Objectives:
The article explains why the norms of intellectual property law constitute a comprehensive branch of law, as well as the role that public law norms play within it.

Methods:
The considerations are of a dogmatic nature.

Results:
Their goal is not to provide an exhaustive presentation of the issue indicated in the title, but rather to raise it and discuss its most fundamental aspects.

Conclusions:
On this basis, the author reaches the following conclusions: first, it is inaccurate to characterize intellectual property law (when understood in terms of its subject matter) merely as a branch of civil law, even though civil-law mechanisms for the protection of intangible assets constitute its "substance" and "differentia specifica"; second, while public-law norms in this field are functionally subordinate to civil-law intellectual property rights (in the subjective sense), they operate on the basis of co-regulation ("inter-normativity"); third, it is rational to propose a course on "public intellectual property law," provided that the unity of intellectual property law (as a comprehensive branch within the legal system) is respected; fourth, such a course should follow a progression from private law toward public law; and fifth, the most pressing task for any such course on public intellectual property law is to develop the concept of "public intellectual property."