1. Behaviour
It is the conduct of the perpetrator that objectively infringes upon the property or personal rights of others with regard to their intellectual property. Torts to intellectual property generally include, and the copyright (i. E.) torts。
Elements of a violation of intellectual property rights
The composition of intellectual property rights violations is a more controversial issue for scholars. The composition of torts of intellectual property is described by scholars in four ways:
(1) on illegality. This is an important constituent element of intellectual property rights violations, which, although many academics are studying whether unlawfulness should be an element of violation independently, at least in the area of intellectual property rights violations, is essential。
(2) the question of the fact (result) of damage. In the composition of the general doctrine of tort, whether in three, four or five, the fact of the injury is considered to be one of the constituent elements of a civil tort, but it has been argued by many scholars that in the composition of a tort of an intellectual property right, the fact of the tort (result) is no longer a necessary constituent element, which is also one of the differences between a tort of an intellectual property right and a tort in general。
(3) as regards causation. This is a necessary element of the general tort doctrine for civil torts, but since some breaches of intellectual property rights do not require injurious consequences, the determination of causality is meaningful only if the infringement of intellectual property rights that has caused the effects of injury involves a large number of hours of responsibility for the infringer。
3. Tort of intellectual property is an injury to absolute rights
The right to request inaction in respect of such acts should be recognized. This right of petition is generally established in two situations: the objective existence of an unlawful violation; the real risk of violation of the right; or the risk of repeated or continued violation of the same right by the same perpetrator. The condition for the non-establishment of the right to claim is different from the constituent element of damages for tort, and it does not require the subjective element of the perpetrator, i. E., whether his subjective intent and fault are asked, whether he is capable of liability or whether the injury occurred. Failure to act as a condition for a claim to be established is closer to the criteria for the determination of the violation itself。
