IMPROVING THE CIVIL-LAW MECHANISMS FOR COMPENSATION OF DAMAGES CAUSED TO RIGHT HOLDERS BY COUNTERFEIT PRODUCTS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/Keywords:
intellectual property, counterfeit, tortious liability, actual damage, lost profits, statutory damages, license analogy.Abstract
This article provides a comprehensive socio-legal and theoretical analysis of civil law mechanisms designed to compensate for material and non-material damages inflicted upon intellectual property right holders due to the circulation of counterfeit goods. The study examines systemic deficiencies within national legislation, specifically the dogmatic challenges of evaluating lost profits (lucrum cessans) and the standard of proof required in tortious liability. Incorporating a comparative legal analysis of developed doctrines, such as statutory damages and the license analogy method, this paper puts forward concrete legislative recommendations to amend the Civil Code and specialized intellectual property enactments.
References
1.Civil Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan (1996). Official Publication of the Oliy Majlis of the Republic of Uzbekistan. [Amended up to recent legislative acts].
2.Civil Procedural Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan (2018). National Database of Legislation of the Republic of Uzbekistan.
3.Law of the Republic of Uzbekistan "On Copyright and Related Rights" (2006). Collection of Legislative Acts of the Republic of Uzbekistan, No. 29, Art. 284.
4.Law of the Republic of Uzbekistan "On Trademarks, Service Marks and Appellations of Places of Origin of Goods" (2001). National Database of Legislation of the Republic of Uzbekistan.
5.Decree of the President of the Republic of Uzbekistan No. UP-158 (September 11, 2023). "On the Strategy 'Uzbekistan — 2030'". National Database of Legislation.
6.Plenary Resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Uzbekistan No. 7 (April 28, 2000). "On Certain Issues of Application of Legislation on Compensation for Moral Damage". Collection of Resolutions of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Uzbekistan.
7.Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS Agreement) (1994). Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, Annex 1C, 1869 U.N.T.S. 299.
8.Directive 2004/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (April 29, 2004). "On the Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights". Official Journal of the European Union, L 157.
9.United States Copyright Act of 1976, 17 U.S.C. § 504(c).
10.Trademark Act of 1946 (Lanham Act), 15 U.S.C. § 1117(c).
11.WIPO (2024). World Intellectual Property Report 2024: Making Innovation Policy Work for Development. Geneva: World Intellectual Property Organization.
12.OECD/EUIPO (2021). Global Trade in Fakes: A Worrying Threat. Paris: OECD Publishing / European Union Intellectual Property Office.
13.Brand Finance (2023). GIFT™ 2023: Global Intangible Finance Tracker. London: Brand Finance PLC.
14.Imomov, N. F. (2021). Civil Law Regulation of Intellectual Property Objects. Textbook. Tashkent: Tashkent State University of Law.
15.Ruzinazarov, Sh. N., & Achilova, L. I. (2022). Civil Law Problems of Intellectual Property Protection. Monograph. Tashkent: Tashkent State University of Law.
16.Tojiyev, S. B. (2023). "Problems of Protecting the Business Reputation of Legal Entities in Civil Law". Huquq va Burch (Law and Duty Journal), No. 4, pp. 45-51.
17.Department of Intellectual Property under the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Uzbekistan (2025). Statistical Report on Intellectual Property Enforcement and Infringement Analysis. Tashkent.
