ILMIY ISHLANMALARNI TIJORATLASHTIRISHNING HUQUQIY BOSHQARUV ARXITEKTURASINI TAKOMILLASHTIRISH
Ergashev Rustam Rajabovich
Innovatsion rivojlanish agentligi
Tijoratlashtirish va texnologiyalar transferini
rivojlantirish boshqarmasi boshlig‘i
E-mail: darkman_07@mail.ru
Annotatsiya. Maqolada ilmiy ishlanmalarni tijoratlashtirishni huquqiy boshqarishning yaxlit arxitekturasini shakllantirish masalalari tadqiq etilgan. Amaldagi intellektual mulk, shartnoma, moliyalashtirish va innovatsion faoliyat normalarining alohida qo‘llanishi ilmiy natijaning yaratilishidan bozor muomalasiga kirishigacha bo‘lgan jarayonda huquq, vakolat va javobgarlik uzluksizligini har doim ham ta’minlamasligi asoslangan. Tadqiqot natijasida besh pog‘onali huquqiy boshqaruv modeli taklif etilgan: maxsus qonun; qaror muddatlari va namunaviy hujjatlarni belgilovchi qonunosti tartiblar; oliy ta’lim va ilmiy tashkilotlarning ichki tijoratlashtirish siyosati; litsenziya, ulush va investitsiya munosabatlarini individuallashtiruvchi shartnomaviy mexanizmlar; raqamli reyestr va monitoring qoidalari. Maxsus tartibda ishlanmani oshkor qilish, huquq egaligini aniqlash, tijorat salohiyati bo‘yicha qaror, manfaatlar to‘qnashuvi, daromad taqsimoti, davlat mablag‘i hisobdorligi, litsenziyalash, spin-off, reyestr va nizolarni hal qilish masalalarini o‘zaro bog‘lash taklif qilingan. Arxitektura uzluksizlik, vakolat va javobgarlikning mosligi hamda huquqiy qarorlarning tekshiriluvchanligi tamoyillariga asoslangan. Qaror muddatini huquqiy tartibning texnik detali emas, balki tijoratlashtirish tezligiga bevosita ta’sir qiluvchi boshqaruv omili sifatida belgilash taklif etiladi. Model huquqiy aniqlikni oshirish, qaror vaqtini qisqartirish va tijoratlashtirish subyektlari javobgarligini aniq belgilashga qaratilgan.
Kalit so‘zlar: ilmiy ishlanma, tijoratlashtirish, huquqiy arxitektura, intellektual mulk, litsenziyalash, manfaatlar to‘qnashuvi, daromad taqsimoti, innovatsion faoliyat.
УЛУЧШЕНИЕ АРХИТЕКТУРЫ ПРАВОВОГО УПРАВЛЕНИЯ КОММЕРЦИАЛИЗАЦИЕЙ НАУЧНЫХ РАЗРАБОТОК
Эргашев Рустам Раджабович
начальник отдела развития
коммерциализации и трансфера технологий
Агентства инновационного развития
E-mail: darkman_07@mail.ru
Аннотация. В статье рассматриваются вопросы формирования целостной архитектуры правового управления коммерциализацией научных разработок. Она основана на том факте, что раздельное применение действующих норм интеллектуальной собственности, договорного права, финансирования и инновационной деятельности не всегда обеспечивает непрерывность прав, полномочий и обязанностей в процессе от создания научного результата до его выхода на рынок. В результате исследования предложена пятиэтапная модель правового управления: специальный закон; подзаконные акты, устанавливающие сроки принятия решений, и типовые документы; внутренняя политика коммерциализации высших учебных и научных организаций; договорные механизмы, индивидуализирующие лицензионные, долевые и инвестиционные отношения; правила цифрового реестра и мониторинга. Предлагается в специальном порядке связать вопросы раскрытия информации о разработке, определения права собственности, принятия решения о коммерческом потенциале, конфликта интересов, распределения доходов, подотчетности государственных средств, лицензирования, выделения дочерних компаний, регистрации и разрешения споров. Архитектура основана на принципах преемственности, соответствия полномочий и ответственности, а также проверяемости правовых решений. Предлагается определять период принятия решения не как техническую деталь юридической процедуры, а как управленческий фактор, непосредственно влияющий на скорость коммерциализации. Модель направлена на повышение правовой определенности, сокращение времени принятия решения и четкое определение ответственности субъектов коммерциализации.
Ключевые слова: научная разработка, коммерциализация, правовая архитектура, интеллектуальная собственность, лицензирование, конфликт интересов, распределение доходов, инновационная деятельность.
IMPROVING THE LEGAL GOVERNANCE ARCHITECTURE FOR THE COMMERCIALIZATION OF RESEARCH DEVELOPMENTS
Rustam Rajabovich Ergashev
Head of the Department for
Commercialization and
Technology Transfer Development,
Agency for Innovative Development,
E-mail: darkman_07@mail.ru
Abstract. The article examines the development of an integrated legal governance architecture for research commercialization. It argues that fragmented rules on intellectual property, financing, contracts and innovation activities may not ensure continuity of rights, authority and accountability from the creation of a research result to a market transaction. A five-layer governance architecture is proposed: a dedicated legislative framework; subordinate procedures defining decision deadlines and standard documents; internal commercialization policies of universities and research institutions; contractual mechanisms governing licensing, equity and investment relations; and digital registry and monitoring rules. The proposed framework links research disclosure, determination of ownership, decisions on commercial potential, conflict-of-interest management, revenue distribution, accountability for public funding, licensing, spin-off arrangements, registry requirements and dispute resolution. The architecture is based on continuity, alignment of authority with responsibility, and the verifiability of legal decisions. Decision time is treated not merely as a procedural detail but as a management factor that can directly affect the speed of commercialization and private-sector participation. The model is designed to increase legal certainty, reduce decision delays and clarify accountability among actors involved in research commercialization while leaving transaction-specific economic terms to contractual arrangements.
Keywords: research development, commercialization, legal architecture, intellectual property, licensing, conflict of interest, revenue distribution, innovation policy.
https://zenodo.org/records/22308827
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.22308827
Foydalanilgan adabiyotlar
1. O‘zbekiston Respublikasi, “Innovatsion faoliyat to‘g‘risida,” O‘RQ-630-son Qonun, 2020-yil 24-iyul.
2. O‘zbekiston Respublikasi Prezidenti, “2022–2026-yillarda O‘zbekiston Respublikasining innovatsion rivojlanish strategiyasini tasdiqlash to‘g‘risida,” PF-165-son Farmon, 2022-yil 6-iyul.
3. O‘zbekiston Respublikasi Prezidenti, “Mamlakatda yangi ishlanmalar asosida ishlab chiqarishni tashkil etish tizimini joriy qilish hamda ilm-fanni qo‘llab-quvvatlashning qo‘shimcha chora-tadbirlari to‘g‘risida,” PF-54-son Farmon, 2026-yil 4-aprel.
4. O‘zbekiston Respublikasi Vazirlar Mahkamasi, “Tadbirkorlik subyektlari hamda ilmiy hamjamiyat o‘rtasida o‘zaro hamkorlik aloqalarini rivojlantirish chora-tadbirlari to‘g‘risida,” 75-son qaror, 2026-yil 23-fevral.
5. D. J. Teece, “Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy,” Research Policy, vol. 15, no. 6, pp. 285–305, 1986, doi: 10.1016/0048-7333(86)90027-2.
6. R. Jensen and M. Thursby, “Proofs and prototypes for sale: The licensing of university inventions,” American Economic Review, vol. 91, no. 1, pp. 240–259, 2001.
7. J. G. Thursby and S. Kemp, “Growth and productive efficiency of university intellectual property licensing,” Research Policy, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 109–124, 2002.
8. D. S. Siegel, D. A. Waldman, and A. N. Link, “Assessing the impact of organizational practices on the relative productivity of university technology transfer offices,” Research Policy, vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 27–48, 2003.
9. S. Lach and M. Schankerman, “Incentives and invention in universities,” RAND Journal of Economics, vol. 39, no. 2, pp. 403–433, 2008.
10. M. Perkmann, V. Tartari, M. McKelvey et al., “Academic engagement and commercialisation: A review of the literature on university–industry relations,” Research Policy, vol. 42, no. 2, pp. 423–442, 2013.
11. D. Baglieri, F. Baldi, and C. L. Tucci, “University technology transfer office business models: One size does not fit all,” Technovation, vols. 76–77, pp. 51–63, 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.technovation.2018.05.003.
12. H. Etzkowitz and L. Leydesdorff, “The dynamics of innovation: From National Systems and ‘Mode 2’ to a Triple Helix of university–industry–government relations,” Research Policy, vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 109–123, 2000.
13. H. W. Chesbrough, Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology. Boston, MA, USA: Harvard Business School Press, 2003.
14. World Intellectual Property Organization, Knowledge and Technology Transfer: From Lab to Market. Geneva, Switzerland: WIPO.
15. OECD, Commercialising Public Research: New Trends and Strategies. Paris, France: OECD Publishing, 2013.
16. OECD/Eurostat, Oslo Manual 2018: Guidelines for Collecting, Reporting and Using Data on Innovation, 4th ed. Paris, France: OECD Publishing, 2018, doi: 10.1787/9789264304604-en.
17. UNCTAD, Science, Technology and Innovation Parks in Uzbekistan: Assessment and Policy Issues. Geneva, Switzerland: United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, 2024.
18. World Bank, Uzbekistan: Modernizing Uzbekistan National Innovation System Project (P170206), Restructuring Paper. Washington, DC, USA: World Bank, Mar. 30, 2026.
19. A. Campbell, C. Cavalade, C. Haunold, P. Karanikic, and A. Piccaluga, Knowledge Transfer Metrics: Towards a European-wide Set of Harmonised Indicators. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2020, doi: 10.2760/907762.
20. International Organization for Standardization, ISO 56008:2024 Innovation Management — Tools and Methods for Innovation Operation Measurements — Guidance. Geneva, Switzerland: ISO, 2024.
