Enforcement of Competition Law – a Comparative Analysis of U.S. v. Polish and European Approach

72%

Mackiewicz M.

|

tom 13

|

nr 21

71-98

FR

L’objectif de la loi polonaise sur les actions en dommages et intérêts pour les infractions au droit de la concurrence, qui se base sur le droit de l’UE et le transpose était de permettre aux entreprises d’utiliser efficacement l’exécution privée de leurs demandes de dommages et intérêts auprès des auteurs d’infractions au droit de la concurrence. La violation du droit de la concurrence est qualifiée comme un délit civil selon la loi sur les demandes d’indemnisation. Par conséquent, la loi sur les demandes d’indemnisation renvoie aux règles de responsabilité délictuelle. Les conditions de la responsabilité délictuelle classique en droit national n’ont pas exactement la même signification et portée dogmatique que les conditions de la responsabilité publique ou privée pour les infractions au droit national et européen de la concurrence. Dans la pratique, leur application par les tribunaux nationaux peut soulever de nombreuses questions concernant la conformité entre le droit national et le droit de l’UE. Le présent document vise à analyser l’une des principales conditions de la responsabilité délictuelle, à savoir la faute de l’entreprise ainsi que la faute de ses organes et dirigeants. Si on voulait comprendre la notion de faute dans les limites fixées par le droit civil, et suivre la formulation littérale des dispositions du code civil polonais relatives à la condition de faute, l’efficacité de l’exécution privée des demandes de dommages et intérêts résultant d’infractions au droit de la concurrence serait incertaine. Par conséquent, le présent article vise à fournir aux lecteurs une interprétation de la notion de faute, en tant que condition de la responsabilité des entreprises, qui permette d’atteindre l’objectif législatif de la loi sur les demandes d’indemnisation et de respecter les principes d’efficacité et d’équivalence du droit de l’UE. Afin de présenter un cadre complet, cet article examine également la jurisprudence de la CJUE concernant la “faute antitrust”, accompagnée d’une analyse comparative des approches allemande et française de la condition de faute ainsi que des lois antitrust américaines dans le même domaine.

EN

The purpose of the Polish Act on Claims for Damages for Remedying the Damage Caused by Infringements of Competition Law, based on and implementing EU law – the Damages Directive, was to enable undertakings to effectively use private enforcement of their damages claims from competition law offenders. Infringement of competition law is classified as a tort according to the said Act on Claims. Therefore, the Act on Claims refers to tort liability rules. The conditions of classic tort liability in domestic law do not have exactly the same dogmatic meaning and scope as the conditions of public or private liability for the infringements of domestic and EU competition law. In practice, their application by national courts may rise many questions regarding conformity between domestic and EU law. This paper aims to analyse one of the key conditions of tort liability, that is, the fault of both the undertaking – the offenders, as well as the fault of their governing bodies and officers. If one were to understand the notion of fault within the limits laid down by civil law, and follow the literal wording of the Polish Civil Code’s provisions referring to the fault condition, the efficiency of private enforcement of damage claims arising from infringements of competition law would be doubtful. Therefore, the aim of this paper is to provide the readers with such an interpretation of the notion of fault, as a condition of liability of undertakings, that the legislative purpose of the Act on Claims is achieved and that the principles of efficiency and equivalence of the EU law are observed. In order to present a comprehensive picture, this paper will also discuss the case law of the CJEU concerning ‘anti-trust fault’, accompanied by a comparative analysis of the German and French approach to the fault condition as well as United States antitrust laws in the same area.

5

Odszkodowanie z tytułu naruszenia praw autorskich – rozwój czy degeneracja?

72%

Czajkowska-Dąbrowska M.

|

tom 64

61-82

EN

The article examines the claim for damages as regulated in Art. 79 section 1 point 3 letter b) of the Copyright Act and contains an assessment thereof presented against the background of European law. The claim for damages in the case of infringement of copyright is currently provided for in two variants: as compensation falling under general principles of liability for damages and, alternatively, as compensation taking the form of a lump sum. As far as the lump-sum compensation is concerned, it is not necessary for the claimant to prove actual damage. The amount of compensation in this form is set as a double amount (in the absence of culpability on the part of the infringer) or a triple amount (when the infringing conduct is culpable) of an “appropriate royalty”. Such a severe liability violates the civil law standards pertaining to the redress of damages, in particular it interferes with the compensative function of liability for damages. It simultaneously distorts the balance between the claim for a lump-sum compensation and other claims available to right holders in the case of infringement of copyright and, in wider perspective, the balance within the entire system of intellectual property law. It appears dubious whether the legal regulation of the claim for a lump-sum compensation contained in Art. 79 section 1 point 3 letter b) of the Copyright Act is in compliance with the Directive 2004/48/EC on the enforcement of intellectual property rights. Arguments in support of this view have been put forward in the article. Doubts which been expressed in that regard will most likely be clarified by the Court of Justice in its future response to the request for a preliminary ruling, which was made by the Supreme Court.

6

Roszczenie o zapłatę wielokrotności stosownego wynagrodzenia w prawie autorskim – głos w obronie status quo na dzień przed wyrokiem Trybunału Konstytucyjnego

58%

Sokołowska D.

|

tom 72

349-373

PL

The article contains the response to the criticism of the solution regulated under article 79 section 1 point 3 letter b of the Copyright and Related Rights Act made before the Constitutional Tribunal rendered its judgment of 23 June 2015 repealing he above-mentioned legal provision. The genesis of article 79 section 1 point 3 letter b leads to the conclusion that it constituted an autonomous institution of the Polish copyright law. In particular, the claim for payment of a triple amount of the respective remuneration, where the copyright infringement is culpable, was not of a penal nature, neither was it contradictory to the Polish model of liability for damages, moreover at the same time, it was in accordance with the provisions of the Directive 2004/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the enforcement of intellectual property rights.

7

Własność przemysłowa w technologiach przyjaznych środowisku

51%

Bury M. , Mełgieś K.

|

tom R. 9, nr 26

7--18

PL

Znaczenie praw własności przemysłowej w polskiej gospodarce wzrasta. Rośnie nie tylko liczba tych praw w obrocie prawnym, lecz również liczba sporów o ich naruszenie. Mimo to wielu przedsiębiorców nie wykorzystuje w pełni systemu ochrony własności przemysłowej z uwagi, iż jest on złożony i nieprzystępny. Niniejszy artykuł ma przybliżyć tę tematykę. Prawa własności przemysłowej zaliczają się do praw własności intelektualnej udzielanych na wniosek. Wspólną istotną cechą jest to, że ich uzyskanie i utrzymanie jest kosztowne. Aby uniknąć strat, trzeba się nimi dobrze posługiwać i korzystać z porad wyspecjalizowanych rzeczników patentowych i prawników. Poszczególne prawa własności przemysłowej dedykowane są różnym niematerialnym elementom przekładającym się na wartość i sukces przedsiębiorstwa. Niektóre z nich szczególnie nadają się do wykorzystania przez przedsiębiorstwa i organizacje przedsiębiorstw działających w sektorze technologii przyjaznych dla środowiska. Właściwe budowanie portfolio praw wymaga zachowania podstawowych zasad, w szczególności dużej ostrożności w ujawnianiu informacji. Omówienie podstawowych zasad uzyskiwania, wykorzystywania tych praw oraz egzekwowania wynikającego z nich monopolu jest przedmiotem niniejszego artykułu.

EN

Industrial property rights are growing more important for entrepreneurs acting on Polish market. The number of valid rights is growing and so is the number of litigation actions. Nevertheless many entrepreneurs are deterred by complexity of the industrial property rights system and do not take full benefit of it. Present article concerns this issue. Industrial property rights are a kind of intellectual property that is granted after applications. Another common feature relates to the fact that both having them granted and keeping them in force costs money. That is why to take benefit of them one has to put these rights into use and take advices of specialized patent attorneys and lawyers. Different kinds of industrial property rights are aimed to protect different intellectual assets of the company. Some of them are particularly suited for acting in the sector of environment friendly technologies. Appropriate composition of the portfolio of IP rights requires keeping basic rules especially high security regarding disclosures. Basic rules of applying for IP rights, using them and enforcing are given in this article.