International protection of TK

According to the legislation of the Russian Federation, the owners of marks registered in our Patent Office can count on legal protection.

TK included in international treaties signed by the Russian Federation have the same right. Moreover, according to Art. 1507 Part IV of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, residents of our country have the right to apply for registration of TK in any country abroad or to international bodies. The first step to implement the plan is an application filed with FIPS.
International treaties and systems of regional registration can play an important role in the registration of TK, allowing to somewhat simplify the relevant procedures. Moreover, there is an opportunity to register TK, both in a separate country and in territories that do not belong to specific states. In this capacity, it is worth mentioning the customs territories, the management of which falls on the appropriate administrative structures, which make it possible to perform the registration procedure for TK. In this regard, it is worth remembering about Hong Kong, where the system of registration of TK differs markedly from the current one in China.

TK Protection: Ways of Implementation

If there is a title of protection on the TK, the legal owner has all the possibilities to suppress unauthorized actions of competitors.

This right is regulated by the Law on Trademarks and Service Marks. With regard to unauthorized use, sanctions of an administrative, civil and criminal nature are coming (Art. 14.10. Administrative Code of the Russian Federation, 1515 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation and 180 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation).

You can dispute someone else's TK only on the presentation of evidence regarding the coincidence with your own version.
In addition, in some countries, even TK that has not been registered with the Patent Office can be protected. In this case, one has to talk about reliability only after obtaining the proper level of fame. But since it will not be possible to earn a reputation as soon as we would like, the sign will be especially vulnerable for quite a long time.

In any new business, the most important, and often the most difficult, is to take the first step. Business does not like mistakes, and so that the first "pancake" does not turn out to be "lumpy", competent marketing development is needed. Only under this condition do new companies have a chance to successfully realize themselves in the modern market. One of the most relevant and modern means of brand promotion is the use of trademark.

Trademark rights

Any trademark belongs to the copyright holder, the person to whom it is. The copyright holder is authorized to dispose of the trademark and use it at his own discretion. Except for him, no one has the right to release their products under this trademark or similar to it without the permission of the copyright holder.

It is possible to use someone else's trademark within the legal framework. To do this, a licensing agreement is concluded with the owner of the trademark, which allows an individual or a company to release their products under this trademark without any sanctions from the regulatory authorities.

Full or partial license

An individual or company wishing to have the right to use a trademark can obtain a full or partial license from the owner of the trademark. A full license gives the right to sell all goods and services presented in the contract, and a partial license implies only a certain share of these goods and services.

For example, the second option is suitable if you have production and trade directions, and only trade functions are assumed for the franchisee.

When the rightholder issues a license to use a trademark, its owner has the exclusive ability to establish the territorial limits of its use. This means that the licensee may be authorized to use the trademark for the sale of its goods and services not throughout the territory. Russian Federation, but only in the regions and areas specified by the agreement.

In addition, the copyright holder can set a time limit for the validity of the license issued to him. Or vice versa - to retain the right to use the trademark for the second party to the license agreement for the entire period of its validity, taking into account the possibility of renewal. It should be understood, however, that obtaining a license does not transfer the exclusive right to use the trademark to the licensee. The order is regulated by the contract.

A license agreement for the use of a trademark allows to define the scope of possible interference of the owner of the trademark in the technical process of production and release by the licensee of his goods and services. This is quite reasonable, because an unscrupulous partner can easily spoil the reputation of a trademark by releasing low-quality products, if you do not control its work.

Also, the owner can give the licensee the right to issue sub-licenses to other persons. This moment must be spelled out in the license agreement, otherwise the sublicense agreement for the right to use will not have a legal basis. Such a sublicense is contrary to the law and will be invalidated by any court.

The right to issue a license can be an important stage when a company enters the federal level. When brand value is high, it is not recommended to neglect it. Otherwise, the company may slow down in its development.

The copyright holder can carry out the assignment of the trademark.

Under what agreement can trademark rights be transferred?

For this there is a special a contract of alienation of the exclusive right of use or an agreement.

The agreement is governed by article 1488 of the fourth part of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation.

The agreement specifies which goods or services the rights are transferred to.

The right to use a trademark is the right to use and dispose of a trademark and the right to prohibit the use of a trademark by others.

The exclusive right to a trademark can be transferred by the owner on a paid, free-of-charge basis or after the conclusion of a civil contract.

Here the owner fully transfers his authority to possess the name, recognizes the refusal to continue to operate it. This is often done before liquidation and change of direction of the owner.

The transfer of exclusive rights to a trademark for temporary use implies the execution of a license agreement that is valid for a certain period. The main details are spelled out in article 1489 of the 4th part Civil Code RF.

Article 1488. Agreement on the alienation of the exclusive right to a trademark

1. Under an agreement on the alienation of the exclusive right to a trademark, one party (the rightholder) transfers or undertakes to transfer in full its exclusive right to the corresponding trademark in respect of all goods or in respect of a part of the goods for the individualization of which it is registered, to the other party - the acquirer of the exclusive rights.
2. Alienation of the exclusive right to a trademark under a contract is not allowed if it can cause the consumer to mislead about the product or its manufacturer.
3. Alienation of the exclusive right to a trademark that includes, as an unprotected element, the appellation of origin of goods that has been granted legal protection in the territory of the Russian Federation (clause 7 of Article 1483) is allowed only if the acquirer has an exclusive right to such a name.

Article 1489. License Agreement on Granting the Right to Use a Trademark

1. Under a licensing agreement, one party - the owner of the exclusive right to a trademark (licensor) grants or undertakes to provide the other party (licensee) with the right to use the trademark within the limits specified in the contract with or without specifying the territory in which use is allowed in relation to all or part of the goods for which the trademark is registered.

   1.1. A license agreement on the granting of the right to use a trademark must contain, along with the conditions provided for in paragraph 6 of Article 1235 of this Code, a list of goods in respect of which the right to use a trademark is granted.

2. The licensee is obliged to ensure that the quality of the goods produced or sold by him, on which he places the licensed trademark, with the quality requirements established by the licensor. The licensor has the right to monitor compliance with this condition. For the requirements for the licensee as a manufacturer of goods, the licensee and the licensor are jointly and severally liable.
3. Granting the right to use a trademark that includes, as an unprotected element, an appellation of origin of goods that has been granted legal protection on the territory of the Russian Federation (clause 7 of Article 1483) is allowed only if the licensee has an exclusive right to such a name.

Issuance of a license to another person does not mean that the owner of the TK will lose the rights to it. He can restrict the possibilities of appeal, recognize the termination of the contract for various violations.

The owner has the ability to issue several of these licenses, making a profit from each. The licensor undertakes to monitor the proper quality of products. If it gets worse, then prohibitions by the licensee may follow.

Documenting the procedure

To formalize an agreement on the alienation of rights to a trademark or a license for temporary use, registration is required. The fee is prepaid, the amount of which is the same in both cases.

The Office is provided:

• drawn up contract;
• a statement indicating the transfer of ownership or a temporary order under a license;
• certificate.

Upon successful confirmation, a notification of registration is sent.

What is the content and who draws up the contract, letter of consent and permission?

An agreement on the transfer of the right to register a trademark to another person is concluded only with an individual or legal entity who is an entrepreneur.

The trademark of a legal entity can be used only after all the necessary procedures have been followed... The copyright holder's permission to use the trademark must be properly executed.

The contract itself contains:

• clear information about both parties entering into the transaction;
• subject of the contract;
• clarification that the trademark is not subject to assignment, but to be transferred for temporary use;
• its full name, number of the certificate issued during registration;
• an indication of the goods and services covered by the agreement;
• the requirement to maintain the quality of products at the same level as that of the owner himself.

The data of the owner and recipient of the rights are indicated here:

• initials;
• the name of the organizations;
• address;
• purpose of use.

Permission to use a trademark is also issued by its owner. It is drawn up in any of the above ways: using a license or an assignment agreement.

When does the right to use arise?

It considers the date of sending the application or priority for obtaining the right, placement in the state register and information about the already existing legal designation in the Rospatent bulletin, the issuance of the certificate.

The agreement comes into effect from the moment the request is sent to Rospatent.

The right to use someone else's trademark arises only after registration is completed or information is entered into State Register trademarks and service marks of the Russian Federation.

In fact, only the expiration of the exclusive powers of the original owner is counted from the date of filing the application.

When does the contract expire?

The exclusive right of ownership can exist for 10 years in accordance with Article 1491 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. The period is counted from the moment the application is submitted to Rospatent.

Article 1491. Duration of the exclusive right to a trademark

1. The exclusive right to a trademark is valid for ten years from the date of filing an application for state registration trademark to the federal authority executive power on intellectual property or in the case of registration of a trademark under a divisional application from the date of filing of the original application.
2. The period of validity of the exclusive right to a trademark can be extended for ten years at the request of the rightholder, filed within last year action of this right.

   Extension of the term of the exclusive right to a trademark is possible an unlimited number of times.

   At the request of the copyright holder, he may be granted six months after the expiration of the exclusive right to a trademark for filing the said application.

3. An entry on the extension of the term of the exclusive right to a trademark is made federal body executive power for intellectual property in the State Register of Trademarks and in a certificate for a trademark.

In accordance with the law, the transfer of rights to a trademark under an agreement can be extended for ten years, possibly with the permission of the copyright holder. Each time, a fee of 20,250 rubles must be paid. The resubmission of the request should be carried out six months before the end of the contract period. The whole process takes 2-3 months.

A trademark that is an object of intellectual property needs a timely renewal. This is a frequent subject of controversy and disagreement. It is registered in a specific order.

The copyright holder may allow third parties to use the object when concluding an alienation agreement or drawing up a license agreement. It is also possible to transfer the rights to a trademark for a certain period.

In any contract, the full name, abbreviation of the trademark, its image and other important information are clearly spelled out. For final registration, documents are sent to Rospatent.

Wishing to register his trademark, an entrepreneur may face the fact that a similar designation for similar goods has already been registered by another person. And this, we recall, is the basis for refusing to provide a trademark with legal protection (). Nobody prevents an entrepreneur from registering another original designation, but, as a rule, the interest lies in the registration of this particular trademark. The problem can be resolved if the competitor's exclusive right to the disputed designation is terminated early due to non-use of the trademark (). The legislator considers such a possibility as an antimonopoly instrument of protection against unfair competition, expressed in the acquisition and non-use of a trademark (,).

However, the legal protection of a trademark in this case can be terminated early only if the following conditions are simultaneously present:

• the applicant is interested in the early termination of his legal protection;
• the copyright holder has not used the controversial designation continuously for three years.

As a general rule, the applicant must confirm his interest. Thus, an interested person can be considered a person whose rights and legitimate interests are affected by the respective trademark law. These are, for example, manufacturers of similar goods who have a real intention to use the controversial designation in their activities and have taken the necessary preparatory actions for such use, in particular, by filing an application for registration of an identical or similar designation ().

But the copyright holder () is obliged to prove the fact of using the trademark. Moreover, not any use of the trademark is taken into account, but only the commission of actions directly related to the introduction of goods into civil circulation (approved by the Presidium The Supreme Court Russian Federation on September 23, 2015; further - Review). Such actions can be the placement of a trademark on the labels or packaging of goods that are produced, offered for sale, sold, displayed at exhibitions and fairs, or stored or transported for this purpose, etc. ().

OPINION

Alexey Fedoryaka, Head of the Industrial Property Department of the Guardium Patent and Law Office:

At the same time, in practice, there are often cases of the so-called symbolic use of a trademark with the sole purpose of preserving the entrepreneur's right to designate. Last year, SIP considered several disputes at once, in which it investigated this issue. Let's consider them in more detail.

When assessing the evidence of the actual use of the controversial designation, indicators of the volume of production are subject to establishment

The company "G", which produces professional auto chemistry, filed a lawsuit in court for the early termination of the legal protection of the trademark "L" belonging to the company "N" in relation to goods, citing the fact that the contested designation had not been used for three years.

The company confirmed the fact of using the trademark by presenting, among other things, delivery notes for three individuals six samples of "L" wood cleaner.

To compose statement of claim to protect the rights to use a trademark and recover compensation, use"Designer of legal documents" in internet versions of the GARANT system. Get full access for 3 days for free!

However, the court considered that this could not be the basis for confirming the fact of using the trademark. SIP explained that in assessing the evidence of the actual use of the controversial designation, a set of circumstances confirming the introduction of products into civil circulation, including indicators of the volume of such products, must be established. For example, if we are talking about expensive (exclusive) products, a low level of turnover, together with other evidence, can be considered sufficient confirmation of the use of a controversial designation. Whereas the same volume of turnover of less expensive products, due to their qualities (cost, prevalence, belonging to everyday objects, etc.), cannot indicate that these products confirm the fair use of their trademark by the copyright holder.

Produced volume of products household use in the amount of six copies for the eight-year period of validity of the trademark and its introduction into circulation by transferring such samples of goods to three individuals does not allow us to conclude that there is sufficient evidence of the defendant's use of the disputed designation, the court concluded ().

OPINION

Igor Motsny, Patent Attorney, Arbitrator of the Domain Dispute Resolution Center at the Czech The Arbitration Court:

"Trademarks that are not used by rightholders do not fulfill their main economic function (individualization of goods, works, services), create obstacles to the implementation of legitimate business activities by third parties. Moreover, their further action is contrary to public and state interests, since under this signs are not produced and (or) products are not sold, which means that the budget does not receive obligatory payments. "

A small volume of goods introduced into civil circulation cannot certainly indicate the symbolic use of a trademark

Company P applied to the court with a claim for the early termination of the legal protection of the trademark belonging to the company S in relation to the goods "spray guns; spray guns and sprinklers for insecticides; devices for the destruction of plant pests" because, in the applicant's opinion, it was not used the copyright holder for more than three years.

The company insisted that it used the controversial designation and submitted, in support of this fact, contracts for the supply of goods, invoices, acts, advertising materials for products, photographs of the store's sales area, etc. However, the company called the defendant's use of the trademark symbolic due to the small number of goods indicated in the waybills.

The SIP, however, did not agree with the opinion of the plaintiff, stressing that the small volume of goods introduced into civil circulation by itself cannot clearly indicate that the sole purpose of the copyright holder was to preserve the right to a trademark. Such a conclusion can be made only in the presence of a set of evidence testifying to the creation by the rightholder of the appearance of the introduction of goods into civil circulation. The methods used by the society to introduce goods into civil circulation are standard and do not go beyond the usual business turnover, the court said.

From the totality of the evidence presented by the defendant, the SIP saw that the supply of goods under consignment notes was only part of the company's business activity for the supply of goods carried out on a systematic basis, and considered the fact of using the trademark proven ().

The supply of products between affiliated persons in small volumes can be considered as the introduction of goods into civil circulation

Company "T", intending to use the designation "K" for labeling fruit wines and considering that company "A" has not used its trademark for three years, applied to the court with a demand to early terminate the legal protection of the trademark in relation to the goods "alcoholic drinks (excluding beer) ".

In confirmation of the use of the controversial trademark, the company submitted a supply agreement between the companies "P" and "B", a license for the production, storage and supply of wine, a certificate of products manufactured by the company "R" under the controversial trademark, photographs of a bottle of plum wine "K" , waybills, etc.

At the same time, according to the extracts from the Unified State Register of Legal Entities presented in the case materials, the participant of the company "B" with a 99% participation share is the company "E", the general director of which and the participant with a 99% participation share is A., cEO and the only member of society "A". Consequently, the supply of products was carried out between affiliated legal entities... And this, given the small volume of delivered products, cannot be considered as the introduction of goods into civil circulation, the plaintiff considered.

The court, in turn, took a different position, indicating that the existence of corporate relations between the copyright holder and another person using the trademark suggests the existence of the right holder's will to use the trademark by another person. Moreover, in the presence of such a relationship, as a rule, no special legal acts are required within the holding or a group of persons who formalize the consent of the copyright holder to use the trademark by another person. Thus, the fact that the disputed trademark was used with the consent and control of the defendant by an affiliated person with him is the proper use of the trademark.

With regard to the insignificant amount of products sold, the court noted that the goods transferred under the consignment note are only part of a large batch of goods transferred for sale. The methods used by the defendant to introduce goods into civil circulation do not go beyond the scope of normal business turnover. Thus, the judges saw no reason to conclude that the use of the disputed trademark was symbolic ().

The purchase by the copyright holder of products from third parties does not in itself constitute the use of a trademark

Foreign company "V" applied to the court with a claim for early termination of legal protection of the trademark "R" belonging to the company "P" in relation to goods " vehicles; apparatus for locomotion by land, air or water "due to its non-use.

As evidence of the use of the controversial designation, the company presented, among other things, a contract for the sale and purchase of the aircraft "R" and an agreement with the company "P" for the manufacture of marked trailers for cars.

The court explained that the aircraft sale and purchase agreement confirms the fact of the defendant's use of the trademark, but the act of acceptance and transfer of the goods was drawn up on October 4, 2016, that is, beyond the time limit for proving the use of the controversial designation (from February 12, 2013 to February 11, 2016 of the year).

In addition, SIP noted that, according to the defendant's contract with the P company, the latter undertook to manufacture and transfer to its ownership the car trailers, which must be marked with the disputed trademark. And the acquisition by the rightholder of products from third parties in itself is not the use of a trademark - this requires the subsequent introduction of these products into civil circulation. And this, the court stressed, the defendant did not prove.

Thus, the SIP came to the conclusion about the symbolic use of the disputed trademark by the defendant, which became the basis for the early termination of the legal protection of the disputed designation ().

Expert opinion

Experts considered the practice that is being formed by the SIP to be important, at the same time separately highlighting the issues requiring special attention and subsequent adjustment.

OPINION

Anastasia Rastorgueva, partner of the Moscow Bar Association "Barshchevsky & Partners":

"In the analyzed acts, the court comes to a number of interesting and important conclusions that do not directly follow from legal regulations, which indicates that the court is fulfilling its important role - the interpretation of the rules of law. The conclusion about the establishment of a set of circumstances confirming the introduction of products into civil circulation looks very reasonable, but the given example with the volume of products seems controversial and gives too wide a corridor for judicial discretion. "

Igor Motsnyi is convinced that the trademarks actually used should continue to operate and retain their validity regardless of the intensity of their use and the volume of sales of goods or services rendered: “Not all entrepreneurs are equally successful in their activities and not every entrepreneurial activity brings quick and large profits. The courts can and should formulate criteria that will make it possible to draw as clearly as possible the line between real use and symbolic use. "

OPINION

Anatoly Semyonov, Representative of the Presidential Commissioner for the Protection of Entrepreneurs' Rights in the Field of Intellectual Property:

“Of course, it is important to form a standard of proof of the genuine use of a trademark for the purpose of eliminating errors of law enforcement. So far, unfortunately, it should be admitted that arbitrage practice The SIP is extremely inconsistent with regard to the criterion of quantitative sufficiency and completely denies the inadmissibility of descriptive use for the purposes of confirming the true use, which is obvious for the practice of the European Union, for some reason attributing arguments about descriptiveness to the administrative procedure in Rospatent and refusing to consider them in judicial procedure.

Nevertheless, nothing stands still and it is likely that after the expected legal position of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation on the complaint of society "P" regarding the essence of the right to a trademark [Constitutional case No. 6182 / 15-01 / 2017, No. 5898 / 15- 01/2017 on the verification of the constitutionality of the provisions in connection with the complaint of the company "P", considered in a public hearing on December 14, 2017. - Ed.] and the inevitable renewal of the CIP staff after the upcoming reappointment of judges in connection with the expiration of powers in late 2018 - early 2019, the situation with the perception of generally accepted principles international law will improve markedly. "

The specialists also told the readers of the GARANT.RU portal how the copyright holder can minimize the risks of losing the rights to his trademark.

OPINION

Vitaly Tukmanov, Project Manager of the Guardium Patent Law Office:

"The rightholder needs to provide as much evidence as possible confirming the introduction into civil circulation of goods marked with the contested trademark. It is advisable to submit documents on the sale of a large volume of goods to different buyers. In situations where the trademark is not actively used, the rightholder in order to maintain legal protection designations must ensure that their products, marked with a trademark, reach the end user. The volume of sales may be small, but at least have a somewhat systematic nature. "

Igor Motsny advises copyright holders to pay attention to the following circumstances:

• whether the use of a trademark has a certain economic logic and benefit, in addition to protection from early termination of its legal protection;
• whether the trademark is used for its main purpose - the individualization of goods, works, services;
• what are the scope and methods of using the trademark. "Perhaps there was a small production of goods, but at the same time the trademark was also used in advertising, offers for sale, on documentation, on the Internet, etc. All methods of use should be taken into account in conjunction with other circumstances of a particular case", - indicated by the expert;
• whether the trademark was used in civil circulation (i.e., the sale of goods or the offer of services for an unlimited number of persons);
• what is the time period, frequency and regularity of the use of the designation. For example, the use of a trademark, albeit small in volume, but for a stable and rather long period of time, may, according to Motsny, be considered a real use of the trademark;
• in relation to which specific goods and services the trademark is protected. "In modern conditions, the activities carried out via the Internet are becoming more and more important, when there is less and less evidence of the presence of a physical product. In particular, the ICGS recognizes such a product as" downloadable software ", and we are talking about software, which is not implemented in the usual form on media, but is downloaded by the user directly to his device (computer, mobile device, etc.). In this case, it is difficult to present traditional evidence of the production of a product, since the product itself is intangible, but this does not mean that the trademark is not used in relation to it, "he explained.

According to Anastasia Rastorgueva, taking into account the emerging position of the SIP, the number of satisfied applications for the early termination of the legal protection of a trademark will increase. "It is obvious that the positions enshrined in the considered resolutions will soon be accepted by the lower instance, which should also be facilitated by the fact that cases related to the early termination of legal protection of a trademark due to its non-use are also considered by the SIP in the first instance," supported by Vitaly Tukmanov. But Igor Motsny, on the one hand, believes that the SIP approach should not significantly affect the existing practice, since the court only interpreted the symbolic use of trademarks, taking into account the previously expressed position of the RF Armed Forces (). But on the other hand, the expert nevertheless believes that the further interpretation of the concept of the symbolic use of a trademark will be continued in the new judicial acts.

Today a trademark is the most important means of individualization, which is why the issue of protecting the interests of copyright holders is especially acute. We would like to remind that the owner has an exclusive right - the legal possibility to use the trademark in any way within the framework of the law. First, we will give the concept of use, then we will analyze individual cases associated with the use of someone else's trademark.

What is the use of a trademark?

In practice, a legal position has been established, according to which use is the placement of a trademark. In addition, in paragraph 2 of Art. 1484 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, certain specific cases of use are indicated. This includes episodes of placing a trademark:

1. On goods (on labels, packaging).
2. When performing work, providing services.
3. On documents when goods are introduced into civil circulation (for example, when goods are cleared through customs).
4. In advertisements, on signs, in offers for the sale of goods.
5. On the Internet (in particular, in the domain name).

Please note that each of these cases assumes that others are not entitled to use the trademark in relation to similar episodes. However, there are exceptions to this rule, which concern, in particular, the last two cases. Let's dwell here in more detail.

Trademark use in advertising

How to use a trademark in this situation? Let's imagine a standard situation. A small business that sells auto parts makes good sense to place trademarks in ads and advertisements to inform buyers about which brands of parts they can buy. In addition, the store itself contains these trademarks. Let's analyze this situation from a legal point of view.

The trademarks of all brands whose spare parts the store sells (let it be Mercedes-Benz and Volkswagen) are protected by intellectual property rights as a means of individualization. Each of these trademarks has its own copyright holder, and if you turn to the already mentioned article 1484 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, then he and only he has the right to use the trademark in advertising. Therefore, third parties (which is the store in our example) cannot do this. The only way out is to conclude a licensing agreement in order to be able to use the trademark. Should the Russian store contact the German copyright holder in every such case?

Let's turn to Federal law "About advertising". Article 5 introduces such a concept as unfair advertising. Specific cases are listed, which advertising is not allowed. One of these episodes is the use of someone else's means of individualization, if it is misleading as to who the real copyright holder is. In other words, you cannot do this: place a trademark and “cash in” on its reputation, indicating, for example, that the store is an official supplier of spare parts from an authorized dealer. Can we conclude from this that in other cases, just as information, it is possible to post?

Yes, and at least it seems quite logical. Although it was a sensational case when Volkswagen thought otherwise, demanding not only the removal of the placed trademarks, but also huge sums of compensation. However, the court, guided by the law and, apparently, common sense, sided with the entrepreneur, deciding that simply informing about what is sold in the store in no way violates the interests of the owner of the exclusive right.

Placement on the Internet

Here, too, everything is not so simple. The situation when ordinary users place a trademark designation is not regulated by law. By the same logic as with advertising, there is no violation here due to the absence of the user's intent to harm the copyright holder. Otherwise there would be hundreds of thousands of claims. Although, again, formally, all this can be considered a violation.

However, cases when trademarks are registered as domain names are very common. These are the so-called domain disputes. The trial intellectual rights unambiguously expressed on this occasion that the owner of the trademark is always right. Therefore, even if a user has previously registered a website, for example, www.cocacola.ru, he will have to change the name and, most likely, pay compensation. On this occasion, one can recall one of the first cases: the case of Mike Ro Soft against Microsoft Corporation.

Personal use

Although this is not directly provided for in the law, it is obvious that it will not be a violation of the exclusive right when a citizen places trademarks, for example, at home (i.e. for personal purposes). Here you can draw an analogy with the institution of copyright, where this is allowed. Therefore, an ordinary citizen need not worry about it. Although a specific provision in the law, of course, would not hurt, then such cases as the presentation of claims by the Volkswagen concern would not have taken place.

Directly prohibited actions

In paragraph 3 of Art. 1484 separately specifies a ban on the placement of a trademark by third parties on goods. From this we can conclude that violations related to entrepreneurial activity are the most significant. Indeed, the sale of counterfeit products undermines civil circulation and disrupts the normal functioning of the market. For this, not only civil liability is provided, but also administrative, criminal (more details on this here).