Balance of Interests in the Mechanism of Protection of Industrial Property Rights
The research deals with the relationship of private and public interests that are implemented in intellectual property relations and balance of these interests in mechanism of protection.
This study uses the complex of main known methods of scientific knowledge: historical legal, forecasting, hermeneutical semantic, structural functional, logical semantic, dogmatic, complex analysis, system structural, comparative. The purpose of the study is determining the scope, content and relationship of interests in the intellectual property relations, justifying the conceptual foundations of balancing these interests in the management of intellectual capital through the legal regulation and economic mechanisms.
The authors conclude that efficient functioning of intellectual property relations in terms of their scope, content and relationship of interests can be ensured only by means of legal regulation, which organically combines dispositive and imperative principles. The interdependence of such principles determines the key basis of the legal regulation of intellectual property management and should be reflected in all aspects of the development of intellectual property relations, in particular, the grounds for their emergence, change, termination, subject composition, conceptual distinguishing features of legal relations of right holders, etc.
 Chervinsʹka, L.P. 2010. Use of innovative labor activity. Economics, finance, law. No. 2. 3–8.
 Chervinsʹka, L.P., Kalʹnitsʹkyy, M.I. 2010. Innovative labor activity: essence and features. Economics, finance, law. No. 9. 11–15.
 Council Directive 91/250/EEC of 14 May 1991 on the legal protection of computer programs. Official Journal of the European Communities. L 122, 17.5.1991, 42.
 Declaration on the TRIPS agreement and public health, adopted on 14 November 2001. URL: https://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/minist_e/min01_e/mindecl_trips_e.htm.
 Demezhanova, S.M., Kaudyrov, T.E., Demidova, G.S. 2019. Analyzing the Litigation Practice Concerned with the Consideration of Intellectual Property Cases in Kazakhstan. Journal of Advanced Research in Law and Economics, Volume X Issue 1(39) Spring 2019. 124–133.
 Hansen, C.J. 2018. Permission Impossible: An Exception-Based Legislative Solution for Digitizing Copyright-Protected Works, 17 CHI.–KENT J. INTELL. PROP. 74. Available at: https://scholarship.kentlaw.iit.edu/ckjip/vol17/iss1/3.
 Harashima, T. 2018. Wage inequality and innovative intelligence-biased technological change. Theoretical and Practical Research in the Economic Fields, IX Issue 1(17) Summer 2018. 17–24.
 Heller, M.A. Eisenberg, R.S. 1998. Can Patents Deter Innovation? The Anticommons in Biomedical Research. American Association for the Advancement of Science. Vol. 280. 698–701.Available at: http://science.sciencemag.org/content/sci/280/5364/698.full.pdf.
 Intellectual Property Association of European Football Associations: Legal Protection and Protection in Ukraine. 2010. Kyiv: State Department of Intellectual Property: 200.
 Maslyukov, P. 2001. Features of legal regulation of employee's inventions in the UK. Analysis of legislation and judicial practice. Intellectual property. Industrial property. No. 9. 64–72.
 Naumenko, I.N. 2009. Basic principles in the relationship of public and private interests in civil law. Leningrad Law Journal. 2009. No. 2 (16). 193–199.
 Powles, J., Liddicoat, J. 2018. United Kingdom Patent Decisions 2017. International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law. March 2018.Volume 49. Issue 3. 318–323.
 Rădoi, M.I., Șerban, R. 2019. Regional Innovation – A Pillar of Regional Competitiveness and an Object of Regional Development Policy. 2019. Journal of Advanced Research in Management, X Issue 1(19) Summer 2019. 35–43.
 Kumar, R., Das, A.J. 2016. Scenario of intellectual property right on microorganism and microbiological research: an imperative need to amend. Intеrnational Journal of Intellectual Property Management. Vol. 9. No. 1. 1–4.
 Shatkovskaya, T.V., Epifanova, T.V. 2016. Correlation of Private and Public Legal Interests as Theoretical and Scientific and Practical Problem of Modern Law. Journal of Advanced Research in Law and Economics, VII, Issue 3(17), Summer 2016. 625–630.
 Shavell, S. 2001. Rewards versus intellectual property rights. J. of law a.economics. Chicago, Vol. 44, № 1. 525–547.
 Shishkin, S.N. 2011. Business-legal (economic and legal) bases of state regulation of economy: Monograph.Russian Academy of Sciences. Institute of State and Law.M.: Publishing house Infotropic Media: 328.
 Skrypnyuk, O.V. et al. 2008. Political system of Ukraine under conditions of the interaction of civil society and the rule of law. Monograph. Academy of Law Sciences of Ukraine. The Scientific-Research Institute of Private Law and Entrepreneurship. Monograph. Kyiv–Ternopil: Publishing house Textbooks and manuals: 224.
 Sudarikov, S.A.; Grek, N.G.; Bahrenʹkova, K.A. 2004. Economics and Intellectual Property. M.: Publishing house of business and educational literature: 512.
 The Civil Code of Ukraine. 2003. dated January 16, 2003. No. 435-IV. Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/435-15.
 Ventose, E.D. 2014. Australian High Court rules on patentability of methods of medical treatment. Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice. URL: http://jiplp.blogspot.com/2014/02/australian-high-court-rules-on.html
The Copyright Transfer Form to ASERS Publishing (The Publisher)
This form refers to the manuscript, which an author(s) was accepted for publication and was signed by all the authors.
The undersigned Author(s) of the above-mentioned Paper here transfer any and all copyright-rights in and to The Paper to The Publisher. The Author(s) warrants that The Paper is based on their original work and that the undersigned has the power and authority to make and execute this assignment. It is the author's responsibility to obtain written permission to quote material that has been previously published in any form. The Publisher recognizes the retained rights noted below and grants to the above authors and employers for whom the work performed royalty-free permission to reuse their materials below. Authors may reuse all or portions of the above Paper in other works, excepting the publication of the paper in the same form. Authors may reproduce or authorize others to reproduce the above Paper for the Author's personal use or for internal company use, provided that the source and The Publisher copyright notice are mentioned, that the copies are not used in any way that implies The Publisher endorsement of a product or service of an employer, and that the copies are not offered for sale as such. Authors are permitted to grant third party requests for reprinting, republishing or other types of reuse. The Authors may make limited distribution of all or portions of the above Paper prior to publication if they inform The Publisher of the nature and extent of such limited distribution prior there to. Authors retain all proprietary rights in any process, procedure, or article of manufacture described in The Paper. This agreement becomes null and void if and only if the above paper is not accepted and published by The Publisher, or is with drawn by the author(s) before acceptance by the Publisher.