RusBankrot
We know everything about bankruptcy
17/05/2024
Friday
THIS DAY IN HISTORY:
17 May 
1970 Canadian women were recruited to the provincial police for the first time.
1970 Canadian women were recruited to the provincial police for the first time.
1970 Cuba announced the distribution of land to the peasants.
1970 Cuba announced the distribution of land to the peasants.
1970 The strikes were prohibited in Germany.
1970 The strikes were prohibited in Germany.
17 May
1970 Canadian women were recruited to the provincial police for the first time.
1970 Canadian women were recruited to the provincial police for the first time.
1970 Cuba announced the distribution of land to the peasants.
1970 Cuba announced the distribution of land to the peasants.
1970 The strikes were prohibited in Germany.
1970 The strikes were prohibited in Germany.
Supreme Court of Russia to decide whether it is necessary to apply to the Russian Federal Service for Intellectual Property to approve a store sign
The case of the pharmacy chain ‘Rigla’ has reached the Supreme Court, which will decide on the use of the logo on the sign. There are quite a lot of situations when a trademark is registered for one person, and another structure conducts activities under it.
In a number of cases, local authorities refuse to agree on the installation of store signs without the provision of a license (shop or pharmacy) issued by the fact of registration in the Russian Federal Service for Intellectual Property. There is no common opinion on this issue even among experts. Some of them believe that the simple consent of the brand owner is sufficient, while others refer to the requirement of paragraph 2 of Art. 1490 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation.
The Rigla-MR company wanted to place a sign over one of the pharmacies in the Moscow region. On November 20, 2019, the firm received a refusal from the local officials and submitted the written consent of the copyright holder (AS-bureau Plus LLC).
The Economic board of the Supreme Court of Russia is to consider the case on March 29. However, the opinions of experts on this issue are divided.
Kommersant media cites the words of Anzhelika Reshetnikova, who deals with the protection of intellectual property at the KIAP law office. She believes that Article 1229 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, to which Rigla refers in its lawsuit, is of a general nature and cannot be the basis for resolving the specific issue of state registration of the transfer of intellectual property rights.
According to Ekaterina Tilling from Eversheds Sutherland, registering a contract with Rospatent is a long (it can take up to two months) and expensive process (you have to pay royalties). For many firms, in fact, this means an increase in the financial burden on the business and tax accounting difficulties.
In a number of cases, local authorities refuse to agree on the installation of store signs without the provision of a license (shop or pharmacy) issued by the fact of registration in the Russian Federal Service for Intellectual Property. There is no common opinion on this issue even among experts. Some of them believe that the simple consent of the brand owner is sufficient, while others refer to the requirement of paragraph 2 of Art. 1490 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation.
The Rigla-MR company wanted to place a sign over one of the pharmacies in the Moscow region. On November 20, 2019, the firm received a refusal from the local officials and submitted the written consent of the copyright holder (AS-bureau Plus LLC).
Referring to the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, representatives of the local administration refused to consider the consent confirmed by the Russian Federal Service for Intellectual Property.
Rigla tried to challenge the refusal in the arbitration court (case No. À41-13514/20). However, all three courts refused to satisfy the demands, referring to the obligation to register the agreement on the use of the mark with the Russian Federal Service for Intellectual Property. After that the company has applied to the Supreme Court, believing that the legislation does not establish a specific form of consent, and transferring the right to use the brand can be done not only by obtaining a license.The Economic board of the Supreme Court of Russia is to consider the case on March 29. However, the opinions of experts on this issue are divided.
Kommersant media cites the words of Anzhelika Reshetnikova, who deals with the protection of intellectual property at the KIAP law office. She believes that Article 1229 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, to which Rigla refers in its lawsuit, is of a general nature and cannot be the basis for resolving the specific issue of state registration of the transfer of intellectual property rights.
According to the expert, if the Supreme Court of Russia takes the side of Rigla, Russian Federal Service for Intellectual Property will lose a significant part of its functions.
Other lawyers consider that the presence of a license agreement registered with the Russian Federal Service for Intellectual Property is not mandatory for relations with municipal authorities when coordinating advertising signs. Such an agreement is necessary to avoid a conflict situation with the right holder, but not in cases where affiliated persons act and a simple consent is sufficient.According to Ekaterina Tilling from Eversheds Sutherland, registering a contract with Rospatent is a long (it can take up to two months) and expensive process (you have to pay royalties). For many firms, in fact, this means an increase in the financial burden on the business and tax accounting difficulties.
24.02.2022
