Article 1265 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation consolidates that the author has the right to have their name that is inalienable and non-transferable (even in case of alienation of the exclusive right to his work). This right was legislated a long time ago: it also existed in the Resolution of the CEC of the USSR, Council of People's Commissars of the USSR "Fundamentals of Copyright", and in The Law of the USSR "On approval of the Foundations of the Civil Legislation of the USSR and of the Union Republics", and in the Law of the Russian Federation "About copyright and related rights". This is not a domestic legislative invention, the right to a name has already been enshrined in the Berne Convention:

"(1) In order for an author of literary and artistic works that are protected by this Convention, to be considered in absence of evidence to the contrary as such and, accordingly, have the right to apply to the court in countries of the Union regarding the violation of his rights, it is sufficient if the author's name is indicated in the usual way on their work. Current paragraph applies even if this (the author’s) name is a pseudonym, in case that the pseudonym adopted by the author leaves no doubt about his identity."

Examples of the implementation of copyright a name in a variety of areas of intellectual activity are:

• software – developer names are listed on “About” screens or on separate pages (which is especially typical for open source projects, where not only developers are listed, but also contributors are): Adobe Photoshop, 7-Zip, React
• paintings – author's signatures are presented on the front and back sides of the canvases
• sculptures – remembering history Miсelangelo's "Pieta"
• movies – authors are typically listed in posters and titles (which sometimes are both advertising and a consequence of contractual obligations)
• video games - in many ways, the approach is similar to movies, but there may be with a smaller advertising component (see below why authors’ names of games are not always presented in the credits)
• books – authors names / pseudonyms are listed directly on book covers
• musical notes - typically, the author's name is listed at the very beginning of a musical notation of a piece of music

This right is one of the personal non-property rights of author, i.e. it cannot be transferred or sold. The right to a name is directly related to the right of authorship, but it also has its own value. [1] Thus, it is itself is a subject to legal protection regardless of other intellectual rights (property and personal non-property), and sometimes the violation of this right becomes a subject of legal disputes. For example:

Judicial practice on the author's right to their name

Pseudo-paintings by M.F. Larionov

In the framework of the court case no. A40-44111/2015 The Ministry of Culture of the Russian Federation filed a lawsuit against Antique Collectors Club Ltd. and Internet Solutions LLC (the owner of the brand Ozon.ru ) on the obligation to withdraw from sale on the territory of the Russian Federation all copies of the book (monograph) "Goncharova: the Art and Design of Natalia Goncharova" by Anthony Parton's, containing a reproduction of Peacocks. 1907-1908. Canvas.oil. 80x70,5 with an indication of the authorship of M.F. Larionov.

The court found that in 2010 Antique Collectors Club Ltd. published the specified monograph containing reproductions of works by Russian artists N.S.Goncharova and M.F. Larionov, which extended, in particular, to Ozon.ru. The Ministry, having at its disposal evidence that the specified painting does not belong to the brush of Larionov, filed a corresponding lawsuit.

By the decision of the Arbitration Court of the City of Moscow dated by June 24, 2016 in the case No. А40-44111/2015 the following has been established:

1. distortion of the facts of the history of Russian painting, expressed in particular in attributing to famous artists the authorship of works that do not belong to their brush is a violation of the public interests of Russian citizens and of the Russian Federation in the field of culture;
2. the distribution of a book with a reproduction of a falsified painting "Peacock" may cause property damage to the Russian Federation as the owner of the reference paintings of the "Peacocks" series since the value of federal property may significantly decrease;
3. publication of other people's paintings under the name of M.F. Larionov violates the copyrights of artists (Article 1255 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation), particularly their rights to the name (Article 19, 1265 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation).

In this connection, the court ordered the defendants on the territory of the Russian Federation to withdraw from sale all copies of the said book containing this reproduction indicating the authorship of M.F. Larionov as well as to publish such a book.

Bottles of vodka "Karelian tale" with "Fabulous city"

In 1992, the artist Kronid Gogolev created the work "Fabulous City" in the technique of three-dimensional wood carving. His signature is on it, and it is located in the author's gallery which is Exhibition hall in Sortavala (Karelia). Aalto LLC, without the artist's knowledge, placed on its product which is vodka bottles named "Karelian Fairy Tale" a photo image of Kronid Gogolev's work "Fabulous City" (he found out about it and about violation of his rights accidentally in September 2010 from his friend, who brought and showed him this product). The conflict was not settled out of court (the society left the author's complaint unanswered), so Gogolev filed a lawsuit.

In the statement of claim, the plaintiff asked the defendant to prohibit the release of this product with the labes having a photo of his work on them, to withdraw this product from trade, to recover compensation for moral damage and to make an official apology through the media. Later, three more co-defendants joined the defendant.

The Court found the following:

1. this work was indeed created by the plaintiff, and was made public in 2002, and he did not give permission for the use of his work to the co-defendants;
2. The defendant Aalto LLC from 2003 to 2010 produced the specified alcoholic beverages with a label, the design of which is based on the image of the plaintiff's work;
3. the defendant's argument about reaching an oral agreement on placing an image of the painting on the label is rejected, since an oral agreement cannot indicate the granting of the right to use the work;
4. the actions of the defendant violated the non-property rights of the author, because the work is depicted on the label without specifying the author's name.

Besides, in addition to the obligation of Aalto LLC to pay compensation to the plaintiff for intellectual property infringement, the same decision of the Lahdenpokh District Court (Republic of Karelia) No. 151/2012 of July 2, 2012 in case No. 151/2012, the court also awarded compensation for moral damage. An appeal was filed to the Supreme Court of the Republic of Karelia, but it upheld this decision, increasing the amount of compensation in favor of the plaintiff.

Conclusions on examples of judicial practice:

1. the right an author to their name is a subject to legal protection, therefore it can be protected in court;
2. violation of copyright in a name may entail violation of the public interests of Russian citizens and of the Russian Federation in the field of culture;
3. the protection of the right to a name on the territory of the Russian Federation may be implemented, in particular, by withdrawing from sale all copies of tangible media containing violations of such a right, prohibiting the further sale of such bearer and their release (publication);
4. the author has the right to receive monetary compensation for the violation of such a personal non-property right.

Anonymous use

Employment contracts with employees

In order to observe such a right of an author to their name, but at the same time not to use it when using the work, it is enough to obtain from the author the right to use his work anonymously (i.e. without mentioning his name). That is why, for example, in employment contracts with developers write down granting such a right from an employee to an employer, so that the latter could not specify the names of the authors when distributing their program code if he wishes so. The presence of such a written agreement will clearly indicate that an author has indeed allowed another person (for example, an employer) to use the object(s) of his copyright without mentioning his name as the author.

Open licenses

In addition, such permissions may be provided in open licenses. For example, MIT-0 license:

The "MIT No Attribution" or "MIT-0" license is a modification to the usual MIT license that removes the requirement for attribution.

Thus, if the content / program code or other copyright object becomes available under the terms of a license that does not require specifying the author's name when using it, such a condition will allow the author's right to the name to be respected and not violate it.

For feedback on my experience and qualifications on the topic of publication, as well as relevant recommendations for cooperation with me, see my profile on LinkedIn. Any questions and comments on this article or suggestions for cooperation, please send me here.