IP
I
June 7, 2022

From Russia with love: The ‘other’ Russian conflict targeting intellectual property owners

Russia’s war with Ukraine has rightly not been far from the public’s mind over the past couple of months. The war is having, and will continue to have, tragic consequences for the people of Ukraine. However, it is another of Russia’s tactical measures associated with the conflict which could have serious and long-lasting consequences for both the country of Russia and intellectual property owners across the world.

In an effort to bring pressure on Russia numerous countries have imposed significant economic sanctions on Russia. And numerous global businesses, including Apple, McDonald’s, Coca-Cola, Mercedes Benz, Ikea and Starbucks are rapidly downsizing or ceasing operations in Russia. This mass corporate exodus has caused significant logistical and supply chain disruptions in the technology and retail sectors, with many Russian businesses quickly looking to fill the growing gaps in consumer demand.

Russia’s ‘war’ with international patent and design owners

Part of the Russian government’s response to the international sanctions was to launch a second (or third if you include the cyber-attacks) attack of the year against international intellectual property owners. It issued a decree on 6 March 2022 effectively allowing Russian entities to use patents, utility models or industrial designs without paying licence fees, or being at risk of damages for infringement, where the owner is from a country which imposed economic sanctions and/or has carried out “unfriendly activities” towards Russia.

So far, those countries include the United Kingdom, European Union, the USA, Canada, Japan, South Korea, Singapore, and of course Australia and New Zealand.

The decree is broad, and affects owners who are citizens or residents, headquartered in or even receiving significant revenue from those ‘unfriendly’ countries.

The Russian government has, in one fell swoop, effectively gone further than the large-scale nationalisation efforts developing countries undertook in the 1960’s and 70’s, by expropriating intangible property and intellectual property rights from foreign owners.

What’s the likely impact?

The decree expropriating patent and design rights means that Russian entities can now exploit patents and registered designs without consent, and the owners cannot enforce their rights, receive damages for infringement or licence fees for use of those rights.

The economic impacts and sanctions will last long after the shelling finally stops, with the US and EU discussing Russia effectively being a global pariah for the foreseeable future.

In those circumstances, it is unlikely that even if Russian patents and designs could be enforced during their term, owners will have sufficient interests in Russia to justify doing so. Intellectual property owners are now in an invidious position. Even if they can renew their registrations - the sanctions mean it will be difficult or impossible to pay renewal fees - owners may simply decide to abandon their registrations in Russia.

While Russia’s actions may have a short-term gain for Russian entities, foreign investment will be significantly curtailed. Similarly, innovative entities are unlikely to risk transferring or commercialising sensitive technology or data into Russia for a considerable period. This will ultimately stifle the flow of technology and innovation to Russia and reduce its productivity and growth in the long run.

But what about other intellectual property rights?

Despite the decree only explicitly covering patents, utility models and industrial designs, it has the potential to affect other intellectual property rights in Russia, including copyright and trade mark rights. In fact, Russia’s Ministry of Economic Development has hinted that further decrees could be on the way, including (temporarily) removing trade mark and copyright protections for owners based in ‘unfriendly’ countries.

Rospatent, Russia’s Federal intellectual property office has recently received an influx of trade mark applications for famous and luxury brands like Givenchy, Christian Dior, Chanel, Nike, BMW and Audi from applicants that aren’t the marks’ owners. There is a good chance some of these applications will be registered, as even pre-decree, Rospatent was not able to refuse trade mark applications on the express basis that they were filed in bad faith.

One high-profile example is a trade mark application for ‘Uncle Vanya’ for restaurant services, along with the following logo:

If the logo looks familiar, it won’t be a surprise that the trade mark application was filed shortly after senior Russian officials declared all McDonald’s restaurants in Russia should be replaced by a new burger chain called Uncle Vanya, presumably coming to Russian towns everywhere soon.

If Russia issues another decree removing trade mark rights for owners based in ‘unfriendly’ countries, the decree will likely mean that applications such as this would be registered as Rospatent examiners would be prevented from considering existing trade marks owned by ‘unfriendly’ foreign owners.

Additionally, the Russian courts appear to have already declared open season on other forms of intellectual property rights.

One relatively high-profile recent case involves Peppa Pig. Peppa Pig’s UK based owners (Entertainment One UK) was bought by Hasbro Inc, a US entity – both are based in ‘unfriendly’ countries. They brought trade mark and copyright infringement proceedings against a Russian national. The Russian District Court dismissed infringement proceedings. In its judgment, the court specifically referred to Britain’s and the United States’ sanctions against Russia as justification for its decision to allow the Peppa Pig trade marks to be used without consent

If, despite the sanctions, you are interacting or trading with Russian-based entities, one key protection will be to ensure your contracts give you sufficient protection.

No items found.

What does this mean for my brand in Russia?

While the implications may vary from owner to owner, if the Russian government issues another decree removing an ‘unfriendly’ owner’s ability to enforce their trade marks, or object to bad faith filings, the situation could prove pretty tough.

The bad faith trade mark applications filed with Rospatent over the past month are likely to be granted, whether or not they were filed with the intention to actually use those marks.

It’s possible the new mark’s registered owners may engage in trade mark squatting and look to recoup extortionately large profits from the legitimate owners. This would cause trade mark owners significant issues if, or when, they look to re-enter the Russian market.

The issue is two fold for brands, both their ability to sell into Russia and inevitable confusion that will exist, and Russian entities selling into other countries. In both cases while Russia is under sanction this is not likely to be too much of an issue. The issue will really bite when Russia and the rest of the world look to commence trade again, because international brands may be shut out of Russia, and Russia could become a hotbed for supplying counterfeit products and services.

While it is possible to cancel Russian trade marks filed in bad faith on the grounds of abuse of rights or unfair competition, it seems unlikely the Russian courts will give a favourable ruling to the legitimate owners of those trade marks. However, at this stage it is just hard to tell.

The international sanctions regime appears to be in place for the long haul, which will prevent foreign businesses from trading in Russia. A further impact of that for brand owners is their legitimate Russian trade marks may become susceptible to cancellation for non-use if they are not used in Russia for a continuous period of three years.

The applications filed to date are likely the tip of the iceberg, and many more ‘bad faith’ applications will be filed in the future, which may then flow onto the registration of numerous .ru domains and look-alike websites and platforms.

To make up for the recent dramatic loss of goods in the technology and retail sectors in Russia, an increase in grey-market goods (goods sold outside of distribution channels authorised by the intellectual property rights holder) and counterfeiting is also possible.

It shouldn’t be all doom and gloom, and the potential for damage to the goodwill and reputation of the brand can be mitigated. Most Russian consumers will still care about quality and provenance, especially for luxury goods, which seem to be the main victim of these look-alike trade mark filings to date. However, it will require increasing the scale of anti-counterfeit education campaigns and making consumers all over the world aware of the knockoff brands in Russia and the counterfeit market.

What about copyright?

Similarly, if Russia issues a further decree, copyright rights may also be suspended for ‘unfriendly’ owners. This step is likely to have the most significant consequences internationally and would be felt across a number of sectors.

Russia has significant cyber capabilities. Regardless of whether it’s state-sponsored or co-ordinated by Glavnoye Razvedyvatelnoye Upravlenie (GRU) intelligence office (think Fancy Bear), if those capabilities are put to nefarious uses it could have widespread impact.

One victim, given its profile, may be the film and television industry where copies of the latest movie and TV shows are hosted and made available for streaming internationally. If the servers and the streamers are based in Russia, short of obtaining blocking orders against known websites / IP addresses, there’s little copyright owners could do. Rights holders may be left to rely, solely, on technological measures to counter this issue.

But it’s not just the entertainment industry that should be concerned. With Software as a Service (SaaS), Platform as a Service (PaaS) and other ‘as a Service’ offerings becoming more ubiquitous, those owners might find their code is lifted, and a skinned site or portal (with a .ru or squatted .com domain) established where those offerings, again hosted on Russian servers, could be offered worldwide under the same name or a look-alike brand, which could potentially be the most serious consequence of any. This has the additional consequence that if copied and hosted in Russia, owners will lose control of that code, which other than the loss of revenue, could have significant reputational consequences. Unfortunately, depending Russia’s future actions, the law may not provide must assistance, to the extent it requires enforcement in a jurisdiction that does not recognise those bringing a claim. The answer may actually be in creative ways to protect from a technological perspective.

If copyright rights were suspended, there is very little that owners could do to prevent the copying, use and sale of underlying code, database structures, data, UX interfaces etc. in Russia.

Again, education is likely to be key, as well as taking steps to ensure your risks are mitigated, ensuring your cybersecurity processes are adequate and not hosting data or code on Russian-based servers.

If, despite the sanctions, you are interacting or trading with Russian-based entities, one key protection will be to ensure your contracts give you sufficient protection.

For example, think about enforceability, and ensure the agreement is subject to laws and a jurisdiction that is not Russia. Including an express acknowledgement that any monetary award from a foreign court’s (even an ‘unfriendly’ one) judgment would be enforceable in Russia. Alternatively, have any disputes referred to arbitration, and then rely upon the New York Convention to enforce in Russia.

If you have any queries about your intellectual property and the impact of the decrees or the impact of the conflict on your contracts more broadly, please get in touch.

Article Link

Dowload Resource

Dowload Resource

Insights

IP
June 7, 2022

From Russia with love: The ‘other’ Russian conflict targeting intellectual property owners

Russia’s war with Ukraine has rightly not been far from the public’s mind over the past couple of months. The war is having, and will continue to have, tragic consequences for the people of Ukraine. However, it is another of Russia’s tactical measures associated with the conflict which could have serious and long-lasting consequences for both the country of Russia and intellectual property owners across the world.

In an effort to bring pressure on Russia numerous countries have imposed significant economic sanctions on Russia. And numerous global businesses, including Apple, McDonald’s, Coca-Cola, Mercedes Benz, Ikea and Starbucks are rapidly downsizing or ceasing operations in Russia. This mass corporate exodus has caused significant logistical and supply chain disruptions in the technology and retail sectors, with many Russian businesses quickly looking to fill the growing gaps in consumer demand.

Russia’s ‘war’ with international patent and design owners

Part of the Russian government’s response to the international sanctions was to launch a second (or third if you include the cyber-attacks) attack of the year against international intellectual property owners. It issued a decree on 6 March 2022 effectively allowing Russian entities to use patents, utility models or industrial designs without paying licence fees, or being at risk of damages for infringement, where the owner is from a country which imposed economic sanctions and/or has carried out “unfriendly activities” towards Russia.

So far, those countries include the United Kingdom, European Union, the USA, Canada, Japan, South Korea, Singapore, and of course Australia and New Zealand.

The decree is broad, and affects owners who are citizens or residents, headquartered in or even receiving significant revenue from those ‘unfriendly’ countries.

The Russian government has, in one fell swoop, effectively gone further than the large-scale nationalisation efforts developing countries undertook in the 1960’s and 70’s, by expropriating intangible property and intellectual property rights from foreign owners.

What’s the likely impact?

The decree expropriating patent and design rights means that Russian entities can now exploit patents and registered designs without consent, and the owners cannot enforce their rights, receive damages for infringement or licence fees for use of those rights.

The economic impacts and sanctions will last long after the shelling finally stops, with the US and EU discussing Russia effectively being a global pariah for the foreseeable future.

In those circumstances, it is unlikely that even if Russian patents and designs could be enforced during their term, owners will have sufficient interests in Russia to justify doing so. Intellectual property owners are now in an invidious position. Even if they can renew their registrations - the sanctions mean it will be difficult or impossible to pay renewal fees - owners may simply decide to abandon their registrations in Russia.

While Russia’s actions may have a short-term gain for Russian entities, foreign investment will be significantly curtailed. Similarly, innovative entities are unlikely to risk transferring or commercialising sensitive technology or data into Russia for a considerable period. This will ultimately stifle the flow of technology and innovation to Russia and reduce its productivity and growth in the long run.

But what about other intellectual property rights?

Despite the decree only explicitly covering patents, utility models and industrial designs, it has the potential to affect other intellectual property rights in Russia, including copyright and trade mark rights. In fact, Russia’s Ministry of Economic Development has hinted that further decrees could be on the way, including (temporarily) removing trade mark and copyright protections for owners based in ‘unfriendly’ countries.

Rospatent, Russia’s Federal intellectual property office has recently received an influx of trade mark applications for famous and luxury brands like Givenchy, Christian Dior, Chanel, Nike, BMW and Audi from applicants that aren’t the marks’ owners. There is a good chance some of these applications will be registered, as even pre-decree, Rospatent was not able to refuse trade mark applications on the express basis that they were filed in bad faith.

One high-profile example is a trade mark application for ‘Uncle Vanya’ for restaurant services, along with the following logo:

If the logo looks familiar, it won’t be a surprise that the trade mark application was filed shortly after senior Russian officials declared all McDonald’s restaurants in Russia should be replaced by a new burger chain called Uncle Vanya, presumably coming to Russian towns everywhere soon.

If Russia issues another decree removing trade mark rights for owners based in ‘unfriendly’ countries, the decree will likely mean that applications such as this would be registered as Rospatent examiners would be prevented from considering existing trade marks owned by ‘unfriendly’ foreign owners.

Additionally, the Russian courts appear to have already declared open season on other forms of intellectual property rights.

One relatively high-profile recent case involves Peppa Pig. Peppa Pig’s UK based owners (Entertainment One UK) was bought by Hasbro Inc, a US entity – both are based in ‘unfriendly’ countries. They brought trade mark and copyright infringement proceedings against a Russian national. The Russian District Court dismissed infringement proceedings. In its judgment, the court specifically referred to Britain’s and the United States’ sanctions against Russia as justification for its decision to allow the Peppa Pig trade marks to be used without consent

If, despite the sanctions, you are interacting or trading with Russian-based entities, one key protection will be to ensure your contracts give you sufficient protection.

No items found.

What does this mean for my brand in Russia?

While the implications may vary from owner to owner, if the Russian government issues another decree removing an ‘unfriendly’ owner’s ability to enforce their trade marks, or object to bad faith filings, the situation could prove pretty tough.

The bad faith trade mark applications filed with Rospatent over the past month are likely to be granted, whether or not they were filed with the intention to actually use those marks.

It’s possible the new mark’s registered owners may engage in trade mark squatting and look to recoup extortionately large profits from the legitimate owners. This would cause trade mark owners significant issues if, or when, they look to re-enter the Russian market.

The issue is two fold for brands, both their ability to sell into Russia and inevitable confusion that will exist, and Russian entities selling into other countries. In both cases while Russia is under sanction this is not likely to be too much of an issue. The issue will really bite when Russia and the rest of the world look to commence trade again, because international brands may be shut out of Russia, and Russia could become a hotbed for supplying counterfeit products and services.

While it is possible to cancel Russian trade marks filed in bad faith on the grounds of abuse of rights or unfair competition, it seems unlikely the Russian courts will give a favourable ruling to the legitimate owners of those trade marks. However, at this stage it is just hard to tell.

The international sanctions regime appears to be in place for the long haul, which will prevent foreign businesses from trading in Russia. A further impact of that for brand owners is their legitimate Russian trade marks may become susceptible to cancellation for non-use if they are not used in Russia for a continuous period of three years.

The applications filed to date are likely the tip of the iceberg, and many more ‘bad faith’ applications will be filed in the future, which may then flow onto the registration of numerous .ru domains and look-alike websites and platforms.

To make up for the recent dramatic loss of goods in the technology and retail sectors in Russia, an increase in grey-market goods (goods sold outside of distribution channels authorised by the intellectual property rights holder) and counterfeiting is also possible.

It shouldn’t be all doom and gloom, and the potential for damage to the goodwill and reputation of the brand can be mitigated. Most Russian consumers will still care about quality and provenance, especially for luxury goods, which seem to be the main victim of these look-alike trade mark filings to date. However, it will require increasing the scale of anti-counterfeit education campaigns and making consumers all over the world aware of the knockoff brands in Russia and the counterfeit market.

What about copyright?

Similarly, if Russia issues a further decree, copyright rights may also be suspended for ‘unfriendly’ owners. This step is likely to have the most significant consequences internationally and would be felt across a number of sectors.

Russia has significant cyber capabilities. Regardless of whether it’s state-sponsored or co-ordinated by Glavnoye Razvedyvatelnoye Upravlenie (GRU) intelligence office (think Fancy Bear), if those capabilities are put to nefarious uses it could have widespread impact.

One victim, given its profile, may be the film and television industry where copies of the latest movie and TV shows are hosted and made available for streaming internationally. If the servers and the streamers are based in Russia, short of obtaining blocking orders against known websites / IP addresses, there’s little copyright owners could do. Rights holders may be left to rely, solely, on technological measures to counter this issue.

But it’s not just the entertainment industry that should be concerned. With Software as a Service (SaaS), Platform as a Service (PaaS) and other ‘as a Service’ offerings becoming more ubiquitous, those owners might find their code is lifted, and a skinned site or portal (with a .ru or squatted .com domain) established where those offerings, again hosted on Russian servers, could be offered worldwide under the same name or a look-alike brand, which could potentially be the most serious consequence of any. This has the additional consequence that if copied and hosted in Russia, owners will lose control of that code, which other than the loss of revenue, could have significant reputational consequences. Unfortunately, depending Russia’s future actions, the law may not provide must assistance, to the extent it requires enforcement in a jurisdiction that does not recognise those bringing a claim. The answer may actually be in creative ways to protect from a technological perspective.

If copyright rights were suspended, there is very little that owners could do to prevent the copying, use and sale of underlying code, database structures, data, UX interfaces etc. in Russia.

Again, education is likely to be key, as well as taking steps to ensure your risks are mitigated, ensuring your cybersecurity processes are adequate and not hosting data or code on Russian-based servers.

If, despite the sanctions, you are interacting or trading with Russian-based entities, one key protection will be to ensure your contracts give you sufficient protection.

For example, think about enforceability, and ensure the agreement is subject to laws and a jurisdiction that is not Russia. Including an express acknowledgement that any monetary award from a foreign court’s (even an ‘unfriendly’ one) judgment would be enforceable in Russia. Alternatively, have any disputes referred to arbitration, and then rely upon the New York Convention to enforce in Russia.

If you have any queries about your intellectual property and the impact of the decrees or the impact of the conflict on your contracts more broadly, please get in touch.

Article Link

Dowload Resource

Dowload Resource

Insights

Get in Touch