Criminal Sanction of the Infringement of Intellectual Property Rights in Customs; A Comparative Study in Selected Islamic and Western Countries

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Associate Professor, Intellectual Property Department, Faculty of Law, University of Qom, Iran, Qom

2 PhD in Private Law from the Faculty of Law, Mofid University, Iran, Qom

3 Assistant Professor, Private Law Department, Faculty of Law, Mofid University, Iran, Qom

10.22091/dclic.2024.11573.1034

Abstract

One of the important issues in the criminal sanction of intellectual property rights’ infringement in customs is the method of addressing this infringement and determining the fate of infringing goods. Over the past two decades, in selected western and islamic legal systems, alongside traditional handling to the proof of intellectual property rights’ infringement, a simplified procedure for addressing and determining the fate of infringing goods has emerged; resolving the type of violation based on the status of goods containing intellectual works, returning infringing goods to the rights holders, confiscating infringing goods for the benefit of the state and using them according to economic policies, and ultimately destruction, are among the criminal sanctions for infringement of these rights. The challenge in question regarding this matter, after selecting the method of handling in the selected legal systems in compliance with the rules of procedure, is determining the type of response to infringing goods; compliance with the rules of private property of individuals, societal interests and the rights of intellectual property holders are among these challenges, especially in light of recent legal developments in the iranian legal system. This article employs a library-based method to gather materials, and through their analysis, seek to address these issues by explaining the existing laws in the iranian legal system, while considering the achievements of selected legal systems.

Keywords

References

الف. فارسی
جوهری، مهدی؛ صادقی، محمود؛ شهبازی‌نیا، مرتضی؛ مهاجری، علی، (1391). «اقدامات تأمینی و موقتی در دعاوی حقوق مالکیت صنعتی؛ (مطالعه تطبیقی در حقوق ایران و موافقت‌نامه تریپس)». پژوهش‌های حقوق تطبیقی (مدرس علوم انسانی)، شماره ۱۶.
حبیبا، سعید؛ شاکری، زهرا، (1389). «تدابیر مرزی در حمایت از حقوق مالکیت فکری». پژوهشنامه بازرگانی، شماره 15.
درکی، الهام؛ مخترع، آیدا؛ رستگاری، بهنام، (1402). «نقض اموال تملیکی دولت در پیشبرد اهداف اقتصادی: تحلیل قوانین و بررسی موانع و راه‌کارها». تمدن حقوقی، دوره 6، شماره 17.
رستمی، امید؛ رحمانی فرد، محسن، (1400). «سیاست کیفری افتراقی در قبال قاچاق کالا و ارز سازمان‌یافته». مجله حقوقی دادگستری، دوره 85، شماره 116.
قاسمی مقدم، حسن، (1399). «تضمین‌های حمایت از حق بر مالکیت در توقیف و ضبط وسیله جرم». آموزه‌های حقوق کیفری، شماره 17.
قاسمی، ناصر؛ ملک‌زاده، ریحانه، (1402). «اشکال قاچاق کالا و چرایی جرم‌انگاری آن در حقوق ایران». فصلنامه علمی دیدگاه‌های حقوق قضایی، دوره 28، شماره 101.
محمدی، حمید، (1391). ضبط، مصادره، استرداد و اخذ اموال حاصل از جرم، چاپ دوم، گنج دانش.
مژدهی پور، ابوالفضل؛ میلانی، علی‌رضا، (1401). «سیاست جنایی حاکم بر نهاد متولی پیشگیری و مبارزه با قاچاق کالا و ارز در حقوق ایران». فصلنامه علمی دیدگاه‌های حقوق قضایی، دوره 27، شماره 99.
میرحسینی، سید حسن، (1395). حقوق طرح‌های صنعتی، تهران: نشر میزان
نجفی، سینا، (1398). بررسی جزایی ضبط و مصادره اموال در قانون مجازات اسلامی ایران. قانون یار، شماره ۳.
Reference
AIPPI. (2009). YEARBOOK / II, Zurich.
Nokia (Case C495/09), Philips (Case C-446/09).
Rinnert, S. (2015). New European Regulation 608/2013 concerning combating counterfeit goods. World Customs Journal, 9(1), 37-42.
wipo (2013). enforcement of IP rights in countries in transition.
Fujino, jinzo, Yoshida, Hideaki. (2018). The Enforcement of the Intellectual Property Rights in Japan.
IP Enforcement Manual-Singapore (2021). available at: https://www.britcham.org.sg/sites/default/files/content-files/IP%20Enforcement%20Manual.pdf, last visited 2024.10/28
Petillion, F. (2019). Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights in the EU Member States: 15 U.S.C. § 1124 (2024): Importation of goods bearing infringing marks or names forbidden.
Basic Circular Notice of the Customs Act (2022): Section 69-12-1.
Directive 2004/48/EC: Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the enforcement of intellectual property rights.
Regulation (EU) No 952/2013: Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 October 2013 laying down the Union Customs Code.
19 U.S.C. § 1526 (2011): Merchandise bearing American trade-mark.
Council Regulation (EC) No 1383/2003: Council Regulation of 22 July 2003 concerning customs action against goods suspected of infringing certain intellectual property rights and the measures to be taken against goods found to have infringed such rights.
Preu Bohlig & Partner: Customs Enforcement (January 13, 2016). Available at: https://preubohlig.de/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Customs-EnforcementV5160113NEW.pdf [Accessed January 2, 2024, 20:00].
Singapore Customs: Quick guide for copyright and trademark owners and licensees. Available at: https://www.customs.gov.sg/businesses/border-enforcement-of-intellectual-property-rights/quick-guide-for-copyright-and-trade-mark-owners-and-licensees/ [Last visited October 28, 2024].https://www.aksoy-ip.com/post/a-guide-to-the-turkish-customs-measures-against-counterfeit-goods, [last visited 2024/10/27].
https://gun.av.tr/insights/articles/procedures-and-strategies-for-anti-counterfeiting-in-turkey, last visited 2024/10/26.
https://www.trade.gov/country-commercial-guides/indonesia-prohibited-and-restricted-imports, [last visited 2024/10/26].
https://www.mlaw.gov.sg/files/Annex_B_IPDR_Final_Report.pdf, [last visited 2024/11/20]
https://www.wipo.int/web/wipolex/judicial-administration-structure/sg, [last visited 2024/11/20].
The Criminal law doctrines of Islamic countries
Volume 1, Issue 4 - Serial Number 4
Winter 2024
December 2024
Pages 44-66

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics