Proposals for the Introduction of Certificates of Authorship instead of Patents for Methods of Diagnosis and Treatment

Recent years have shown reasonable support (including by the author of the article) for proposals to exclude methods for diagnosing and treating people and animals from the list of results of intellectual activity in respect of which patent protection can be applied in the scientific legal literature. These proposals are based on the provisions of the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS Agreement), foreign experience of countries with developed legal systems and arguments about the practical inexpediency of patenting these results of intellectual activity, as well as on the moral and ethical side of the issue. In the case of legislative support for these initiatives, in order to preserve the encouragement of innovation and reflect the contribution of developers to medical science in the field of creating new and developing existing methods of diagnosis and treatment, the paper proposes to refer to the experience of the USSR in issuing copyright certificates for this type of invention and to revive such legal mechanisms in the Russian legal system.

1. Varfolomeeva Yu. A. Mirokhozyaystvennye aspekty upravleniya intellektualnoy sobstvennostyu // Vneshnetorgovoe pravo. — 2005. — № 2. — S. 16–20.

2. Vorozhevich A. S. Patentovanie sposobov lecheniya i diagnostiki: opyt zarubezhnykh stran, vybor Rossii // Intellektualnaya sobstvennost. Promyshlennaya sobstvennost. — 2020. — № 6. — S. 34–42.

3. Grazhdanskiy kodeks Rossiyskoy Federatsii: Patentnoe pravo. Pravo na selektsionnye dostizheniya. Postateynyy kommentariy k glavam 72 i 73 / K. V. Vsevolozhskiy, O. V. Dobrynin, V. N. Kastalskiy [i dr.]; pod red. P. V. Krasheninnikova. — M.: Statut, 2015. — 444 s.

4. Danilin S. N., Borisov A. N. Prava na rezultaty intellektualnoy deyatelnosti i sredstva individualizatsii. Kommentariy k chasti chetvertoy Grazhdanskogo kodeksa RF (postateynyy). — M.: Delovoy dvor, 2015. 896 s.

5. Danilina E. A. Vozmozhnosti pravovoy okhrany traditsionnykh znaniy v ramkakh prava promyshlennoy sobstvennosti // SPS «KonsultantPlyus», 2011 (data obrashcheniya: 29.12.2021).

6. Dzhermakyan V. Yu. Kommentariy k glave 72 «Patentnoe pravo» Grazhdanskogo kodeksa RF (postateynyy). 3-e izd., pererab. i dop. — SPS «KonsultantPlyus», 2013 (data obrashcheniya: 29.12.2021).

7. Eremenko V. I. Pravovaya okhrana selektsionnykh dostizheniy v Rossiyskoy Federatsii // Zakonodatelstvo i ekonomika. — 2015. — № 1. — S. 34–67; № 2. — S. 7–27.

8. Zarubinskiy G. Nekotorye voprosy pravovoy okhrany lekarstvennykh sredstv v RF (ch. 1) // Remedium. 2006. — № 2. — S. 29–32.

9. Zashchita isklyuchitelnykh prav na izobreteniya, ispolzuemye v lekarstvennykh preparatakh: problemy pravovogo regulirovaniya i napravleniya sovershenstvovaniya zakonodatelstva: monografiya / A. A. Ayurova, O. V. Gutnikov, S. A. Sinitsyn [i dr.]; otv. red. O. V. Gutnikov, S. A. Sinitsyn. — M.: IZiSP, Kontrakt, 2019. — 208 s.

10. Kashanin A. V. O doktorskoy dissertatsii R. A. Merzlikinoy // Vestnik grazhdanskogo prava. — 2008. — T. 8. № 3. — S. 245–277.

11. Kommentariy k Grazhdanskomu kodeksu Rossiyskoy Federatsii (chasti chetvertoy) (postateynyy): v 2 t. / S. A. Gorlenko, V. O. Kalyatin, L. L. Kiriy [i dr.]; otv. red. L. A. Trakhtengerts. — 2-e izd. — T. 2. — M.: Infra-M, 2016. — 524 s.

12. Kommentariy k Grazhdanskomu kodeksu Rossiyskoy Federatsii: v 2 t. — T. 2: Chasti tretya, chetvertaya GK RF / pod red. T. E. Abovoy, M. M. Boguslavskogo, A. G. Svetlanova; Institut gosudarstva i prava RAN. M.: Yurayt, 2009.

13. Pravo intellektualnoy sobstvennosti: uchebnik / O. L. Alekseeva, A. S. Vorozhevich, O. S. Grin [i dr.]; pod obshch. red. L. A. Novoselovoy. — T. 4: Patentnoe pravo. — M.: Statut, 2019. — 659 s.

14. Yakovlev V. F. Izbrannye trudy. — T. 2: Grazhdanskoe pravo: istoriya i sovremennost. — Kn. 2. — M.: Statut, 2012. — 351 s.

15. Deutsch E. Gentechnologie und Recht // Zeitschrift fur Rechtspolitik. — 18. Jahrg, H. 3 (Marz 1985).

16. Mitnovetski O., Nicol D. Are patents for methods of medical treatment contrary to the ordre public and morality or «generally inconvenient»? // URL: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1733926/pdf/v030p00470.pdf (data obrashcheniya: 29.12.2021).