saqarTvelos generaluri prokuratura

doqtoranta forumiCONCLUSIONGeorgia not only recognises foundations established by the International law for copyrightprotection of computer programs, but in its legislation also implements basic provisions stated bythe European Directive on the legal protection of computer programs 86 . Similarity of fundamentalprinciples within this legal institution puts our country to the join way of development.It is understood that in the countries of Harmonized European Legislation provisions on property(economic) rights on the computer programs and limitations and exceptions of these rights areformulated in a different ways but all of them convey same ideas.In the presented article we aim at determining the meaning of property rights and their scope ofprotection which is or could be presented in our law. Formulation of the provision in the law onprotection of this unusual (by nowadays as it appeared quiet a usual) object of property rights doesnot always provide a clear understanding of this question. Especially we would like to stress thosearticles of law on limitation and exceptions of property rights which were envisaged by the Civilcode of Georgia back in 1997. These provisions did not undergo any changes when they appearedin the special Law of Georgia on Copyright and Neighbouring Rights of 1999 and nor were theychanged in the following years.Georgian legislation is in outward resemblance with the international principles and provisionsof European directive. However, the description of the nature of limitations and exceptions ofproperty rights on computer programs is incomplete. It would be appropriate if the articles onlimitations and exceptions in our law were formulated on the complete analogy of Articles 5 and 6of the European Directive, which would promote their better understanding. In addition, we hopethat practice of application of this law and means of interpretation of its provision will show possibledirections of the improvement of the existing copyright legislation and demonstrate whether or notthe protection of computer programs will be provide and maintained by the legislators.86 In 1995 Prof. A Dietz brought a notice in his article concerning Eastern European Countries laws: „ . . . themore recent these laws are, the more directly and without almost any change they adopted the relevantrules provided in the European Software Directive “, Adolf Dietz, Intellectual Property and Desocializationin Eastern Europe, IIC 1995/6, p. 870.74