The adoption of the law alone will not accelerate the introduction of innovations — a holistic system of incentives is needed. Jahongir Aripov, article for the Economic Review magazine.
— The articles of the Civil Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan in the field of defining the right holder of intellectual property created at the expense of public funds contradict each other. The draft law "On Innovations and Innovative Activity" will include a clause on assigning rights to it to the Research Institute (RI) where it was created. What specific legal rights to the invention need to be transferred to the Research Institute (use, disposal, possession, alienation, copyright) and what effect can be expected from such actions?
— We are talking directly about the exclusive right to an industrial property object. The exclusive right holder can either transfer this right or sell non-exclusive licenses to an unlimited circle of persons.
However, the situation is such that de facto the rights to developments today already belong to the Research Institutes. We are left only to legitimize this. But for a technological breakthrough, the mere adoption of a law is not enough. To increase the degree of implementation, a whole system of incentive mechanisms is needed, and the adoption of this law is only the foundation for this. The only thing we will really achieve by adopting this law is the trust of foreign investors. But even here, in addition to the law, the development of mechanisms to attract investors is needed.
— What risks does the state face (inaction of the author and non-implementation of the technology, sale of the technology abroad, etc.) and how to insure against them? What to do if in the process of working on a state order a new IP is created, the capabilities of which go beyond the scope of this order, but still created on budget money?
— The law must necessarily prescribe mechanisms ensuring the priority of the national industry for the developer. Perhaps a ban on the sale of an exclusive license abroad should be established.
It is also necessary to ensure that the state should initially be the right holder of state-important inventions (for example, in the field of national security). Moreover, including in respect of all previously created IP objects.
Rights to inventions accompanying a state order should belong to the developer, unless otherwise stipulated initially. So far, we are observing the opposite situation — "by default" the rights belong to the customer. According to Article 696 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan, "unless otherwise provided by the contract, the customer has the right to use the results of work transferred to him by the contractor." It is required to normatively and legally define cases where rights to created intellectual property can belong only to the state, and in other cases change the general rule "rights belong to the customer" to "rights belong to the contractor (executor) unless otherwise established by law or contract", with the simplification of the process of commercialization of innovations.
Perhaps, while there is no such definition in the law, some state body should be authorized to make a decision on who will retain the right to this development. Separately, it is necessary to work out the issue of the possibility of a conflict of interest.
Jahongir Aripov.
Economic Review, No. 7-2012