Citizen’s voice and intellectual property: legal parallels

In modern conditions of rapid development of speech synthesis technologies and digital media, the human voice acquires maximum vulnerability. As a fundamental intangible asset and a unique identity, it requires increased attention within the framework of its security and protection. In this regard, the study of current legal norms in this area, including in the context of current legislation on intellectual property rights, seems timely and promising for the development of this institution in Russian legislation. The purpose of the study is to identify the legal parallels between a citizen’s voice and intellectual property, as well as to identify existing gaps in the civil protection of voice as a fundamental intangible asset. The authors of the article consider the legal nature of the voice and come to the conclusion that this concept should be outside the sphere of law. At the same time, analyzing the legal essence of an audio trademark in the context of its relationship to voice, the authors note that, despite the existence of a certain legal relationship between them, the civil law regime of an intellectual property object does not and cannot be applied to voice. The general conclusion of the article is that the legal parallel between the voice as an intangible asset and the legislation on intellectual property rights is very conditional. The existing gaps in legal regulation currently make it difficult to effectively protect citizens from the misuse of voice, which is especially important in the era of the development of artificial intelligence technologies and digital media. The study highlights the need to develop a voice protection institute that will ensure a balance between the interests of citizens, society and technological progress, and will also contribute to enhanced protection of citizens in the digital age.

1. Timeshov, R. P. (2010), Intangible assets in civil law and their protection, Abstract of Ph.D. dissertation, Kuban state agrarian university, Krasnodar, Russia.

2. Drobyshevskaya, T. V. (2001), Personal non-property rights of citizens and their civil law protection. Monograph, Publishing house of Krasnoyarsk, Krasnoyarsk, Russia.

3. Maleina, M. N. (2001), Personal non-property rights: concept, implementation and protection, Statut, Moscow, Russia.

4. Tolstoy, V. S. (2006), Personal non-property legal relations, Publishing house “Elite”, Moscow, Russia.

5. Matveev, A. G. and Martyanova, E. Yu. (2023), “Civil-legal protection of the human voice during its synthesis and subsequent use”, Ex jure, no. 3, pp. 118–131.

6. Belaya, O. V. and Kitsay, Yu. A. (2020), “Biometric data as a means of human identification and authentication: Russian and international experience”, Law and Practice, no. 1, pp. 85–89.

7. Orlova, V. V. (2006), Means of individualization in entrepreneurial activity: Theory and practice of protecting company names, trademarks and other commercial designations, PATENT, Moscow, Russia.

8. Sergeeva, N. Yu. (2015), Substantive limits of the exclusive right to a trademark – an object of protection, Ph. D. Thesis, Russian state academy of intellectual property, Moscow, Russia.

9. Sergeeva, N. Yu. (2024), “Singapore Treaty on the Law of Trademarks as one of the key international acts in the field of industrial property”, Online scientific journal of the Russian state academy of intellectual property IP: theory and practice, no. 3, pp. 79–92.