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.
The claim of American manufacturer for protection of rights to the brand in Russia was rejected
ABRO Industries Inc., a US resident, has not received trademark protection in the Arbitration Court of Sevastopol. The court dismissed the organization's claim against the Russian Alexander Yakushev, citing the company's attempt to abuse procedural rights.
The case for the protection of intellectual property rights to the company's trademark was initiated by Avtobibika (LLC), representing the interests of an American manufacturer of chemicals for cars. The company demanded 50 thousand rubles from the businessman as compensation for the fact that he illegally sold imported goods (silicone grease) under the “ABRO MASTERS” brand.
It is curious that judge Aleksey Smolyakov did not dispute the very fact of infringement of rights to someone else's trademark, confirming the illegality of such an act. However, the court did not punish the offender, pointing out that the manufacturer of the goods was registered in the United States. Since this “unfriendly country” introduced restrictive measures against Russians, having deprived residents from the Russian Federation of the opportunity to seek such compensatory measures on their territory, the answer of the Russian Themis should be mutual.
The current decision of the Sevastopol arbitration in case No. À84-453/2022 actually repeats another similar decision made by the Judge Andrey Slavinsky, who some time ago also rejected the claim for the protection of exclusive rights to a foreign entity (a British company) in connection with a violation by a Russian businessman. We are talking about the “Peppa Pig case” (No. A28-11930 / 2021), which Rusbankrot already covered in mid-March 2022.
Russian lawyers, commenting on the Judge Slavinsky's earlier refusal to satisfy the claims of a British firm, were inclined to consider such a decision as a separate excessive act, not of great importance for justice. It seems that the number of such cases is increasing and is beginning to turn into a steady trend.
The case for the protection of intellectual property rights to the company's trademark was initiated by Avtobibika (LLC), representing the interests of an American manufacturer of chemicals for cars. The company demanded 50 thousand rubles from the businessman as compensation for the fact that he illegally sold imported goods (silicone grease) under the “ABRO MASTERS” brand.
It is curious that judge Aleksey Smolyakov did not dispute the very fact of infringement of rights to someone else's trademark, confirming the illegality of such an act. However, the court did not punish the offender, pointing out that the manufacturer of the goods was registered in the United States. Since this “unfriendly country” introduced restrictive measures against Russians, having deprived residents from the Russian Federation of the opportunity to seek such compensatory measures on their territory, the answer of the Russian Themis should be mutual.
The current decision of the Sevastopol arbitration in case No. À84-453/2022 actually repeats another similar decision made by the Judge Andrey Slavinsky, who some time ago also rejected the claim for the protection of exclusive rights to a foreign entity (a British company) in connection with a violation by a Russian businessman. We are talking about the “Peppa Pig case” (No. A28-11930 / 2021), which Rusbankrot already covered in mid-March 2022.
Both judges, in their justification for denying the plaintiff's claims, refer to the same Decree of the President of the Russian Federation No. 79, which refers to the foreign exchange transactions of Russians, and does not say a word about any restriction on procedural rights and prohibitions for foreigners.
The case does not mention any references to possible retortions that would be introduced by the authorities in relation to the property rights of foreign persons (Article 1194 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation).Russian lawyers, commenting on the Judge Slavinsky's earlier refusal to satisfy the claims of a British firm, were inclined to consider such a decision as a separate excessive act, not of great importance for justice. It seems that the number of such cases is increasing and is beginning to turn into a steady trend.
20.04.2022
