Internet has become one of the most important areas of conflict between IP rights in Russia

On 25 November 2003 LES Russia seminar "Internet and intellectual property", was held in Moscow. Thirty-eight attendees from Russia, the Ukraine, Belarus and Kazakhstan were in the seminar.

Opening the seminar, Valery Medvedev, LES Russia Vice President noted the extensive penetration of Internet into all spheres of human activity and the ever increasing importance of settling legal issues related to intellectual property in the global network. Justification of this thesis is confirmed by the interest shown in the seminar by patent attorneys, lawyers, attorneys, experts in the field of computer engineering and Internet etc.

The first report was given by Mr. Igor Motsny, Lawyer of "ElcomSoft" (Moscow), which is widely known today by even non-specialists because of the court hearing that was won by the company in the U.S.A. with the participation of a programmer, Mr. Dmitry Sklyarov, as a defendant. In his report "Protection of Copyrights in Internet, Mr. Motsny dealt with the main issues of protection of copyrights in Internet, among which the ease of dissemination of copyright subject matters, the identicalness of a copy and an original, the difficulties in the struggle against infringement of copyrights in Internet, the localness of law-enforcement practice in respect to the globality of the network, etc., were noted. The speaker presented a brief review of existing international legislation in this field, legislation of the U.S.A., EU and Russia. Consideration in detail was given to the question of how the point of responsibility of Internet providers for infringement of copyrights committed by clients is resolved abroad and in Russia. In conclusion, the speaker gave consideration to a draft law dedicated to introducing supplements into the law of the Russian Federation on copyright and neighboring rights. The many questions put to the speaker showed the live interest of the participants in the problems raised and in the law enforcement practice of their resolution.

The second speaker, Mr. Alexander Osokin, a counsel actively practicing in the field of copyright and industrial property, made a report "Distribution of Information in Internet: Problems of Law Enforcement". The speaker's main idea was directed to the necessity of at least adapting the existing law enforcement legislation to such revolutionary changes of technology as is provided by Internet. Mr. Osokin noted the problem of giving consideration to a hyperlink, leading to another site containing information infringing the right of a third person, as a copyright infringement. The case of the "Ad Margin" publishing house against Mr. Chernov was cited as an example. The conclusion was made that at the present moment it is not possible to bring the owner of a site with a hyperlink to account for copyright infringement.

Another problem related to a hyperlink is that it aids in the dissemination of information that discredits honor, merits and business reputation. A court decision was presented as an example, in which the court satisfied a claim, finding the defendant guilty of disseminating such information with use of a hyperlink to another site. As a recommendation in the struggle against the illegal use of hyperlinks, Mr. Osokin suggests that the so-called preventive suit be used to forbid actions from being carried out that create a threat of infringement of a right. In his opinion such suits may be quite effective in Russia. Questions raised by and also examples of law enforcement practice presented by the participants of the seminar showed different approaches to the resolution of this problem and also a rather rapid adaptation of Russian courts to participation by Internet in the hearing "as a third person".

The final report - "Conflict between Trademark Owners Rights and Domain Names: Evolution of Judicial Practice", was made by Mr. Mark Chizhenok, Lawyer of "Gorodissky & Partners". Mark analyzed the evolution of existing law enforcement practice in this field and developed a pattern of more and more complex judicial practice. In recent times Russian courts proceed from the presumption that even if the domain name is similar to or identical with a registered trademark, this is not sufficient to recognize the fact of infringement. The courts study facts of confusing similarity of a domain name and trademark, homogeneity of services and abuse of the right to a trademark. Furthermore, an analysis was made in the report concerning the role of services accorded by the RosNIIROS, Internet provider, Moscow, in judicial proceedings. As examples of the evolution of rights, Mr. Chizhenok cited court decisions with indication of domain names mosfilm.ru; Kodak.ru; nivea.ru; quelle.ru; coca-cola.ru; kamaz.ru; romashka.ru and others. The speaker was asked many questions. The liveliest discussion dealt with the subject of studies by courts of the homogeneity of services provided by a domain name and a trademark.

It is gratifying to note that all the reports were to an equal degree of high interest to the participants of the seminar. Taking into account the dynamics of law enforcement practice in this field, it is probable that LES Russia will return to this topic at one of the future seminars or conferences.

Sergey Dorofeev
Secretary of LES Russia