Keywords
How to Cite
Abstract
It has been established that legal protection of trademarks in the digital environment requires a complex
and multifaceted approach. This article provides a comprehensive analysis of international legal practices and
the need to improve the legislation of Uzbekistan in this field. It has been identified that the economic and
legal significance of trademarks is consistently increasing in the context of the digital economy. Moreover, it has
been determined that in the United States, the European Union, and other advanced jurisdictions, mechanisms
such as “safe harbor,” “notice-and-action,” and UDRP are effectively applied and have become essential tools for
protecting intellectual property on digital platforms. The article comparatively examines the legal status of digital
intermediaries, the liability limits of online platforms, and systems for resolving infringements involving domain
names. In particular, the legal foundations of automated monitoring, content removal, and blocking mechanisms
are analyzed. The impact assessment reveals that the current legislation of the Republic of Uzbekistan does not
fully correspond to the actual needs and risks of the digital environment. Therefore, concrete normative proposals
are put forward to introduce relevant legal concepts into the Laws “On Informatization” and “On Intellectual
Property” and to implement new legal mechanisms based on international practice.
References
The Digital Millennium Copyright Act - АҚШнинг “Рақамли мингйиллик муаллифлик ҳуқуқи тўғрисидаги
Қонун” // URL: extension://mjdgandcagmikhlbjnilkmfnjeamfikk/https://www.copyright.gov/legislation/dmca.pdf.
URL: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32022R2065.
Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy – “Бирхил домен номи бўйича низоларни ҳал қилиш
сиёсатининг Қоидалари” // URL: http://www.icann.org/en/dndr/udrp/uniform-rules-24oct99-en.htm.
Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998, Public Law 105–304, 112 Stat. 2860 (Oct. 28, 1998). // URL: extension://
mjdgandcagmikhlbjnilkmfnjeamfikk/https://www.copyright.gov/legislation/dmca.pdf.
The Lanham Act of 1946, also known as the Trademark Act, codified at 15 U.S.C. §§ 1051–114 // URL: https://
www.bitlaw.com/source/15usc/index.html.
Dinwoodie, G. B. & Janis, M. D. Trademark and Unfair Competition Law: Cases and Materials, 5th ed., Aspen
Publishers, 2018, pp. 681–700 // URL: https://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/facbooks/201/.
Gervais, D. & Carroll, M., “The Web of User-Generated Content”, Vanderbilt J. of Entertainment & Technology
Law, Vol. 11, No. 4, 2009, pp. 841–870, esp. p. 856. // URL: https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/jetlaw/vol11/iss4/4/.
Mark A. Lemley. Terms of Use. Stanford Law Review, Vol. 91, 2006, pp. 459–485. // URL: https://papers.ssrn.com/
sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=917926.
Bannon, Aoife. “Liability of Internet Intermediaries in EU E-Commerce Law: From Passive Hosts to Active
Platforms.” Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, vol. 15, no. 3, 2020, pp. 211–221. // URL: https://academic.
oup.com/jiplp/article/15/3/211/5735514.
Husovec, Martin. Injunctions Against Intermediaries in the European Union: Accountable But Not Liable?
Cambridge University Press, 2017. // URL: https://archive.org/details/injunctionsagain0000huso/page/n5/
mode/1up?ui=embed&view=theater&wrapper=false.
van Eijk, Nico. The Role of Intermediaries in Copyright and Trademark Enforcement. Amsterdam Law Forum, Vol.
, No. 2, 2012, pp. 37–48. // URL: https://amsterdamlawforum.org/articles/abstract/17/.
Torremans, Paul. Holyoak and Torremans Intellectual Property Law. 8th ed., Oxford University Press, 2015 // URL:
https://archive.org/details/holyoaktorremans0000torr/page/n7/mode/2up.