واکاوی وضعیت حقوقی مورد معامله در قراردادهای اطلاعات‌محور

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 استادیار، دانشکده حقوق و علوم‌سیاسی، دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد، مشهد، ایران (نویسنده مسئول) alisaatchi@um.ac.ir

2 دانشجوی دکتری، دانشکده حقوق و علوم‌سیاسی، دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد، مشهد، ایران

چکیده

«مورد معامله» عبارت است از موضوعی که در قرارداد مورد توافق طرفین واقع می‌شود و برمبنای ماده 214 قانون مدنی و نظر حقوق‌دانان داخلی، به دو قسم «مال» یا «عمل» قابل تفکیک است. ازاین‌رو، قراردادها را نیز می‌توان به دو دسته «قراردادهای کالامحور» و «قراردادهای خدمات‌محور» تقسیم کرد. بااین‌حال، نظر به رشد فناوری و پیشرفت‌های علمی صورت‌گرفته، امروزه با قراردادهایی تحت‌عنوان «قراردادهای اطلاعات‌محور» مواجه هستیم که غرض از انعقاد آن، مبادله اطلاعاتی است که در دسترس همگان نبوده و به‌عنوان مالی باارزش و البته ناملموس، از قابلیت نقل و انتقال برخوردار است. بنابراین با توجه به جایگاه اطلاعات در این قراردادها، باید به این سؤال مهم پاسخ داد که آیا قواعد حقوقی فعلی که از دیرباز درخصوص قراردادهای کالامحور وضع‌ شده، همچنان برای قراردادهای اطلاعات‌محور نیز قابل اعمال است یا این قراردادها قواعد حقوقی ویژه خود را می‌طلبند؟ نتایج این پژوهش حکایت از آن دارد که ازسویی با توجه به ویژگی‌های اطلاعات و ازسوی دیگر اقسام مختلف آن، کلیه قواعد حاکم بر قراردادهای کالا، مناسب قراردادهای اطلاعات‌محور نبوده و بنابراین قراردادهای یادشده جدای از اینکه از برخی جهات همچون «انتظارات قراردادی» و «ضمانت اجرا» با سایر قراردادها متفاوت‌اند که ساختار و احکام خاص خود را نیازمندند. به همین منظور، می‌توان قراردادهای اطلاعات‌محور را برحسب نوع اطلاعات در دو حوزه خدمات و مالکیت فکری جای داد و ضمن تدوین احکام خاص این نوع قراردادها، قالب‌های قراردادی متناسب با آن را نیز معرفی کرد

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

Examination of legal status of object of transaction in information-based contracts

نویسندگان [English]

  • ali saatchi 1
  • Faezeh Teymourimoghaddam 2
1 Assistant Professor, Faculty of Law & Political Science, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran. Corresponding Author Email: alisaatchi@um.ac.ir
2 Ph.D. Candidate, Faculty of Law & Political Science, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran
چکیده [English]

 
In today's world, where different sciences are rapidly advancing, social exchanges are primarily based on information, which may have various terminological definitions across various sectors. In the Iranian legal system, a definition of information can be found in Paragraph (a) of Article 1 of the “Law on Free Access to Information” enacted in 2009. According to this article, information is defined as “any type of data contained in documents, stored in software form, or recorded by any other means.” It is worth noting that despite the different definitions and types of information in diverse fields, information has gained a special status in contracts between individuals as the subject of the transaction. The aim of information-based contracts is the exchange of information that is not publicly available and is transferable as valuable and intangible assets. Notable examples include the sale of technical knowledge for the production of a product or the provision of specialized consultancy services. The inherent characteristics of information, such as intangibility, simultaneous usability by multiple individuals, increasing value compared to other assets, and easier accessibility, necessitate the independent definition of “information-based contracts, ” identification of transferable types of information, and formulation of legal rules appropriate to this type of contract. Therefore, considering the aforementioned materials and the silence of our country's research literature on information-based contracts, the present study seeks to use a descriptive-analytical approach, while identifying appropriate legal bases for concluding information-based contracts and introducing contractual formats appropriate to the subject of these contracts, to explain the most important effects of information being traded in the field of contract law. The findings of this research indicate that not all types of information are necessarily tradable, and only those with economic value can be accepted as the subject of a transaction. These are generally divided into two main categories: first, specialized information, which usually lacks exclusivity and can be accessed by various experts. Access to this type is often intended to solve temporary problems and usually does not generate specific profits for the user. Second, information with intellectual property aspects, which is entirely exclusive and accessible only through the owner. The commercialization of such information and the mass production of resulting products can bring significant financial benefits. Although access to both types of information requires payment and the presence of an information owner, the main difference lies in the method of use and the resulting financial benefits. Therefore, considering the mentioned differences, it is necessary to draft contractual forms appropriate to each type of information. For this purpose, service provision contracts can be used for specialized information, and license agreements can serve as appropriate formats for the exchange of intellectual information. Regarding the first one, it is necessary to draft a contract that is based on the general provisions of service contracts and specifically tailored to information as the subject matter. This approach can also be observed in European documents as well as certain service contracts, such as construction, design, and treatment contracts. While these contracts fall under the category of service-based contracts, they have their own specific contractual frameworks and terms. Regarding the intellectual property, given the widespread commercialization goals and the nature and characteristics of intellectual property rights, one of the most suitable contractual frameworks for the development and commercial use of intellectual assets is a license agreement, which is also accepted under Iranian law. Another important result of this study is the fundamental distinction between information-based and goods exchange contracts. Given the nature and characteristics of information, the legal rules governing information-based contracts—whether at the stage of formation, execution, or termination—differ fundamentally from those of goods-based contracts. These differences are evident in areas such as contractual expectations and legal remedies. It seems that in all types of information-based contracts, given the specific characteristics and requirements of information as the subject of the transaction, the status of contractual expectations will be different from other contracts. For example, in goods contracts, the contractual expectation that the goods are free of defects at the time of conclusion is accepted (Article 423 of the Civil Code); however, in the context of information-based contracts, such an expectation is not applicable. Since information does not have a physical existence at the time of contract formation, quality assessment generally becomes apparent only after use. Thus, even after contract conclusion, the information may be defective, and invoking legal remedies related to defects may be possible. Also, guaranteeing the absence of any defects in information-based contracts in the field of intellectual property, such as software or inventions, is unreasonable and contrary to prevailing practices, since some degree of error is always present in such information. In this case, beyond the need to reconsider the concept of defect, given the irreversible nature of information, usual legal remedies cannot be applied to defective information, and other legal solutions must necessarily be identified and utilized. Therefore, although one of the purposes of contract termination due to defect in the subject matter is to prevent harm to the parties and return them to their pre-contractual state, this is not possible in information contracts. Because of the intangible nature of information, it cannot be returned, and thus termination of the contract due to a defect would result in the unjust enrichment of one party, which is legally unacceptable. In this case, the subject matter may be considered as destroyed, and according to the first clause of Article 429 of the Civil Code, the only remedy would be to receive compensation (Arsh), without the possibility of contract termination. It is emphasized that this view, due to the nature of information and the impossibility of returning the defective subject matter in information-based contracts, distinguishes such contracts from others

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Information
  • Service-based Contracts
  • Intellectual Property
  • Legal effects
  • License
  1. کتاب

    1. انصاری، باقر، حقوق دادهها و هوشمصنوعی، تهران: شرکت سهامی انتشار، 1402.
    2. داراب­پور، مهراب و محمدرضا داراب­پور، حقوق قراردادها، جلد 1، تهران: جنگل، 1394.
    3. ساعتچی، علی و فرزاد جاویدی آل سعدی، قواعد عمومی حاکم بر قراردادهای خدمات محور، تهران: مجد، 1397.
    4. شیروی، عبدالحسین، حقوق قراردادها، تهران: سمت، 1401.
    5. صفایی، سید حسین، محمود کاظمی، مرتضی عادل و اکبر میرزانژاد، حقوق بیع بینالمللی، تهران: دانشگاه تهران، 1397.
    6. صفایی، سیدحسین، قواعد عمومی قراردادها، تهران: میزان، 1394.
    7. طاهری، حبیب‌الله، حقوق مدنی، قم: دفتر انتشارات اسلامی، 1418 ه.ق.
    8. قاسم‌زاده، سید مرتضی، اصول قراردادها و تعهدات، تهران: دادگستر، 1401.
    9. کاتوزیان، ناصر، دوره مقدماتی حقوق مدنی: اعمال حقوقی، تهران: گنج دانش، 1396.
    10. کاتوزیان، ناصر، قواعد عمومی قراردادها، جلد 2، تهران: میزان، 1380.
    11. کاتوزیان، ناصر، قواعد عمومی قراردادها، جلد 3، تهران: گنج دانش، 1398.
    12. محقق داماد، سیدمصطفی، جلیل قنواتی، سید حسن وحدتی شبیری و ابراهیم عبدی پورفرد، حقوق قراردادها در فقه امامیه، جلد 2، تهران: پژوهشگاه حوزه و دانشگاه، 1391.
    13. محمودی، اصغر، حقوق قراردادهای انتقال فناوری، تهران: جنگل، 1393.

    مقاله

    1. انصاری، باقر و اسماعیل انصاری، «حقوق اطلاعات از منظر تحلیل اقتصادی»، دوفصلنامه مطالعات حقوق تطبیقی، دوره 3، شماره 2، 1391، صص 1-21.
    2. جعفرزاده، میرقاسم و علی ساعتچی، «تحلیل حقوق قراردادی انتظارات تجاری در قرارداد لیسانس اختراع»، فصلنامه دیدگاههای حقوق قضایی، دور 25، شماره 90، 1399، صص 169-184.
    3. خورسندیان، محمدعلی و میلاد امیری، «مطالعه تطبیقی تعهدات طرفین قراردادهای خدمات در حقوق ایران و اروپا»، دوفصلنامه مطالعات حقوق تطبیقی ، دوره 9، شماره 1، 1397، صص 121-146.
    4. خیری جبر، علی، سید محمدمهدی قبولی درافشان و اعظم انصاری، «تأثیر تخلف از انجام تعهدات قراردادی در پیدایش حق فسخ (مطالعه تطبیقی در حقوق ایران و برخی نظام‌های حقوقی اسلامی و غربی)»، فصلنامه پژوهش تطبیقی حقوق اسلام و غرب، دوره 5، شماره 4، 1397، صص 93-122.
    5. ساعتچی، علی و امید محمدی‌نیا، «تحلیل حقوقی اقتصادی قواعد حقوقی حاکم بر قراردادهای لیسانس(مطالعه رویکرد نظام حقوقی آمریکا و رهنمودهایی برای نظام حقوقی ایران)»، دوفصلنامه دانشنامه حقوق اقتصادی، دوره 28، شماره 19، 1400، صص 87-64.
    6. الشریف، محمدمهدی، «از تملیک تا تعهد: تأملی بر تأثیر حقوق فرانسه در تحلیل ماهیت اجاره در حقوق ایران»، فصلنامه پژوهش تطبیقی حقوق اسلام و غرب، دوره 1، شماره 2، 1393، صص 29-58.
    7. قناد، فاطمه و الهام شریف، «مطالعه اجمالی حمایت از داده‌های شخصی در نظام حقوقی ایران و سند مقررات عمومی حفاظت از داده‌های اتحادیه اروپا»، دوفصلنامه حقوق فناوریهای نوین، دوره 2، شماره 4، 1400، صص 1-22.
    8. گالاچر، اسکات، «موافقت‌نامه عمومی تجارت خدمات سازمان جهانی تجارت و تجارت بین‌المللی خدمات حقوقی»، ترجمه مسعود کمالی اردکانی، مجله حقوقی بین­المللی، دوره 25، شماره 39، 1387، صص 299-312.
    9. لطیف­زاده، مهدیه، سید محمدمهدی قبولی درافشان، سعید محسنی و محمد عابدی، «تحلیل بستر قانونی حمایت از داده شخصی در اتحادیه اروپا»، پژوهشنامه پردازش و مدیریت اطلاعات، دوره 37، شماره 2، 1400، صص 439-472.

    References

    Books

    1. Ansari, Bagher, Data Law and Artificial Intelligence, Tehran: Sahami Company Publishing, 2023. (in Persian)
    2. Barendrecht, M. et al. Principles of European Law on Service Contract, Berne: European Law Publishers Ltd, 2007.
    3. Darab-Pour, Mehrab and Mohammad Reza Darab-Pour, Law of Contracts, Volume 1, Tehran: Jungle, 2014. (in Persian)
    4. Jacques, W. Research Handbook on Intellectual Property Licensing, Northampton: Edward Elgar, 2013.
    5. Katouzian, Nasser, General Rules of Contracts, Volume 2, Tehran: Mizan, 2001. (in Persian)
    6. Katouzian, Nasser, General Rules of Contracts, Volume 3, Tehran: Ganj-e-Danesh, 2019. (in Persian)
    7. Katouzian, Nasser, Introductory Course of Civil Rights: Legal Practices, Tehran: Ganj-e-Danesh, 2017. (in Persian)
    8. Lipinski T. A. The Librarian’s Legal Companion for Licensing Information Resources and Services, Chicago: Neal-Schuman, 2013.
    9. Mahmoudi Asghar, Law of Technology Transfer Agreements, Tehran: Jungle, 2014. (in Persian)
    10. Mohaghegh Damad, Sayyed Mostafa, Jalil Ghanavati, Sayyed Hassan Vahdati Shobyiri and Ibrahim Abdi Pour-Fard, Contract Law in Jurisprudence Emamieh, Volume 2, Tehran: Seminary and University Research Institute, 2012. (in Persian)
    11. Qasem-Zadeh, Sayyed Morteza, Principles of Contracts and Obligations, Tehran: Dadgostar, 2022. (in Persian)
    12. Sa’atchi, Ali and Farzad Javidi Al- Saadi, General Rules Governing Service-based Contracts, Tehran: Majd, 2018. (in Persian)
    13. Safa’ei Sayyed Hossein, Mahmoud Kazemi, Morteza Adel and Akbar Mirza-Nejad, International Sales Law, Tehran: University of Tehran, 2018. (in Persian)
    14. Safa’ei, Sayyed Hossein, General Rules of Contracts, Tehran: Mizan.2014. (in Persian)
    15. Schulze, R. Common European Sales Law (CESL) Commentary,H. Beck; Hart Pub; Nomos, 2012.
    16. Shiravi Abdol-Hossein, Law of Contracts, Tehran: Samt, 2022. (in Persian)
    17. Stamatoudi, I. A. Copyright and Multimedia Products: A Comparative Analysis, NewYork: Cambridge university press, 2003.
    18. Taheri, Habibollah, Civil Rights, Qom: Islamic Publication Office, 1997. (in Persian)
    19. Von Bar, C., Eric Clive and Hans Schulte-Nölke. European Contract Law, Materials for a Common Frame of Reference: Terminology, Guiding Principles, Model Rules, Munich: European law publishers, 2008.

    Articles

    1. Aamodt, A. and Mads Nygard. “Different Roles and Mutual Dependencies of Data, Information, and Knowledge- An AI Perspective on Their Integration”, Data & Knowledge Engineering, Volume 16, Issue 3, 1995, PP 191-222.
    2. Alshrif, Mohammad Mehdi, “From Transfer of Ownership to Obligation: The Influence of French Law on the Analysis of the Lease Contracts in the Iranian Law”, Quarterly Journal of Comparative Studies on Islamic and Western Law, Volume 1, Issue 2, 2014, PP 29-58. (in Persian)
    3. Ansari, Bagher and Esmail Ansari, “Economic Analysis of Information Law”, Bi-Quarterly Journal of Comparative Law Review, Volume 3, Issue 2, 2012, PP 1-21. (in Persian)
    4. Gallacher, Scott, General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) ”, Translated by: Masoud Kamali Ardakani, International Legal Journal, Volume 25, Issue 39, 2009, PP 229-317. (in Persian)
    5. Ghannad, Fatemeh and Elham Sharif, “Comprehensive Study of Personal Data Protection in Iran's Legal System and European General Data Protection Regulations”, Bi-Quarterly Journal of Modern Technologies Law, Volume 2, Issue 4, 2021, PP 1-22. (in Persian)
    6. Hull, K. “The Overlooked Concern with the Uniform Computer Information Transactions Act”, Uniform Computer Information Hastings Law Journal, Volume 51, Issue 6, 2000, PP 1391-1412.
    7. Jafarzadeh, Mirghasem and Ali Sa’atchi, “Analysis of contract law of commercial expectations in patent license”, Quarterly Journal of Judicial Law Views, Volume 25, Issue 90, 2020, PP 169-184. (in Persian)
    8. Kheiri Jabr, Ali, Sayyed Mohammad Mahdi Ghabouli Dorafshan and Azam Ansari, “Effect of Violating the Contractual Obligations in Emergence of the Avoidance: A Comparative Study of Iranian Law and Some Islamic and Western Legal Systems”, Quarterly Journal of Comparative Studies on Islamic and Western Law, Volume 5, Issue 4, 2018, PP 93-122. (in Persian)
    9. Khorsandian, Mohammad Ali and Milad Amiri, “A Comparative Study between European and Iranian Laws of Service Contracts”, Bi-Quarterly Journal of Comparative Law Review, Volume 9, Issue 1, 2018, PP 121-146. (in Persian)
    10. Kissman, L. “Revised Article 2 and Mixed Goods/Information Transactions: Implications for Courts”, Santa Clara Law Review, Volum 44, Issue 2, 2004, PP 561-594.
    11. Latif-Zadeh, Mahdieh, Sayyed Mohammad Mahdi Ghabouli Dorafshan, Saeed Mohseni and Mohammed Abedi, “Analysis of the Legal Framework for the Protection of Personal Data in the European Union”, Journal of Information Processing and Management, Volume 37, Issue 2 , 2021, PP 439-472. (in Persian)
    12. Nimmer, R. T. “Breaking Barriers: The Relation between Contract and Intellectual Property Law”, Berkeley Technology Law Journal, Volume 13, 1998, PP 255-317.
    13. Nimmer, R. T. “Essay on Article 2's Irrelevance to Licensing Agreements”, Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review, Volume 40, Issue 1, 2006, PP 827-889.
    14. Nimmer, R. T. “Licensing in the Contemporary Information Economy”, Journal of Law and Policy, Volume 8, 2002, PP 235-260.
    15. Nimmer, R. T. “Licensing on the Global Information Infrastructure: Disharmony in Cyberspace”, Northwestern Journal of International Law & Business, Volume 16, Issue 2, 1996, PP 224-247.
    16. Nimmer, R. T. “Through the Looking Glass: What Courts and UCITA Say About the Scope of Contract Law in the Information Age”, Duquesne Law Review, Volume 38, Issue 2, 2000, PP 99-169.
    17. Primo B. “Trade in Services”, The Gats and Asia, Asia Pacific Economic Review, Volume 1, 1999.

    Sa’atchi, Ali and Omid Mohamadinia, “legal and economic Analysis of applicable legal rules on license contract (Examination of US legal System approach to present guidance for Iranian Legal system”, Quarterly Journal of Encyclopedia of Economic Law, Volume 28, Issue 19 , 2021, PP 64-87. (in Persian