Vol. 1 No. 4 (2026), Articles
Vol. 1 No. 4 (2026)

CIVIL LAW FOUNDATIONS FOR THE JOINT EXERCISE OF EXCLUSIVE RIGHTS (ON THE EXAMPLE OF TRADEMARKS)

Articles
Published 2026-07-27
Kamoljon Rakhmatov
Independent Researcher (PhD)
PDF

Keywords

exclusive rights, intellectual property, trademark, trademark coexistence, coexistence agreement, consent of the right holder, protection of consumers from confusion, fair competition, legal regime, civil law relations, comparative legal analysis, intellectual property law.

How to Cite

Kamoljon Rakhmatov. (2026). CIVIL LAW FOUNDATIONS FOR THE JOINT EXERCISE OF EXCLUSIVE RIGHTS (ON THE EXAMPLE OF TRADEMARKS). Zamonaviy Ilmiy Yondashuvlar Va Texnologik Taraqqiyotning Ustuvor yo‘nalishlari, 1(4), 132-147. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.21629623
ACM ACS APA ABNT Chicago Harvard IEEE MLA Turabian Vancouver AMA

Download Citation

Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS) BibTeX

Abstract

This article provides a comprehensive analysis of the civil law foundations for the joint exercise of exclusive rights, using trademarks as an example. In particular, it examines the legal nature, civil law regime, and legal significance of trademark coexistence agreements. Based on the legislation and judicial practice of the United States, the European Union, Germany, the United Kingdom, and China, the study comparatively analyzes the application of this legal institution, the mutual rights and obligations of trademark owners, and the legal approaches aimed at protecting consumers from confusion, ensuring fair competition, and safeguarding public interests. Furthermore, the article substantiates the legal basis for introducing trademark coexistence agreements into the legislation of the Republic of Uzbekistan, explores the legal mechanism governing their implementation, and presents scientific proposals and recommendations for further improvement of this legal institution.

PDF

References

1. Spencer T. Wiles. The TTAB Shold Drink a Beer and Relax: Implications for Trademark Consent Agreements in the Craft Brewing Industry After In re Bay State Brewing Company, Inc. – P. 130

2. Times Mirror Magazines Inc. v. Fiels & Stream Licenses Co. 103 F. Supp. 2d 711 (S.D.N.Y. 2000), aff’d, 294 F.3d 383 (2d. Cir. 2002). URL: https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-2nd-circuit/1372486.html

3. https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/948/1050/2098685/

4. 2 In re Bay State Brewing Company, Inc. Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. URL: http://brandaide.com/wp-content/ uploads/2016/03/Time-Traveler-TTAB-case.pdf

5. Spencer T. Wiles. The TTAB Shold Drink a Beer and Relax: Implications for Trademark Consent Agreements in the Craft Brewing Industry After In re Bay State Brewing Company, Inc. – P. 133.

6. https://iprgezgini.org/tag/canon-v-mgm-c-3997/

7. 82/897/EEC: Commission Decision of 15 December 1982 relating to a proceeding under Article 85 of the EEC Treaty (IV/C-30.128 - Toltecs-Dorcet). URL: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A

8. 31982 D0897

9. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:61983CJ0035&from=EN

10. Apple Corps LTD v. Apple Computer Inc. [2004] EWHC 768 (Ch). URL: https://www.casemine.com/judgement/ uk/5a8ff7d860d03e7f57eb2726

11. Hormby, Thomas (10 January 2007). "What's in a Name? Apple Corp vs. Apple Computer". Low End Mac. Archived from the original on 3 February 2007. Retrieved 1 March 2007. "History of Apple v Apple". BBC. 8 May 2006. Archived from the original on 7 February 2007. Retrieved 3 February 2007.

12. Shambaugh D. US-China rivalry in Southeast Asia: power shift or competitive coexistence? //International Security. – 2018. – Т. 42. – № 4. – P. 85-127.