巴西源代码专利的规范性不可能和软件剽窃的问题

Charles Emmanuel Parchen, C. Freitas
{"title":"巴西源代码专利的规范性不可能和软件剽窃的问题","authors":"Charles Emmanuel Parchen, C. Freitas","doi":"10.5585/rtj.v9i1.13169","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"It is discussed the absence of the normative possibility of patenting a computer program in Brazil, along with the resulting effects of the shortage of an adequate protection to that immaterial work which cannot be compared to other artistic and literary works as it currently occurs in Brazilian legislation. Once the software itself does not have adequate protection, there is an incentive to plagiarism and counterfeiting. This submits the person of the originator of the computer program to risks and uncertainties of needing to draw upon common means to protecting their patrimony, without there being, however, guarantee of exclusivity and primacy over their intellectual work, which is the source code. By using the deductive method and the bibliographic research, the study proposes the necessity of updating the law, so that it will conform to, for example, countries with emphasis on entrepreneurship, such as the United States. The article concludes that it is not possible to achieve healthy entrepreneurship if, to people with an innovative and inventive eye, are not guaranteed by law, the exclusivity and primacy of their creation for a reasonable time lapse.","PeriodicalId":425034,"journal":{"name":"Revista Thesis Juris","volume":"110 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-06-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A impossibilidade normativa de patente de código fonte no Brasil e o problema do plágio de software\",\"authors\":\"Charles Emmanuel Parchen, C. Freitas\",\"doi\":\"10.5585/rtj.v9i1.13169\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"It is discussed the absence of the normative possibility of patenting a computer program in Brazil, along with the resulting effects of the shortage of an adequate protection to that immaterial work which cannot be compared to other artistic and literary works as it currently occurs in Brazilian legislation. Once the software itself does not have adequate protection, there is an incentive to plagiarism and counterfeiting. This submits the person of the originator of the computer program to risks and uncertainties of needing to draw upon common means to protecting their patrimony, without there being, however, guarantee of exclusivity and primacy over their intellectual work, which is the source code. By using the deductive method and the bibliographic research, the study proposes the necessity of updating the law, so that it will conform to, for example, countries with emphasis on entrepreneurship, such as the United States. The article concludes that it is not possible to achieve healthy entrepreneurship if, to people with an innovative and inventive eye, are not guaranteed by law, the exclusivity and primacy of their creation for a reasonable time lapse.\",\"PeriodicalId\":425034,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Revista Thesis Juris\",\"volume\":\"110 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-06-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Revista Thesis Juris\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5585/rtj.v9i1.13169\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista Thesis Juris","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5585/rtj.v9i1.13169","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

讨论了巴西缺乏为计算机程序申请专利的规范性可能性,以及巴西立法中目前无法与其他艺术和文学作品相比的非物质作品缺乏适当保护所造成的影响。一旦软件本身没有足够的保护,就会有抄袭和假冒的动机。这就使计算机程序的创建者面临着需要利用共同手段来保护其遗产的风险和不确定性,然而,没有对其智力作品(即源代码)的排他性和优先性的保证。通过演绎法和文献研究法,本研究提出了更新法律的必要性,使其符合例如美国等强调创业精神的国家。文章的结论是,对于具有创新和发明眼光的人来说,如果法律不能在一段合理的时间内保证其创造的排他性和首要性,就不可能实现健康的创业。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A impossibilidade normativa de patente de código fonte no Brasil e o problema do plágio de software
It is discussed the absence of the normative possibility of patenting a computer program in Brazil, along with the resulting effects of the shortage of an adequate protection to that immaterial work which cannot be compared to other artistic and literary works as it currently occurs in Brazilian legislation. Once the software itself does not have adequate protection, there is an incentive to plagiarism and counterfeiting. This submits the person of the originator of the computer program to risks and uncertainties of needing to draw upon common means to protecting their patrimony, without there being, however, guarantee of exclusivity and primacy over their intellectual work, which is the source code. By using the deductive method and the bibliographic research, the study proposes the necessity of updating the law, so that it will conform to, for example, countries with emphasis on entrepreneurship, such as the United States. The article concludes that it is not possible to achieve healthy entrepreneurship if, to people with an innovative and inventive eye, are not guaranteed by law, the exclusivity and primacy of their creation for a reasonable time lapse.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信