| Popis: |
Distinctive signs in trade are primarily protected by industrial property rights; however, criminal sanctions are also prescribed for their unjustified use. The criminal act of Unauthorised Use of another's Mark or Model is defined in Article 233 of the Penal Code (KZ-1) by using a silent blank referral. The Code uses legal concepts from the field of industrial property law without defining them, but also without explicit reference to the special legislation where they are regulated. This creates considerable ambiguity regarding the extent of the incriminated conduct. By an intra legem analogy, the law also incriminates unauthorised use of "other special sign for goods or services". Since modern legislation regulates a number of such signs and labels, the guidelines for assessing which are protected by criminal law can be found by comparing the common characteristics of those distinctive signs whose unjustified use is incriminated explicitly. The article analyses the characteristics of the protection of company names, trademarks, geographical indications and models under the rules of private and criminal law. The author finds that the analogy should be interpreted as incriminating the unauthorised use of distinctive signs that are legally protected by an exclusive right that entitles the holder to prohibit all third parties from using the protected distinctive sign. On this basis, the author identifies specific industrial property rights, regulated in Slovenian and in European Union legislation, which are protected by Article 233 of KZ-1. Znaki razlikovanja v gospodarskem prometu so primarno varovani s pravicami industrijske lastnine, za njihovo neupravičeno uporabo pa so predpisane tudi kazenske sankcije. Kaznivo dejanje neupravičene uporabe tuje oznake ali modela je v 233. členu Kazenskega zakonika (KZ-1) opredeljeno z uporabo tihe blanketne tehnike. Zakon uporablja pojme s področja industrijske lastnine, ne da bi jih podrobneje opredelil, a tudi brez izrecnega sklica na specialne predpise, v katerih so urejeni, kar ustvarja precej nejasnosti glede obsega inkriminiranega ravnanja. Z analogijo intra legem je inkriminirana tudi neupravičena uporaba "druge posebne oznake za blago ali storitev". Ker je v novejši zakonodaji urejenih precej takšnih oznak, je treba vodila za presojo, katere od njih so kazenskopravno varovane, razbrati iz primerjave s skupnimi značilnostmi tistih oznak, katerih neupravičena uporaba je izrecno inkriminirana. V prispevku so analizirane nekatere značilnosti civilnopravnega in kazenskopravnega varstva firme, znamke, geografske označbe in modela. Avtor ugotavlja, da je treba analogijo razlagati tako, da je inkriminirana neupravičena uporaba tistih znakov razlikovanja, ki so pravno varovani z izključno pravico zasebnopravne narave, ki daje imetniku pravico, da vsem tretjim osebam prepove neupravičeno uporabo zaščitenega znaka. Na tej podlagi identificira posamezne pravice industrijske lastnine, urejene v slovenski zakonodaji in v zakonodaji Evropske unije, ki so kazenskopravno varovane z 233. členom KZ-1. |
