What is the difference between an owner and a copyright holder of an apartment?

The regulatory framework is very rich in various terms and concepts that are not always correctly interpreted in everyday life.

For example, from the point of view of the average person, the owner and owner of property are one and the same. But from a legal point of view, these concepts are not identical.

Next, let's try to understand what an owner, possessor, copyright holder and tenant are. What is common and what is the difference between these participants in the legal field?

What rights does the property owner have?

We want to build a new house and then demolish the old one. We can’t place the house 3 meters from the neighbor’s fence, it’s only one and a half meters. The neighbors have a large neglected garden next to which we want to build; they only come for apples and mushrooms. Can we, having built a house in violation of regulations, then register it? Domozhirova Elena Leonidovna, In accordance with Art.

Orthographic dictionary. Medinsky explained that the copyright holder himself sends a request to the site where, in fact, the illegal content is posted. According to the Ministry of Culture, a statement of copyright infringement will be sent to the telecom operator by the copyright holder. The copyright holder must notify the provider of a file hosting user who violates copyright and related rights.

The owner of the land plot must be officially notified of the decision to seize at least one year in advance.

Rights and obligations of the land owner

Russia, Are the copyright holder and the owner the same thing? Unified Free Consultation with Lawyers. Consumer protection, bankruptcy, alimony, housing and communal services, inheritance. Along with the topic "Owner" they are also looking for: Meeting of owners Real estate owner Rights of the owner of the plot Owner of the apartment more.

Dear site users. On this page you will find a definition of the term “Copyright Holder”.

Copyright holder The copyright holder is a party to a commercial concession agreement that transfers its exclusive rights to the user. In English: Rightholder See also: Privatization Financial Dictionary Finam.

If you want a plot of land for a shopping pavilion, then read Article 34 of the Land Code of the Russian Federation and act in accordance with its requirements. Federal Law of December 31, 2014

Who is the copyright holder of a real estate property?

The copyright for the drawings is included in the register of copyright objects of the People's Republic of China. Can the copyright holder, through an authorized representative, make a claim on the territory of Russia? Trademarks are not registered in Rosreestr. Only after registration with Rospatent. You should not contact Rosreestr: According to Russian legislation, the use of a trademark is possible without notifying the Federal Service for Intellectual Property Rospatent. However, until you are the owner of a certificate of exclusive right to use the mark, the latter has no legal force and is not protected by law. Official registration of a trademark based on the provisions of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation will help you avoid troubles. I am a single mother of 2 children. I filed an application for dissolution. I provided all the documents to the Pension Fund, except for the obligation, i.e. The Pension Fund refused to issue it to me, citing an insufficient number of documents, a complaint was written on my part explaining the above reasons, and a refusal was also received. How to correctly draw up a statement of claim in court. Read answers 1 If an extract from the Unified State Register of Real Estate about a property indicates one copyright holder, then how can you find out whether any other owners may emerge? Good day to you. If there are no more copyright holders in the USR statement, then they will not appear.

What is the difference between a copyright holder and an owner?

In relation to the field of intellectual rights, the use of the term “right holder” is due to the fact that the law divides the persons who own intellectual property into those who created this property and those who received the rights to use it from the authors. The copyright holder of an intellectual property object (if he and the author are not the same person) cannot be recognized as the author under any circumstances. The owner of the result of creative activity can be either the author or the copyright holder. According to the legislation of the Russian Federation, only an individual is recognized as the author, and both an individual and a legal entity are recognized as the copyright holder. The author becomes the owner by virtue of the very creation of the work; for this he does not need to carry out any formalities (if we are talking about objects of copyright, state registration is provided for objects of patent law and means of individualization, without which the protection of such objects is impossible). The copyright holder can become an owner only by concluding an agreement with the author or by being his heir or creditor.

The differences between the owner and the copyright holder in intellectual and other legislation lie primarily in the fact that there are two legal institutions - the right of ownership and the right of possession. The owner remains the owner even if he does not currently own his property.

Article 5. Participants in land relations

1. Participants in land relations are citizens, legal entities, the Russian Federation, constituent entities of the Russian Federation, and municipalities.

2. The rights of foreign citizens, stateless persons and foreign legal entities to acquire ownership of land plots are determined in accordance with this Code and federal laws.

3. For the purposes of this Code, the following concepts and definitions are used:

owners of land plots - persons who are the owners of land plots;

land users - persons who own and use land plots on the right of permanent (perpetual) use or on the right of free use;

landowners - persons who own and use land plots on the right of lifelong inheritable ownership;

tenants of land plots - persons who own and use land plots under a lease agreement or sublease agreement;

easement holders - persons who have the right to limited use of other people's land plots (easement);

legal holders of land plots - owners of land plots, land users, land owners and tenants of land plots;

holders of public easement - persons who have the right to limited use of lands and (or) other people's land plots, established in accordance with Chapter V.7 of this Code.

Data owner or information owner – who does the law mean?

Zakon.Ru is an officially registered media outlet. The link to this article will look like this: Rozhkova M.A. Data owner or information owner – who does the law mean? [Electronic resource] // Law.ru. 2020. November 14. URL:

(abstracts of the report read at the II International Scientific and Practical Conference “Intellectual Rights: Challenges of the 21st Century” on November 14, 2021 (Tomsk), where previously made conclusions are summarized and developed)).

In his article “Data sets, data sets, data banks, databases - what are they and how to distinguish them?” I outlined the need to distinguish between the figures of the copyright holder and the owner of information. But it turned out too short and unclear, so I wanted to correct this omission.

True, the analysis of the question posed in the title must be preceded by a number of comments.

1. First of all, it should be noted that experts in the technical field answer the question of the relationship between the concepts of “information” and “data” differently: someone talks about their interconnectedness, someone draws attention to the existence of differences between them, someone builds a certain hierarchy, someone speaks in the spirit of their equivalence. That is, a unified position on this issue has not been formed. Under these conditions, it is not surprising that Art. 2 of the Federal Law of July 27, 2006 No. 149-FZ “On Information, Information Technologies and Information Protection” (hereinafter referred to as the Law on Information), which establishes the conceptual apparatus, does not contain a definition of the concept “ information ” - this concept is disclosed through the terms “ information ” , " messages ", " data ".

This gave me reason to conclude that such a listing reflects various aspects of understanding information, each of which needs to be considered independently and, apparently, in independent regulation of the legal relations arising in connection with them.

At the same time, I would like to note that I am an opponent of the idea of ​​drawing a clear line between the concepts of “data” and “information”, justified by the fact that “their identification conflicts with the existing technological reality”[1]. My disagreement with this idea is based on the existence of different opinions among technical specialists about what information is and how it relates to data, as well as the practical impossibility of making a in law between the concepts of “data” and “information”. In addition, the need to consolidate such a gradation in legislation raises doubts - in the law of most states, these terms are consistently used as synonyms, as interchangeable concepts. Moreover, for example, in relation to personal data, European legislation uses the term “data” (English personal data), while in the USA the term “information” (English personal information).

1. At the same time, the identification of three aspects of information in the domestic law - information , messages , data - allows, in my opinion, to successfully resolve many legal issues. But first, it is necessary to determine the nature of the relations that arise regarding them (which I wrote about earlier in the article “On property rights to intangible objects in the system of absolute rights (part three - rights to information and data as types of information)” [2]), as well as the legislation governing these relations. So.

1) Messages are a form of information transfer.

You can, of course, convey information by transferring it to a medium (for example, paper) through signs (or letters). But today, the transfer of information is carried out using various media and is considered as a physical process of spatial transfer of information by technical means from the source of information to its receiver. Briefly, this process can be described, for example, as follows: the source of information sends a message, which is encoded in single or several consecutive signals; this signal(s) is transmitted over a communication channel; The received signal(s) appears in the information receiver, which is decoded and becomes the received message.

It is noteworthy that in relation to messages we can talk about the volume and speed of information transfer, but never about the content of the information transmitted.

It is obvious that in such a context, messages cannot in any way be considered as independent objects of rights. And relations regarding the transfer of information (messages) are relations in the field of telecommunications , the basis for which is the Federal Law of July 7, 2003 No. 126-FZ “On Communications”.

2) Information was previously defined by me as information relating to a specific subject, object, fact, case [3]. And here it is the content that comes to the fore, which fundamentally distinguishes information from messages.

The conducted research allowed me to conclude that, according to the criterion of unknown content to third parties, information can be divided into three main categories: (1) publicly available and well-known information ; (2) personal data ( personal information ) and (3) secrets .

Publications and speeches sometimes say that there is no need to separate personal data and secrets - this is, they say, confidential information in any case, so they should have a single legal regime, or better yet, a single law. In my opinion, this position is incorrect. This is due to the fact that the concept of “confidentiality” for legal purposes cannot be understood too simply - in the sense of something secret or secret. It is necessary to take into account the approach already established in developed jurisdictions, in which the concept of “ confidentiality ” is recognized as having a broader meaning: it covers both secrets themselves and other forms of restrictions in relation to specific types of information. In other words, confidentiality can take the form of both secrecy and privacy , which I wrote about earlier in the article “Are personal data really confidential, or How do the categories of “personal data” and “secrets” relate (the view of a civil scientist) )").

Secrecy is understood as a form of concealment of information that is involuntary in nature and provides sanctions for disclosure. The secrecy regime includes state, professional, official, commercial secrets, secrets of private life (personal, intimate, family), as well as, for example, information for official use, confidential information agreed upon by counterparties, etc.

Another type of confidentiality is privacy , which is a form of restricting access to information, due to which any use is permitted only with the consent of the subject of this information. In other words, under this regime, access to information is much freer, but its use without appropriate consent is prohibited. This type of confidentiality applies to personal data , which is not a secret at all, but the use of which by third parties is permissible only subject to compliance with the rules established by law.

In domestic law, information is traditionally not considered as independent objects of civil rights (and, accordingly, the question of their copyright holder does not arise) - the opposite position is considered extremely debatable. Apparently, the only exception to the general rule is a trade secret and its “intellectual clone” - a production secret, for which the current legislation today recognizes the possibility of acting as objects of civil rights.

Relations regarding information are, first of all, relations concerning their processing , that is, accumulation, collection, storage, distribution, etc. In addition, relationships may arise regarding information related to its use to solve various pressing problems.

Therefore, relationships regarding information are regulated by a number of special legislative acts. This is, in particular, Federal Law No. 152-FZ of July 27, 2006 “On Personal Data” (hereinafter referred to as the Law on Personal Data), Federal Law No. 98-FZ of July 29, 2004 “On Trade Secrets”, other legislation on secrets, Federal Law of 06/08/2020 No. 168-FZ “On the Unified Federal Information Register containing information about the population of the Russian Federation”, as well as the Civil Code of the Russian Federation (in part, for example, Article 152.2 and Article 1465 of the Civil Code) and so on.

3) the data as a set of information, combined and ordered according to some characteristic, several characteristics or criteria [4] . This understanding allows us to exclude “raw data” from the data, that is, unprocessed or minimally processed data.

Data, like information, have meaning precisely in the context of their content and this is where their undoubted similarity lies. But information processing and data processing appear to have slightly different direction vectors.

Processing of information is the collection, storage, distribution and other operations on information about a specific person (object, fact, case) or specific persons (objects, facts, cases). Data processing involves performing operations with a large volume of completely varied information, and, as a rule, for the purpose of its subsequent use to identify or create new information / substantiate conclusions / support decision-making.

It is noteworthy that differences in the focus of processing also affect the needs of legal regulation: data processing does not require the “intervention” of the law at all, but only until the moment information (personal data, secrets) or objects of intellectual rights are included in the processing - in this case relevant legislation comes into force.

As a result of the above, in my opinion, relations regarding data processing do not require special legal regulation - the necessary regulations should be included in the legislation on personal data, on secrets, on intellectual property.

Another thing is that the enormous economic significance of data has allowed it today to become one of the most valuable economic assets, and, consequently, the object of civil rights . Moreover, in the absence of the necessary civil law regulation.

1. The latter circumstance is increasingly manifested in practice and the need to establish a civil law regime for data that would allow for normal civil circulation in the area under consideration is increasingly felt. The formation of such a regime, in my opinion, should begin with an understanding of two basic principles.

1) Legal regulation of property relations regarding data should be based on the postulate according to which the data themselves are not a negotiable object - the property of negotiability can only be recognized for property rights to data.

A similar approach has been implemented in domestic legislation in relation to intellectual property. Objects of intellectual rights are intangible, which fundamentally distinguishes them from things - traditional objects of the material world that can be touched. As is known, in Art. 128 of the Civil Code, property refers to both things and intangible objects, which include the results of intellectual activity and means of individualization.

At the same time, objects of intellectual rights, being full-fledged objects of civil rights , cannot in any way become objects of civil circulation . And this is directly reflected in the law: in accordance with paragraph 4 of Art. 129 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, it is not the objects of intellectual rights themselves that are released into circulation, but only the property rights to them (exclusive rights), which is due precisely to the intangible nature of these objects. In other words, the subject of civil law transactions can only be exclusive rights to the results of intellectual activity and means of individualization, but not the named objects of rights themselves, which do not have the property of negotiability.

Similarly, data that are intangible objects (about the intangible nature of information - see paragraph 2 of the article “Data sets, data arrays, data banks, databases - what is it and how to distinguish them?”) can become objects of civil rights . But only property rights can be put into circulation , but not the data itself. And, accordingly, only property rights to data can become the subject of civil transactions and transfer from one person to another.

2) And one more important point, for the sake of which, in general, this article was conceived: in order to form a full-fledged civil law regime for data in domestic law, the legislator must clearly define the legal capabilities of the holder of data rights, that is, the data copyright holder .

Today, the Information Law uses the term “ information holder ”. Is it possible to equate the data copyright holder with the “information owner”? It seems to me that it is definitely not: the owner of the information should be recognized as the person who has gained access to the information. That is, you can possess information without being its copyright holder, but only by gaining access to the information in a legal or illegal way.

For example, a hacker who hacks someone else's database becomes the owner of a certain amount of information, but does he have any rights to it? Apparently, he becomes the owner of the information without being its copyright holder. Or, for example, a bank employee who has legal access to the bank’s database becomes the owner of certain information, but does he have the right to dispose of the rights to it? Same answer: he is the owner of the information, but not the copyright holder.

Thus, possessing information does not at all mean having rights to it .

But now, unfortunately, it is precisely the “owner of information” that the Information Law assigns the rights to information, and this subject is endowed with a whole conglomerate of rights that are different in nature. So, by virtue of Art. 6 of the Law, the owner of information has the right to: (1) permit or restrict access to information, determine the procedure and conditions for such access; (2) use the information , including disseminating it, at your own discretion; (3) transfer information to other persons under a contract or on other grounds established by law; (4) protect your rights in accordance with the law in the event of illegal receipt of information or its illegal use by other persons; (5) carry out other actions with information or authorize such actions .

It is obvious that in the Law on Information an attempt was made to consolidate, among other things, the foundations of the civil law regime of information, but they clearly contradict the domestic legal doctrine. The current state of affairs clearly needs to be corrected, and here it should be noted that information law, the basis for which is the Information Law, belongs to the sub-branch of administrative law, which excludes the possibility of enshrining in this law a civil law regime for data - this issue must be resolved by legal instruments civil.

About the author . Other works of the author are in the public domain - https://rozhkova.com/all.html

PS IP CLUB news feed in the field of intellectual property law and digital law (IP & Digital Law) in:

facebook – https://www.facebook.com/ipclubin

VKontakte – https://vk.com/ipclubin

telegram – https://t.me/ipclubin

[1] Savelyev A.I. Civil legal aspects of regulating data circulation in the context of attempts to form a digital economy // Bulletin of Civil Law. No. 1. 2021. P. 68.

[2] And in its development - in the work: Rozhkova M.A. Property rights to new intangible objects in the system of absolute rights // Digital Economy Law - 2021 (16): Yearbook-anthology / Director. and scientific ed. M. A. Rozhkova. M.: Statute, 2021. P. 5-78 (URL: https://rozhkova.com/books_text/2020-16-pce.pdf).

[3] Ibid.

[4] Ibid.

Definition

An owner is an individual or legal entity who owns, uses and disposes of property on the basis of a document confirming this right. An item may be in sole or joint ownership, which affects the procedure for its alienation.

An owner is a person who actually possesses a thing, but does not always have ownership rights to it. In legal practice, this is the name given primarily to citizens who have the right to use a thing with the possibility of transferring it (general power of attorney for a car).

Owner and proprietor: what's the difference?

The difference between these definitions has been emphasized since the emergence of Roman law, a feature of which was the presence of 2 independent legal institutions: the right of possession and property rights.

Possession was defined by Roman jurists as the actual dominion of a person over a certain thing without legal title . In this case, the object was always material things, and two elements were distinguished in the composition of possession: “the soul of possession” and “the body of possession.”

First, “soul” is the possessive will, i.e. the desire and intention of the owner to possess a thing for himself, without recognizing the dominance of other persons over it. It is noteworthy that from this position even a thief in Rome was considered an owner. “Body of possession” is the state of actual possession.

The differences between ownership and property rights in the modern regulatory framework are as follows:

1. Possession is distinguished from ownership by the absence of title.
2. In the modern interpretation of property rights, the actual possession of a thing, object, real estate does not matter; the owner has all rights of use that are based on legal title, i.e. a document of title, which is kept by the owner even in cases where the property is transferred to another person or has left the owner’s possession against his will.

So, the owner is always the owner, but the owner is not always the owner . Then a reasonable question arises: who is, for example, a person driving a car by proxy? We answer: also the owner of the vehicle, but only for the period while the right of ownership is transferred to him by the owner.

According to clause 1 of Article 209 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the owner has the rights to own, use and dispose of his property.

Possession makes it possible to actually have, to actually possess some property at the moment, but not to dispose of it. The right of use means the ability to use this property, consume it and extract useful qualities. The right of disposal makes it possible to change the fate of property, for example, to destroy, sell, donate, exchange.

However, the same article of the Civil Code states that the owner has the right to transfer all of the above powers (one, two or all together) to another person on the basis of any document, for example, a power of attorney issued by him containing a list of rights granted.

But the owner, having transferred the right of ownership to another person, still remains the owner and is only temporarily deprived of the opportunity to use his property from the moment of its transfer. The powers transferred to them will now belong not to the owner, but to the new legal owner by proxy.

It is important to distinguish between legal and illegal ownership of property . Illegal possession does not give any powers, but it entails a burden of responsibility.

Article 5

1. Participants in land relations are citizens, legal entities, the Russian Federation, constituent entities of the Russian Federation, and municipalities. 2. The rights of foreign citizens, stateless persons and foreign legal entities to acquire ownership of land plots are determined in accordance with this Code and federal laws. 3. For the purposes of this Code, the following concepts and definitions are used: owners of land plots - persons who are the owners of land plots; land users - persons who own and use land plots on the right of permanent (perpetual) use or on the right of free use; landowners - persons who own and use land plots on the right of lifelong inheritable ownership; tenants of land plots - persons who own and use land plots under a lease agreement or sublease agreement; easement holders - persons who have the right to limited use of other people's land plots (easement); rights holders of land plots - owners of land plots, land users, land owners and tenants of land plots.

Is the copyright holder the owner or the tenant?

Now let’s compare the concepts of “owner”, “copyright holder” and “tenant”. It would seem that who else but the owner has all the rights to the property that belongs to him. But no, not always, so these definitions cannot be identified. And the owner will not always be the copyright holder, and the copyright holder may not be the owner .

Copyright holder is a broader concept. It covers owners, possessors, tenants, owners of land on the right of lifelong inheritable possession and perpetual use, holders of easement rights, etc.

The difference between copyright holders lies in the scope of their powers . So, for example, the owner has the right to own, use and dispose of land, the tenant has the right to only own and use, but not fully dispose of it (can sublease, but does not have the right to sell); the owner is also limited in his authority to dispose of the property.

The owner himself, transferring the right of ownership to another person, for example, on the basis of a lease agreement, also loses the right to use his property for the duration of the agreement.

Thus, all the concepts we are considering are very similar, sometimes interchangeable, but in themselves they represent different concepts that have long been entrenched in legal practice.

Hello, in this article we will try to answer the question “Who is the copyright holder of the property.” You can also consult with lawyers online for free directly on the website.

The list of rights to use land plots established by Article 40 of the Land Code of the Russian Federation is not exhaustive: other rights may be established by law.

Another case is when you are not working on something alone, that is, writing a book or painting together with someone.

Copyright holder and owner How, for example, can one distinguish the owner from the owner if these concepts, at first glance, are identical to each other? Let's try to understand this issue and understand how significant the differences are and how they are expressed.

What is the category of land?

The type of category regulates the intended purpose and mode of land use. Categories are established by zoning territories and are recorded in the Unified State Register of Real Estate. In total, there are 7 categories of land in the Russian Federation:

• agricultural purposes (farmland, plots for on-farm roads and facilities for processing agricultural products);
• settlements (for individual housing construction, for public buildings, for infrastructure facilities, etc.);
• industry, transport, security and other special purpose lands;
• specially protected objects and territories (parks, reserves, etc.);
• forest fund;
• water fund;
• stock.

Of the listed items, only reserve lands are practically impossible to use for any purposes. However, they can be transferred to another category so that the owner or tenant can choose acceptable types of land use. For each of the listed categories, the legislation specifies the types of permissible land use.

For example, for agricultural plots the main type is farming or other related activities. It is impossible to build industrial buildings on them that are not involved in the processing of agricultural products. Only changing the category will allow the site to be used for other purposes and the prohibitions will be lifted.

What it is

Land plots can be transferred to citizens and legal entities for ownership, as well as for temporary or indefinite use. In each of these cases, the owners have a legal right to use the land for its intended purpose (for example, agricultural land can only be used for growing agricultural products or other similar purposes). Restrictions on the rights of owners or possessors are permitted only in cases provided for by law or based on the terms of contracts.

Legislative acts allow the following forms of encumbrances on land:

• prohibitions and restrictions established in regulations and targeted restrictions on certain areas of land use (for example, a ban on constructing industrial and production facilities on lands allocated for personal farming);
• restrictions associated with the emergence of a public or private easement, i.e. the ability of third parties to use someone else's land plot;
• prohibitions and restrictions related to the emergence of legal claims - arrest to secure a claim or to ensure enforcement actions;
• restrictions on the ownership and disposal of land that arise with the consent of the copyright holder (for example, a mortgage when purchasing land on credit);
• temporary restrictions associated with the conclusion of a lease agreement (when transferring ownership of land, lease relations are maintained for the entire duration of the agreement).

Thus, various types of restrictions can arise directly by force of law, under the terms of contracts and agreements, as well as on the basis of judicial acts.

Based on the analysis of the norms of the Land Code of the Russian Federation and the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, we can distinguish the following types of encumbrances that can be established on land plots:

• public and private easements;
• mortgage encumbrance;
• a lease agreement whose term exceeds one year;
• arrest imposed by a judicial act or resolution of an official of the FSSP;
• trust management;
• concession.

In some cases, a prohibition or encumbrance may arise based on the special status of the property located on the site. For example, a historical heritage site automatically imposes restrictions on the corresponding land area.

Sources

1. Product quality control No. 7 2014; Standards and quality - M., 2014. - 645 p.
2. Maleev, Yu.N. International air law: questions of theory and practice / Yu.N. Maleev. - M.: International Relations, 1986. - 240 p.
3. Polezhaev Oleg The rights of the developer to the land plot and the building erected by him. History of formation and foreign experience: monograph. ; Justitsinform - M., 2021. - 931 p.
4. Manova N. S. Criminal process: lecture notes; Yurayt - M., 2009. - 115 p.
5. Spiridonova O. E. Legal structures and symbols in criminal law; Legal Center - M., 2005. - 915 p.