IP/Q/RUS/1, IP/Q2/RUS/1  
IP/Q3/RUS/1, IP/Q4/RUS/1  
 
9 February 2016  
(16-0839)  Page: 1/46  
Council for Trade-Related Aspects of 
Intellectual Property Rights  Original: English  
 
 REVIEW OF LEGISLATION 
 
RUSSIAN FEDERATION1 
The present document records the introductory st atement made by the delegation of the Russian 
Federation, and reproduces the questions put to it and the responses given in connection with the 
review of legislation initiated at the Council's meeting of 10-11 October 2013.2 The review was 
concluded in February 2015.3  
_______________ 
 
 1  INTRODUCTORY STATEMENT MADE AT TH E MEETING OF THE COUNCIL FOR TRIPS ON 
10-11 OCTOBER 2013 
The Russian Federation has provided detailed answer s to the questions from the United States, the 
European Union and Switzerland concerning implementation of Russian national legislation in the 
IP area, and it was quite a long list of answers and questions. We thank the Secretariat for their 
help which was provided, and was necessary for us. From our perspective, these answers give a clear understanding of the situation with IP protec tion in Russia and the situation is getting better, 
but we are not going to cease, and we expect so me new changes in our national legislation which 
will provide more copyright protection, and we  will notify these changes without delay.  
 2  RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS POSED BY THE EUROPEAN UNION
4 
IPR IN INFORMATION AND TELECOMMUNI CATION NETWORKS INCLUDING THE 
INTERNET 
We have been informed about a new legislativ e proposal by the Ministry of Culture titled 
"On Introduction of Amendments to Certain Legislative Acts of th e Russian Federation 
for the Purpose of Elimination of Violat ions of Intellectual Property Rights 
in Information and Telecommunication Networks Including the Internet". 
 
1. How will this proposal work together wi th the planned amendments to Part IV 
of the Civil Code?  
2. What are the current intentions of the Ru ssian government in respect of the liability 
of internet service provider s? Do any of the measures notified or planned modify 
the commitment to take action against internet websites that promote illegal 
distribution? 
On 24th May 2013 the President of the Russian Federation, Vladimir Putin, during the session 
of Presidential Council of cinematography said: "One of our topics is fighting internet piracy. We shall pay a serious attention to this topic. And I want to assure you that we will not forget it." 
                                               
1 As regards laws and regulations notified by the Russian Federation under Article 63.2 of the 
Agreement, reference is made to documents IP/N/1/RUS/1, IP/N/2/RUS/1 and IP/N/6/RUS/1. 
2 Document IP/C/M/74. 
3 Document IP/C/M/78.  
4 Responses circulated in document IP/C/W/595 to questions posed in document IP/C/W/588. 
 IP/Q/RUS/1 • IP/Q2/RUS/1 • IP/Q3/RUS/1 • IP/Q4/RUS/1 
 
- 2 - 
 
   
After receiving such kind of encouragement at  the highest level, many experts started to 
work actively with the legal base of fighting internet piracy. One of the results of this work was an adoption of the law "on introduction of changes in acts of the Russian Federation 
in connection with protection of the intellectual property rights in the information and 
telecommunications networks" on 2 July 2013, with the adoption of The Federal Law No. 187- ФЗ 
(thereafter – the Law). 
 
The new "Antipiracy Law" introduces the principle of liability of internet service providers and 
mechanisms of blockage of illegal content by a court decision. For the moment, the scope of the law is limited to films. 
From the side of the Government, we will study attentively how the law will be implemented. 
Meanwhile, the Government will also work on a package of necessary amendments. 
It is important to note that the adopted law has allowed us to make a real step forward in this 
direction. It makes possible to overstep through many contradictions, and to make a basis for the 
next development of the legislatio n for fighting internet piracy. 
The adoption of the Law was a sign to start the wo rk on improvement of Russian legislation in this 
area. Such process will be very fast. 
It is expected that the main work will be on the: 
- extension of scope of protection to all objects of intellectual property rights 
(phonograms, books, images, etc.); 
- preventive and quick mechanisms which will restrict access to infringing content 
(interaction of right holder and service provider before going to the Court); 
- improvement of law enforcement; and 
- clarification of provisions on liability of such kind of providers as torrents. 
COLLECTIVE RIGHTS MANAGEMENT 3 .  D o  a n y  o f  t h e  m e a s u r e s  n o t i f i e d  o r  p l a n n e d ,  m o d i f y  t h e  s c o p e  o f  r i g h t s  t h a t  a r e  
subject to collective management as provided for in Article 1244 of the Civil Code? 
 Now the change of Article 1244 of the Civil code of  the Russian Federation is not intended because 
of the following reasons: 
 A practical realization of the legal institute of expanded collective management of rights 
has led to the stabilization of a system of collective management and to the increase of dues and payment of compensation to rightholders (including foreign). Bi-annual data 
from accredited organizations to the Ministry of Culture show that dues/payment 
of compensation on copyrights have increased by several times, and on related rights and dues on private copying by hundreds of times. 
 Russian legislation realizes the form of activity of organizations on collective rights 
management, what is applied in Scandinavian countries, including WIPO's recommendations from 1991 on monopolization of activity of companies on collective management of copyrights and related rights. 
 The legal institute of State accreditation on what was introduced in 2008 finished "legal" 
nihilism what was acted since 1993, when: (1) a few dozen organizations competing together existed, it was negative for the image of an institute of collective rights 
management; (2) was full user's ignoring of obligations to payment the compensation. IP/Q/RUS/1 • IP/Q2/RUS/1 • IP/Q3/RUS/1 • IP/Q4/RUS/1 
 
- 3 - 
 
 The list of spheres of collective management, in which state accreditation are provided, 
are constricted to some spheres where rights management is not possible in individual order, or difficult. 
 Now, the Russian Federation is a leader in due/payment of the compensation in all 
countries of the Post-Soviet states. According, to CISAC PAO (copyright legal 
organization) the Russian Federation has entered to triple of most dynamically developing countries at level of dues in 2012. 
 In Post-Soviet states where the institute of accreditation does not exist 
(i.e. the Republic f Kazakhstan, and the Repu blic of Moldova) or where it has been 
abolished (Ukraine), a decline in dues/payment of the compensation has been observed. In the Ukraine a total breakup of all systems, that is main pretension from the 
United States of America what is marked in Report 301 in 2012. 
 The change of legislation by non-monopolization of activity in collective management 
led to the decline of dues of the compensation (Italy). 
 In the institute of state accreditation not only right holders, but also users who use right 
holder's objects of unlimited quantity (e.g. users who make daily unlimited broadcasting of objects of the intellectual proper ty on radio and TV), are interested. 
4. Do these measures envisage expansion of the mandate of co llective management 
organisations?  The expansion of the mandate of collective mana gement organizations in amendment in Part IV 
of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation is not provided. 
5. Do any of the measures notified or planned, modify the right under Art 1244 
of the Civil Code, which ensures that the rights holder without a contract with 
a collective management organisation ha s the right to refuse its services? 
 The amendments of Part IV of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation do not establish any 
changes in point 4 of Article 1244 of the Civil Code  of the Russian Federation where a procedure of 
withdrawal rights from management of accredited organization is established. 
6. Do any of the measures notified or planned involve those that would be intended 
to monitor and hold accountable organiza tions engaged in collective management 
of rights to ensure that right-holders re ceive remuneration that is due to them? 
 In the draft amendments of Part IV of the Civil Code of the Russi an Federation, the responsibility 
of organizations engaged in collective mana gement of rights about non-payment, the 
remuneration what is due to right holder is provided. 
It is necessary to pay attention to the fact that the absence of an indicated provision in Part IV 
of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation does  not deprive right holders of the right to apply 
to court with a demand about punishment from organization a pecuniary sums what are due to the right holder, and to use another way of protection provided in acting legislation. 
7. Is the Russian Federation following up  on its commitment to review its system 
of collective management of rights in orde r to eliminate non-contractual management 
of rights within five years after Part IV of  the Civil Code entere d into effect (2008)? 
 
The Russian Federation complies with its liabilities in full regarding what it has taken on with entry 
to WTO. One such liability is building the syst em what protects copyright and related rights 
effectively. 
The Ministry of Culture, as the federal organ of executive authority which authorized to carry out 
regulatory legal regulation in the sphere of copy right and related rights, control and supervision in 
indicated sphere, realized corresponding revision of system of non-contract management of rights and next results of the institute of state accreditation are: IP/Q/RUS/1 • IP/Q2/RUS/1 • IP/Q3/RUS/1 • IP/Q4/RUS/1 
 
- 4 - 
 
   Payments of compensation to right holders about different kinds of use, rights are 
increased since the moment of introduction of the institute of state accreditation in comparison with period of realization the collective management of rights on basis of direct contracts from 1993 to 2008. 
 At this moment, annual stable progress in the activity of accreditation is observed as the 
number of contracts are concluded with international organizations of management of rights in dynamics of growth of dues and payments in compensation, etc. It affirms 
that the possibilities of using the system of state accreditation still has not been 
exhausted and does not need to change existing system. 
 In society, the understanding of compliance for users author's rights and other right 
holders with use the results of the intellectual activity is formed, what in future will 
exclude the Russian Federation from a list of countries which may not provide the 
effective protection of intellectual property. 
 An acting system allows not only to pay compensation to right holders but also to decide 
other social problems with the rise in creative activity and a citizen's legal consciousness, 
ministration to young musicians. 
 Introduction of the institute of state accreditation has provoked a process of the 
formation of a uniform judicial practice for consideration of disputes about performance 
of accredited organizations, a functions of dues, distribution and payment of the 
compensations. 
 All indicated allows to claim than cancel of non-contract management of rights and 
non-monopolization of the institute of collective management of copyrights and related 
rights will lead to lowering of level of legal security of right holder's rights and legal interests. 
Considering that some foreign music in the territo ry of the Russian Federation is very big, the 
lowering of levels of legal security of right holders' rights and legal interests will affect foreign right holders, because it will be difficult to protect thei r rights on the territory of the Russian Federation 
as experience shows in the two previous decades. 
It is necessary to note that inside the Customs Union between members – the 
Republic of Kazakhstan, the Russian Federation, an d the Republic of Belarus project of Agreement 
about unified order of management of copyright and related rights on collective basis, is 
developing now. Indicated projects will contain: maximally allowable size of retention on necessary 
costs about dues, distribution and payment of the compensations; organization's duty to public 
annual reports about their activity in their official websites; and also duty to carry out annual 
independent audit for check and confirmation of reliability implemented due, distribution and 
payment of the compensations. 
PRIVATE COPYING 
8. Do an of the measures notified or planne d modify the scope of "private copy" concept 
as defined in Article 1273 of the Civil Code?  In Article 1273 of the Civil Code of the Russian Fe deration cases are provided of withdrawal and 
restriction of the right holders' exclusive right in  the case of reproduction of the results of the 
intellectual activity by individual person for personal purposes. 
It is necessary to pay attention to the fact that, in Article 1273 of the Civil Code of the Russian 
Federation, positions correspond to the Berne Conventi on for the Protection of Literary and Artistic 
Works of 9
th September 1886 (Berne Convention) of which the Russian Federation is a member 
since 1995 and of the TRIPS Agreement. 
Herewith, in point 2 of Article1273 of the Civil Code  of the Russian Federation, the results indicate 
- in the intellectual activity (phonograms and audiovisual works) about reproducing them for IP/Q/RUS/1 • IP/Q2/RUS/1 • IP/Q3/RUS/1 • IP/Q4/RUS/1 
 
- 5 - 
 
personal purposes - that right holders have the right to receive compensation, in accordance with 
Article 1245 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. 
System of dues, distribution and payment of co mpensation for free reproduction for personal 
purposes started to function in full from Octobe r 2010, since the moment of the adoption of the 
Decision of the Government of the Russian Fe deration, No. 829 on 14th October 2010, where it 
established the size of funds for payment of compensation and are governed order of due, 
distribution and payment of the compensations. In this connection, to pay attention to the fact 
that in this sphere of collective management activity, the compensation due may not realized in 
case if few organizations will lead it; now adoption of some steps that may change the concept of free reproduction for personal purposes is not provided. 
THE MONETARY THRESHOLD IN CRIMINAL PROCEDURES AND PENALTIES REGARDING 
COPYRIGHT PIRACY 
9. Do any of the measures notified or plan ned provide guidance on the application of 
the monetary threshold for application of crim inal procedures and penalties with regard 
to copyright piracy, in order to reflect realities of the commercial market, notably 
regarding the internet market?  
The application of the monetary threshold for applic ation of criminal procedures and penalties with 
regard to copyright piracy was explained in the Re solution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court No. 
14 of 26 June 2007. The Resolution indicates that in process of identification of the scale of a 
crime (large or very large scale), the decision should be based on the retail value of the original 
(licensed) copies of works or phonograms at the time of the crime, based on the number of them, 
including copies of works or phonograms, belonging to different right holders. It is important to 
add that if the infringer commits the copyright crime twice or more, his crime will be considered as 
a criminal case without taking in consideration the monetary threshold. 
THE NEW DRAFT SEED LAW It seems that a new draft seed law is being prepared in Russia. The issue is currently 
dealt with by the Federal Law on the Protecti on of Selection Achievements of August 6, 
1993. This new law, regarding plant variet y protection would introduce the so-called 
agricultural exemption which is an option al exemption under Article 15(2) of the 
UPOV 1991 Convention. Under such an exemption a farmer is allowed to use the product 
of his harvest for further propagating purposes of a protected variety without 
the authorization of the title holder but against a reasonable remuneration. 
Nevertheless, pursuant to the recommend ation on Article 15(2), annexed to the 
UPOV Convention, such an exemption can be in troduced only to the extent as such use 
has been common practice in the given country, i.e. only for certain crops and for one generation. 
 
It appears that the plan is to introduce such an exemption without any limits, meaning that for all crops and for several generation s. This seems not to be in line with the 
UPOV 1991 Convention to which Russia is a contracting party.  
 
10. Could we receive a detailed explanation as to the rationale behind the new law? 
 
The Russian Federation will be glad to organize bilateral consultations on this issue. 
The EU question needs more clarification. Th e Federal Law on the Protection of Selection 
Achievements of 6 August 1993 is not in force si nce 2008 when Part Four of Civil Code of the 
Russian Federation was introduced. It needs to be clarified what exactly EU partners consider the 
draft of law. 
THE LAW ON THE CIRCUL ATION OF MEDICINES 
11. Please explain how Article 18.6 of the Law on Circulatio n of Medicines is currently 
applied in Russia, e.g., is the six-year term of  protection currently in force or does it 
require additional guidelines or  other implementing measures? 
 IP/Q/RUS/1 • IP/Q2/RUS/1 • IP/Q3/RUS/1 • IP/Q4/RUS/1 
 
- 6 - 
 
  12. If it is in force, could you explain th e process used to provide this protection? 
 13. Please explain the relationship of Ar ticle 18.6 with Article 26 of the Law on 
Circulation of Medicines, which allows for the accelerated review of generic applications.  
 
14. What are the measures being taken in order to avoid legal uncertainty that is 
created by lack of clarity regarding data protection? 
 
Article 18 of Federal Law FZ-61d. of 12.04.2010 has been complemented with section 7 of the following content: 
"It is prohibited to receive, disclose, commercially use and use for state registration 
any information on non-clinical research of medical products and clinical research of 
medical products, provided by the applicant for state registration of medical products without their permission for six years since the date of state registration of a medical 
product. 
Non-observance of the prohibition stated by the above-mentioned section entails 
amenability in compliance with laws of the Russian Federation. 
Turnover of medical products registered with violation of this section on the territory 
of the Russian Federation is illegal". 
The above-mentioned section has applied since 22 August 2012. To observe requirements of section 7 of Article 18  and prevent violations of exclusive rights of 
developers of medical products, the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation in its draft bill "on 
amendments to Federal law, "on turnover of medi cal products" and to Article 333.32.1 of part two 
of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation" made an amendment to the composition of the 
registration dossier (Article 18, section 3) by including documents that verify: 
"12)  presence of intellectual rights 13)  presence of consent of an applicant of an original medical product to use 
information about results of non-clinical and clinical researches of the original medical 
product in case less than six years has passed since the registration of the original medical product." 
Article 26 FZ-61 d.d.12.04.2010 "on turnover of medical products" applies only to urgent 
production of expert's evidence but not to urgent  registration. Since rapid production of expert's 
evidence may be applied to reproduced medical pr oducts, provision of information obtained during 
non-clinical and clinical researches of the original medical product and published in specialized 
publications is possible during such procedures, if  the original medical product is not covered by 
patent protection. 
At the moment, a series of amendments in the Law on Circulation of Medicines N61 is being 
considered by the Government. Different provisions related to Article 18 will be introduced to avoid 
any possible misunderstanding of the provision. 
At the same time, the Russian Federation, according to the Doha Declaration (on the TRIPS 
Agreement and Public Health) of 2001, in which a co ncern about the impact of intellectual property 
rights on medical products prices was expressed and ultimately reserves the right to consider 
applying Article 8 of the TRIPS Agreement in terms of implementing the right to health, which states that during drafting or amending of national laws or regulations member states can take 
measures necessary in protecting population's health, as well as Article 30 of the TRIPS Agreement 
which contemplates some exclusions from excl usive rights granted by patents while barring 
unjustified limitations of rights of patent-holders and third parties. Particularly the right to "early 
usage" does not contradict this Article (the so-called Bolar provisions) which allows generic drugs 
producers to conduct all the procedures and trials  necessary to registration of a generic drug 
before patent to the original drug expires (or exclusive research data regulations). As a result they IP/Q/RUS/1 • IP/Q2/RUS/1 • IP/Q3/RUS/1 • IP/Q4/RUS/1 
 
- 7 - 
 
are guaranteed the possibility of entering generi c product to the market right after the stated 
period has expired. 
At the moment, a series of amendments in the Law on Circulation of Medicines N61 is being 
considered by the Government. 
GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS (GIS) 
15. Where does the Russian notion of appellati ons of origin (AOs) stand with respect the 
TRIPS concept of GIs? 
 
16. Please explain, how the generic use of EU geographical indications in the draft 
Customs Union Technical Regulation on Safety of Alcoholic Products is in line with the 
protection provided to those  terms under TRIPS rules? 
 
Upon accession of the Russian Federation to the WTO, questions about concordance of the Russian 
legislation in intellectual property with the provisions of the TRIPS Agreement is analyzed including 
by other Members of WTO. Within the framework of preparation for accession to the WTO, no 
discrepancies in legislation were discovered. Th e legislation of the Russian Federation about 
appellations of origin corresponds to the Paris Conv ention for the Protection of Industrial Property 
and the provisions of the Geographical indi cations (GIs) part of the TRIPS Agreement. 
It is necessary to mark that Section 3 "Geographical Indications" of Part 2 "Standards Concerning 
the Availability, Scope and Use of Intellectual Property Rights" of the TRIPS Agreement obliges the member countries to provide legal measures to secure legal protection of geographical indications 
on their territories. According to Article 1 "Nature and Scope of Obligations" of Part 1 "General 
Provisions and Basic Principles" of the TRIPS Agreement, countries are free to use the provisions of the TRIPS Agreement within the framework of their own legal systems. 
The legal system of the Russian Federation provides  a registration of appellations of origin which 
are part of geographical indications. Moreover, le gal protection of geographical indications may be 
realized not only because of registration of geographical indications as appellations of origin in 
established law order, but within the framework of antitrust legislation, legislation about 
advertisement, and consumer rights protection. 
As to the generic use of EU geographical indications in the draft Customs Union Technical 
Regulation on Safety of Alcoholic Products, it is important to note that in the August 2013 Draft of 
Customs Union Technical Regulation on Safety of Alcoholic Products there are no generic used of 
EU geographical indications. 
3  RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS POSED BY SWITZERLAND
5 
GENERAL 
1. Are the provisions of the TRIPS Agreemen t, as far as not implemented in national 
law, directly applicable in the lega l system of the Russian Federation? 
 
The Protocol of Accession of the Russia Federati on to the WTO was ratified by the State Duma 
of the Russian Federation on 22 August 2012. Si nce this date, the TRIPS Agreement became part 
of the Russian legislation system. Obligations of the Russian Federation, taken during the 
accession process, were implemented through amendments to the national legislation. 
PATENTS 2. Does the legislation of the Russian Federation grant patent protection for 
inventions relating to products and processe s in all fields of technology? Are there any 
exceptions? If yes, please indicate these ex ceptions and explain how they comply with 
Article 27 of the TRIPS Agreement. 
 
                                               
5 Responses circulated in document  IP/C/W/596 to questions posed in document IP/C/W/587. IP/Q/RUS/1 • IP/Q2/RUS/1 • IP/Q3/RUS/1 • IP/Q4/RUS/1 
 
- 8 - 
 
  In accordance with Article 1350 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, a technical solution 
in any area (we consider it as an invention in fields of technology) related to a product (including a structure, substance, micro-organism strain, or culture of cells of plants or animals) or a means (a process of conducting actions on a material object with the help of material means) shall be 
protected as an invention. An invention shall be granted legal protection if it is new, 
has an inventive level, and is industrially applicable. 
The Article provides that legal protection for invent ions shall not be granted to: varieties of plants, 
breeds of animals and biological methods of obta ining them, with the exception of microbiological 
methods and products obtained through the use of such methods. 
We consider that these exceptions fully comp ly with Article 27 of the TRIPS Agreement. 
3. Does the legislation of the Russian Fe deration, in accordance with Article 27.1 
in combination with Article 31 of the TRIPS Agreement, consider importation 
as "working" a patent and therefore preclude  compulsory licensing, if a product is being 
imported?  
 
4. Does the legislation of the Russian Fede ration make the granting of a compulsory 
licence subject to all the conditions enumer ated in Article 31 of the TRIPS Agreement? 
Please cite the relevant provisions of the legislation. 
 Article 1362 of the Civil Code of the Russian Fe deration is devoted to the detailed regulation 
of questions of compulsory  licensing. Quotas regulating compulsory  licensing are founded on 
the provisions of the Paris Convention for the Protec tion of Industrial Property (Article 5 item A(2)) 
and the TRIPS Agreement (Articles 31 and 40). 
Semantic maintenance of the notion "conditions corresponding to established practice" used 
in Article 1362 of the Civil Code of the Russi an Federation and the notion "reasonable 
commercial conditions" used in Article 31(b) of the TRIPS Agreement, are the same. 
In the case of insufficient use of an invention or industrial design during the four years since the 
date of granting of the patent or utility model – during three years since the date of granting of 
the patent and a patent holder's refusal to conclude licence contract with interested person on conditions corresponding to established practice, this person shall have the right to go to court with a suit against the patent holder for the granting of a compulsory simple (non-exclusive) 
licence for the use of an invention, utility model, or industrial design. In the demand for the 
lawsuit, the interested person must indicate the pr oposed of the granting to him of such a licence, 
including the scope and conditions of use of the patented object, the amount, procedure, and 
times of payments. The Court makes a decision about the granting of the compulsory licence 
if the patent holder does not show that non-use or insufficient use by him of the patented object is based on valid causes. All cases of using of patented object are defined in the court decision. 
The right provided in conformity with the compulsory licence may not be transferred to 
third persons. 
In a case where the circumstances that were the basis for the granting of the simple 
(non-exclusive) licence cease to exist and their reappearance is unlikely, then acting of the 
compulsory licence may be terminated by judicial procedure on a suit by the patent holder. 
This quota corresponds to Article 31(c) of the TRIPS Agreement. A duty of proof of absence 
of these circumstances is charged to patent holder. In this case, the terms and procedure 
of termination of the licence and termination of the right is arised with getting of this licence are 
established by the court. 
Article 31(I)(ii) of the TRIPS Agreement foresees a "cross licence". Analogous quota is contained in 
item 2 of Article 1362 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. The present item establishes 
rules for a situation where the use of one patented invention is connected to the using of other patented invention or patented utility model. If other person have the patent to this other invention or utility model than using of first patented invention needs to get a permission from 
other patent holder. In case of refusal of other patent holder to get a licence, first patent holder 
shall have the right to go to court with a suit for the granting of the compulsory licence. Observation of conditions "an important technical achievement" and "a significant economic IP/Q/RUS/1 • IP/Q2/RUS/1 • IP/Q3/RUS/1 • IP/Q4/RUS/1 
 
- 9 - 
 
advantage" is directed to the protection of hi ndering patent holder's interests and this quota 
provides some balance of interests for both patent holders and the society in full, as long as society is interested in the creation of an important technical achievement, patenting them and their use. 
In the case of granting compulsory licence by court decision, the second patent holder acquires the 
right to get from the first patent holder an analogous licence for such invention to procure the use provided by the compulsory licence. It is necessary to note that positions in this item do not 
provide any possibility to demand submitting the co mpulsory licence for procuring the possibility to 
use patented utility model. Such limitation is stipulated because the patent of a utility model is distributed without verification it is its patentability. 
The provisions of Article 1362 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation about the compulsory 
licensing in case of insufficient use the industrial design during four years do not contradict to 
Article 5(B) of the Paris Convention for the Prot e c t i o n  o f  I n d u s t r i a l  P r o p e r t y  s o  l o n g  a s  t h e  
submitting of the compulsory licence of a patented industrial design does not mean a cessation of 
his legal protection. 
A reconsideration of court decisions is realized in conformity with the Civil Procedural Code of the 
Russian Federation and the Arbitration Proc edural Code of the Russian Federation. 
The procedure for the reconsideration of a court decision on compulsory licensing, based on Article 
1362 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, is provided in Procedural legislation. 
5. Does the legislation of the Russian  Federation provide for the principle 
of the reversal of burden of proof in patent litigation? Please cite the relevant provisions 
of the legislation. 
 The principle of burden of proof in Russian patent  legislation is incorporated in Articles 1350, 1351, 
and 1352 of Civil Code of the Russian Federation only on describing conditions of patentability of 
an invention, utility model and industrial design. 
According to the provisions of these articles the burden of proof that the circumstances have taken 
place, by virtue of which the disclosure of info rmation does not prevent the recognition of the 
patentability of the invention, utility model or industrial design, shall rest on the applicant. 
PROTECTION OF UNDISCLOSED INFORMATION 6. According to Article 18.6 of Federal Law No. 61-FZ "On the Circulation 
of Medicines", in force since 22 August 2012, Russia implemented the obligation under  
Article 39.3 of the TRIPS Agreement to pr otect undisclosed information in marketing 
approval procedures against unfair commercia l use by granting a term of protection 
of six years against reliance by a second app licant. Please explain how this protection 
is being implemented and enforced in practice, and whether a new administrative regulation addressing the practical aspects of  the application of Law No. 61-FZ is going 
to be put in force. 
 7. Can you confirm that, despite an acce lerated procedure for generic products 
registration as provided for in Article 26 of Law No. 61-FZ, the Russian marketing 
approval authorities do not allow reliance on the data submitted by their originator for 
the full term of protection of six years from the date of state registration of 
the medicinal product? 
 
Article 18 of Federal Law FZ-61 d.d. 12.04.2010 has been complemented with section 6 of the following content: 
"It prohibited to receive, disclose, commercially use and use for state registration 
any information on non-clinical research of medical products and clinical research of medical products, provided by the applicant for state registration of medical products without their permission for six years since the date of state registration of 
a medical product. IP/Q/RUS/1 • IP/Q2/RUS/1 • IP/Q3/RUS/1 • IP/Q4/RUS/1 
 
- 10 - 
 
  Non-observance of the prohibition stated by the above-mentioned section entails 
amenability in compliance with laws of the Russian Federation. 
Turnover of medical products registered with violation of this section on the territory 
of the Russian Federation is illegal." 
The above-mentioned section applies after 22 August 2012. 
To observe the requirements of section 7 of Arti cle 18 and prevent violations of exclusive rights 
of developers of medical products, the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation, in its draft bill 
on "Amendments to Federal Law", "On Turnover of Medical Products" and "Article 333.32.1 
of Part Two of the Tax Code of the Russian Fede ration", made an amendment to the composition 
of the registration dossier (Article 18, section 3) by including documents that verify: 
12) Presence of intellectual rights; 
13) Presence of consent of an applicant of an original medical product to use 
information about results of non-clinical and clinical researches of the original medical product in case less than six years has passed since the registration of the original 
medical product. 
Article 26 FZ-61 d.d. 12.04.2010 "On Turnover of Medical Products" applies only to urgent 
production of expert evidence but not to urgent registration. Since rapid production 
of expert evidence may be applied to reproduce medical products provision of information obtained 
during non-clinical and clinical researches of the original medical product and published in specialized publications is possible during such procedure if the original medical product is not covered by patent protection. 
Actually a series of amendments in the Law on Ci rculation of Medicines N61 is considered by the 
Government. Different provisions related to Article 18 will be introduced to avoid any possible misunderstanding of the provision. 
At the same time, the Russian Federation, according to the Doha Declaration of 2001 
on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health in which a concern about the impact of intellectual property rights on medical products' prices was expressed and ultimately reserves the right to 
consider applying Article 8 of the TRIPS Agreemen t in terms of implementing the right to health, 
which states that: during drafting or amending of national laws or regulations, member-states can take measures necessary in protecting population's health, as well as Article 30 of the TRIPS Agreement which contemplates some exclusio ns from exclusive rights granted by patents, 
while barring unjustified limitations of rights of patent holders and third parties. In particular, 
the right to "early usage" does not contradict this Article (the so-called Bolar provisions) which allows generic drug producers to conduct all the procedures and trials necessary for the 
registration of a generic drug before the patent of  the original drug expires (or exclusive research 
data regulations). As a result, they are guarant eed the possibility of entering generic product 
to the market right after the stated period has expired. 
PROVISIONAL MEASURES 
8. Do the judicial authorities of the Russian  Federation have the authority to adopt, 
on the request of a rightholder, a provisio nal measure inaudita altera parte before 
an action leading to a decision on th e merits of the case has been lodged? 
Please cite the relevant provisions of the legislation. 
 According to Article 141 of Civil Procedural Code  of the Russian Federations an application for 
providing for a claim shall be considered on the day of its arrival to the court, without notifying 
the defendant and the other persons taking part in the case. The judge or court shall issue a ruling on taking measures to provide for the claim. 
According to Article 93 of Administrative Procedural  Code of the Russian Federation an application 
for securing a claim shall be considered by an arbitration court trying the case. This is to be done IP/Q/RUS/1 • IP/Q2/RUS/1 • IP/Q3/RUS/1 • IP/Q4/RUS/1 
 
- 11 - 
 
by a single judge, at latest, on the day following the date when the application comes to the court, 
without notifying the parties thereto of it. 
Thus, the court of law and arbitration court have the right to accept provisional measures 
immediately without notifying the party of dispute on which measures are imposed. 
9. Does the legislation of the Russian Fe deration provide for any restrictions for 
obtaining provisional measures? If so, what are these restrictions? Please cite the relevant provisions of the legislation. 
 
The statement for acceptance security (provisional) measures can be submitted both simultaneously with the statement of claim and already in the course of judicial process. 
By the general rule, an application for securing a claim shall be considered by an arbitration court 
trying the case. This is to be done by a single judge, at latest, on the day following the date when 
the application comes to the court, without no tifying the parties thereto of it, including 
if the statement for claim maintenance is su bmitted simultaneously with the statement 
of claim (Article 93 of Administrative Procedural Code of the Russian Federation, 
Article 141 of the Civil Procedural Code of the Russi an Federation). In that case, the question on 
acceptance of the statement of claim to consideration is examined by an arbitration court not later 
than the next day after the day of receipt of the statement of claim by arbitration court. 
Upon the consideration of the statement for securing a claim, the arbitration court takes out 
a court decision on securing the claim or on refusal of claim securing. 
Securing measures hold action for all periods of legal proceedings before their cancellation. In the 
case of satisfaction of the claim, securing measur es hold the action upon execution of the judicial 
act which finalise this legal investigation. In the ca se of refusal of satisfaction of the claim, keeping 
the claim without consideration, cessation of case, securing measures hold the action upon the 
entering into force of the corresponding judicial ac t. After the entering into force of the judicial 
certificate the arbitration court, at the petition of the person participating in case, takes the decision on cancellation of measures on securing of the claim or specifies it in judicial act. 
As measures of protection from the statement for securing a claim, the other party (respondent) 
can declare objections, in essence, in judicial session, when the specified petition is considered with a call of both parties. In other cases, the interested person has the right: 
- To present counter security measures (Article 94 of the Administrative Procedural 
Code of the Russian Federation); 
- to dispute imposition of security measures (Article 97 of the Administrative Procedural 
Code of the Russian Federation and Article 144, Civil Procedural Code of the 
Russian Federation); 
- to request replacement of one security measure by another (Article 95 of the 
Administrative Procedural Code of the Russian Federation and Article 143, 
Civil Procedural Code of the Russian Federation); 
- to file a suit on indemnification or payments of indemnification, caused by securing 
the claim (Article 98 of the Administrative Procedural Code of the Russian Federation and Article 146, Civil Procedural Code the Russian Federation). 
According to Article 98 of Administrative Procedural Code of the Russian Federation, 
the respondent and other persons whose rights and/or  legitimate interests are violated by securing 
a claim shall be entitled - after entry into legal force of the judicial act of an arbitration court on 
the refusal to allow the claim - to demand of the person that has applied for taking the 
precautionary measures, repair of damages in th e procedure and in the amount provided for by 
the civil legislation or payment of compensation. 
10. Please describe the provisional meas ures provided for in the legislation 
of the Russian Federation, including those for combatting counterfeiting and piracy. IP/Q/RUS/1 • IP/Q2/RUS/1 • IP/Q3/RUS/1 • IP/Q4/RUS/1 
 
- 12 - 
 
  Please describe the procedures that must be  followed and cite the relevant provisions 
of legislation.  Security (Provisional) Measures - the measures directed on maintenance of the claim or property 
interests of the applicant (claimant). Security measures can be accepted at any stage of 
consideration of the dispute in an arbitration court or court of law if non-acceptance of these measures could complicate or make impossible the execution of the judicial act, including if such 
execution is supposed outside the Russian Federation, and also with a view to the prevention 
of causing considerable damage to the applicant. 
Under the statement of the person participating in  judicial proceedings, and in the cases provided 
by agrarian Administrative Procedural Code of th e Russian Federation and Civil Procedural Code of 
the Russian Federation, under the statement of other persons the arbitration court and court of 
law can accept urgent time security measures (measures on claim maintenance). 
According to Part 1 of Article 91 of the Administrative Procedural Code of the Russian Federation 
and Article 140 of the Civil Procedural Code of  the Russian Federation, Security Measures 
(measures on claim maintenance) can be: 
- Forbidding the respondent, or other persons, to commit certain actions concerning 
the subject of the dispute; 
- placing on the respondent the duty to commit certain actions for the purpose of preventing 
damage to, or deterioration of the condition of, disputable property; 
- transfer of disputable property to the cl aimant, or other persons, for keeping custody 
thereof; 
- end over measures. 
According to point 2 of Article 1252 of the Civil Co de of the Russian Federation, in the arrangement 
of the provision of security for a claim in a case of infringement of exclusive rights, the material 
media, equipment and materials that are allegedly involved in an infringement of the exclusive 
right, to the result of intellectual activity or means of individualization, may be subjected to the 
security measures established by the procedural legislation, e.g. seizure of material media, 
equipment and materials. 
According to Article 1302 of Civil Code of the Russian Federation, on cases of infringement 
of copyrights and related rights, a court may forbid a defendant, or a person believed on sufficient grounds to be an infringer of copyright, from  carrying out certain actions (i.e., manufacture, 
reproduction, sale, hiring out, importation or ot her use envisaged by the present Code, and also 
the transportation, storage or possession of copies of a work for the purpose of using them in civil law transactions, if the copies are understood to be counterfeit. 
The court may also order the seizure of all copies of  a work that is assumed to be counterfeit, as 
well as materials and equipment used or intended for manufacture or reproduction/playback thereof. 
11. Please describe the measures provided by  the legislation of the Russian Federation 
to combat counterfeiting and piracy at  the border. Please explain whether 
the competent authorities are empowered to ac t ex officio and, if so, please indicate 
the enforcement actions that may be taken.  Please cite the relevant provisions 
of the legislation. 
 In accordance of Article 306 and Article 307 of the Federal Law, from 27 November 2010, No. 311-
FZ a rightholder, having sufficient grounds to believe that his/her/it's right may be infringed, is 
entitled to file an application with the federal executive governmental body empowered in the area 
of customs affairs asking for inclusion of the relevant intellectual property item in the customs 
register of intellectual property items, in accordan ce with the legislation of the Russian Federation 
in connection with the import of goods into the Russian Federation, or the export thereof out of the Russian Federation, or when other actions take place involving goods being under customs control. IP/Q/RUS/1 • IP/Q2/RUS/1 • IP/Q3/RUS/1 • IP/Q4/RUS/1 
 
- 13 - 
 
On behalf of the rightholder, the actions envi saged by the customs legislation of the Customs 
Union and the present federal law may be committed by his/her/it's representative. 
The Customs Register of Intellectual Property  Items is the main protecting instrument. 
The following may be included in the Customs Register of Intellectual Property 
Items (hereinafter referred to as "the register"): th e copyright law items, subjects of allied rights, 
trademarks, service marks and appellations of origin of products in respect of which the federal executive governmental body empowered in the area of customs affairs has taken a decision 
on taking measures relating to the suspension of  clearance of goods. Inclusion in the register 
is free of charge. The register shall be kept  by the federal executive governmental body 
empowered in the area of customs affairs in  the procedure established by this body. 
The intellectual property items, in respect of  which the federal executive governmental body 
empowered in the area of customs affairs has taken a decision on taking measures relating to the 
suspension of release of goods, shall be incl uded in the register on the condition that 
the rightholder ensures the performance of the un dertaking mentioned in Part 5 of Article 306 
of the Federal Law, by the methods envisaged by the civil legislation of the Russian Federation. 
Instead of security for the performance of the undertaking, the rightholder is entitled to file a contract of insurance for the risk of liability for infliction of harm for the benefit of the persons 
specified in Part 5 of Article 306 of the present fe deral law. In this case, the sum of security for 
the undertaking, or the insured amount, shall be at least 300,000 rubles. 
If within one month after the date of despatch of a notice on the decision taken on measures 
relating to the suspension of clearance of the goods the rightholder fails to file a document 
confirming security for the undertaking, or a contract of insurance for the risk of liability for 
infliction of harm, the federal executive govern mental body empowered in the area of customs 
affairs shall take a decision on refusal to include the intellectual property item in the register. 
The federal executive governmental body empowere d in the area of customs affairs shall ensure 
that the data in the register is published in its official publications and placed on its official internet website, in the procedure established by it. 
In accordance of Article 309 of Federal Law, from 27 November 2010, No. 311-FZ customs bodies' 
decisions on suspension of the release of goods; ex tension of the term of suspension of release of 
goods; revocation of a decision on suspension of the release of goods; and also on the granting of 
the right to information and to the taking of sa mples and specimens, shall be taken by a customs 
body not later than the next working day after th e date of discovery of signs of a breach of 
intellectual property rights, receipt of a relevant written application, or of the commission of another action deemed grounds for taking the relevant decision. 
In accordance of Article 331 of Customs Code of Customs Union if during realization of customs 
actions related to the placing under customs procedures goods containing objects of intellectual property included in the customs register kept by the customs body of the member-state of the 
Customs Union, the customs body finds signs of infr ingement of the rights for intellectual property, 
the release of such goods is suspended for ten working days. 
If there is a request from the rights holder or the party representing his interests, this period may 
be prolonged by the customs body, however, not more than ten working days, if the mentioned 
parties applied to the authorized bodies for prot ection of the rights of the rights holder, in 
compliance with the legislation of the member-states of the Customs Union. 
Decisions suspending the release of goods and prol onging the period of suspension of release of 
goods are adopted in writing by the head of the customs body or the person authorized by him. 
No later than within one working day following the day of adoption of the decision suspending the 
release of goods containing objects of intellec tual property, the customs body shall notify 
the declaring party and the rights holder or th e parties representing their interests of such 
suspension, the reasons and periods of suspension, as well as report to the declaring party the name (full name) and the place of location (a ddress) of the rights holder and/or the party 
representing his interests, and to the rights holder or the party representing his interests the name 
(full name) and place of location (address) of the declaring party. IP/Q/RUS/1 • IP/Q2/RUS/1 • IP/Q3/RUS/1 • IP/Q4/RUS/1 
 
- 14 - 
 
  Upon the expiry of the period of suspension  of the release of goods containing objects 
of intellectual property, the release of such goods is renewed and is carried out according to the procedure specified in the Customs Code of the Customs Union, except for the cases when 
the customs body gets documents confirming the with drawal of goods, their arrest or confiscation, 
or other documents in compliance with the legislation of the member-states of the Customs Union. 
Customs bodies may suspend the release of goods containing objects of intellectual property not 
included in the customs register; kept by the customs body of a member state of the Customs 
Union and the joint customs register of objects of intellectual property of member states of the 
Customs Union, without application of the rights holder, according to the procedure specified in the legislation of the member-states of the Customs Union. 
The rights holder shall be held liable, in compliance with the civil legislation of member-states of 
the Customs Union for property damage incurred on  the declaring party, the owner, the recipient 
of the goods containing objects of intellectual prop erty as a result of suspension of the release of 
goods in compliance with the present Chapter, if viol ation of the rights of the rights holder is not 
found. 
ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS 12 Please describe how the legislatio n of the Russian Federation meets the 
requirements of Article 41 of the TRIPS Agreem ent. Please cite the relevant provisions. 
 Different provisions of following legislative acts: the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the Code 
of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offences; the Criminal Code of the 
Russian Federation; the Arbitration Procedure Code  of the Russian Federation; the Civil Procedure 
Code of the Russian Federation; the Criminal Procedural Code of the Russian Federation; the Federal Law from 27 November 2010, No. 311-FZ "On Customs Regulation in the 
Russian Federation"; the Federal Law from 26 July 2006, No. 135-FZ "On Competition Protection". 
In order to increase the effectiveness of IPR litigations, in March 2013, an Intellectual Property 
Arbitration Court was created. 
13. Please indicate the authorities re sponsible for the application of the 
measures provided by the legislation of the Russian Federation to combat 
counterfeiting and piracy. Please explai n whether the competent authorities are 
empowered to act ex officio and, if so, plea se indicate the enforcement actions that may 
be taken. Please cite the relevant  provisions of the legislation. 
 In the Russian Federation, the authorities responsi ble to combat counterfeiting and piracy are: the 
Ministry of Interior; the Investigation Comity, the Prosecutor, and the Federal Customs Service. 
I n  a c c o r d a n c e  t o  t h e  t h i r d  p a r t  o f  A r t i c l e  2 0  o f  t h e  C r i m i n a l  P r o c e d u r a l  C o d e  o f  t h e  
Russian Federation, criminal cases related to the illegal use of objects of copyright or related 
rights, as well as: the acquisition, storage or carriage of counterfeited copies of works or 
phonograms for the purpose of sale carried out on a large scale; illegal use of an invention, useful model, or industrial design; disclosure of the essence of an invention, useful model, or industrial design without the consent of its author or applicant, and before the official publication of 
information about them; illegal acquisition of authorship, or the compelling to co-authorship, 
are considered as criminal cases of the private-public prosecution and are initiated only upon application from the victim, or from his legal representative, but are not subject to the termination 
in connection with the victim's reconciliation with the accused, with the exception of the cases 
envisaged in Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. IP/Q/RUS/1 • IP/Q2/RUS/1 • IP/Q3/RUS/1 • IP/Q4/RUS/1 
 
- 15 - 
 
In accordance to the third part of Article 20 of Cr iminal Procedural Code of the Russian Federation, 
the head of an investigative agency, the investigat or, as well as the enquirer with the consent of 
the procurator, shall institute a criminal case on any crime indicated in parts two and three of this Article and in the absence of an application of th e victim or his legal representative, if the crime 
has been committed with respect to a person who, due to his dependent or helpless state or for 
other reasons cannot defend his rights and legal interests. The other reasons shall also include the case of commission of a crime by a person the information about whom is unknown. 
All other acts committed under Articles 146, 147 and 180 of Criminal Code of the 
Russian Federation are criminal cases of public ch arge and are raised in an order established by 
Article 146 Criminal Procedural Code of Russian Federation. 
14. Please describe any new initiatives th at are planned to improve the enforcement 
of intellectual property rights in the Russian Federation. Is there a particular action plan 
in place?  
There is no particular action plan on in tellectual property rights enforcement in 
the Russian Federation. Every competent body has a goal to promote end increase the protection of IPR. 
However, some initiatives have recently been realized. First of all, the creation in March 2013 of 
the Intellectual Property Arbitration Court. 
The second initiative is the fight against internet piracy. The first step was done in July with the 
adoption of Federal Law No. 187- ФЗ. The new "Antipiracy Law" introduces the principle of liability 
of internet service providers, mechanisms for blockage of illegal content by a court decision. For 
the moment, the scope of the Law is limited to films, but different amendments concerning the extension of scope of protection are in the stage of public discussions. 
4  RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS POSED BY THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 
4.1  Responses to Original Questions
6 
1. Article 1232 (IP/N/1/RUS/O/2 at 359): We are concerned that this may impose a 
formality. Do rightsholders have to regist er alienations of exclusive rights? Would a 
foreign author who sells or assigns a right have to register such sale/assignment in 
Russia?  
According to Article 1232 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation (hereinafter – CC RF) in cases 
when the result of intellectual activity or means of  individualization is subject to state registration, 
alienation of the exclusive right to such result or such means by contract, pledge of this right, and 
grant of the right of use of such result or such me ans by contract, and likewise also the transfer of 
the exclusive right to such result or such means without a contract are subject to state registration.  
 
Exclusive rights to such objects of intellectual property as inventions, utility models, industrial designs, trademarks and service marks (hereinaft er – trademarks) shall be recognized on the 
condition of their state registration. Regarding computer programs, databasesand topology of 
integrated circuits state registration is conducted at the option of the rightholder.  
 Thus currently in the Russian Federation subjects to state registration are contracts for the 
alienation of the exclusive right to an invention, utility model, industrial design, computer 
program, database, topology of integrated circuit and contracts for grant of the right of use (including license contracts and franchise) and contract for the pledge of an exclusive right to 
invention, utility model, industrial design, trademark, topology of integrated circuit. 
 Order and terms of state registration of the fo ur abovementioned types of juridical facts are 
established by the Government of the Russian Federation. 
 
                                               
6 Responses circulated in document IP/C/W/592 to questions posed in document IP/C/W/589. IP/Q/RUS/1 • IP/Q2/RUS/1 • IP/Q3/RUS/1 • IP/Q4/RUS/1 
 
- 16 - 
 
  In regard to objects of copyrights and related rights which do not need to make state registration,  
it is stipulated in Article 1259 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation.  2. Article 1234 (IP/N/1/RUS/O/2 at 360-361): We have two concerns here. 
1) Paragraph 1 seems to require a complete transfer of all the rights as the only type of 
exclusive license that an author can give. Can an author provide an exclusive license 
limited to only one right (i.e., reproducti on) and maintain ownership of the other 
exclusive rights? 2) Paragraph 2 appears to impose a formality ( see the term "subject to 
state registration."). Do rightsholders have to register the contract of alienation of 
exclusive rights? Would a foreign author who sells or assigns a right have to register 
such sale/assignment in Russia? 
 
Article 1233 of the Civil Code of the Russian Fede ration provides two kinds of contract on the 
disposal of an exclusive right by rightholder: Cont ract for the Alienation of an Exclusive Right (Civil 
Code of the Russian Federation, Article 1234) and License Contract (License Contract, Article 
1235). 
License Contract provided in Article 1234 of the Ci vil Code of the Russian Federation Contract for 
the Alienation of an Exclusive Right provide author's (rightholder's) possibility to transfer (alienate) 
the exclusive right belonging to him to a result of intellectual activity or a means of individualization in full scope to the other party (the recipient) that means absence of the copyright to use transmitted the result of intellectual activity in any way subsequently. By a 
contract for the alienation this right shall pass to the recipient acquiring the result of intellectual 
activity. 
In Article 1235 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation stipulates that a license contract (on 
submitting of an exclusive license or nonexclusive li cense). Such kind of contract is widely used in 
all countries as the rightholder's method of disposal of exclusive rights whereby the licensor (rightholder) saves the exclusive right to a result of intellectual activity and the licensee may use 
the specific result of intellectual activity in stipulated ways on certain territory by certain terms. 
Conclusion of License Contract shall entail a transition of the exclusive right to the licensee. 
In case the author (rightholder) concludes a contract about alienation of the exclusive right to the 
result of intellectual activity or to the means of  individualization with whom provide a procedure of 
state registration, than this contract also needs to state registration. 
Mandatory state registration are required only in the Patent Rights Object (CC RF, Chapter 72), 
Achievements of Breeding (CC RF, Chapter 73), Me ans of Individualization (CC RF, Chapter 76). 
According contracts about alienation of the exclus ive right to the indicated result of intellectual 
activity shall be subject to state registration also (paragraph 2 of Article 1232 of the CC RF). 
Contracts about alienation of the exclusive rights to copyright or related right are not subject of 
state registration. 
 3. Article 1235 (2) (IP/N/1/RUS/O/2 at 361- 362): We are concerned that this may 
impose a formality. Do rightsholders have to  register license contracts? Would a foreign 
author who enters a license contract have to  register the license contract in Russia? 
 If authors (rightholders) conclude License Contracts about granting right to use the result of 
intellectual activity which needs to state registration, this contract also needs to state registration. 
 Currently subjects of state registration are license contracts for the rights of use of an invention, 
utility model, industrial design, trademark, and topology of integrated circuit (paragraph 2 of 
Article 1232 CCRF).  That being said, it is worth noting that there is a pending project of Federal Law No. 47538-6 
under consideration by the State Duma of the Federal Assembly « Introducing Amendments to the 
First, Second, Third and the Fourth Parts of the Ci vil Code of the Russian Federation and ndividual 
legislative acts of the Russian Federation», deve loped by the Presidential Council of the Russian 
Federation on codification and improvement of civil legislation (hereinafter – CC RF Project) 
 CC RF Project suggests radical changes to state regi stration of contracts for the disposition of the 
exclusive right to objects of intellectual property . In developing the CC RF Project, provisions of IP/Q/RUS/1 • IP/Q2/RUS/1 • IP/Q3/RUS/1 • IP/Q4/RUS/1 
 
- 17 - 
 
the Singapore Treaty on the Law of Trademarks ratified by Federal Law No.98-FZ d.d. 23.05.2009 
«On Ratification of the Singapore Treaty on the Law of Trademarks» were considered. 
 
According to CC RF Project state registration of the grant of the right of use of an invention, utility 
model, industrial design, computer program, topo logy of integrated circuit, and trademark by a 
license contract can be conducted on the request of the parties without providing the contract itself.  
 
4. Article 1240 (IP/N/1/RUS/O/2 at 363): We are concerned that this provision could nullify negotiated terms by authors of underlying works. For example, if a musical 
composition is used in a movie – either a pre-existing recording or one created for the 
movie – the author of the composition often maintains some rights, such as the right of 
public performance. Can a composer's contract require that a film incorporating her music only be shown in theaters/transmitt ed by broadcasters that are licensed to 
publicly perform musical compositions or  would 1240(2) nullify such a contract?  
 
A film (audiovisual work) is an independent complex object of author rights (Civil Code of the 
Russian Federation, Article 1259). 
 According to paragraph 1 of Article 1240 of the CC  RF a person who has organized the creation of 
a complex object including several protected results of intellectual activity (e.g. the film) shall 
obtain the right of use of these films on the basis of contracts (for the alienation of the exclusive 
right or license contracts) concluded with the rightholders on the respective results of intellectual activity, which had been used in the process of creation of the film. 
 
Herewith License Contract about granting right to use (e.g. a music in the film) recognized be invalid in case if such contract contains limiting to use music in the film.  
 
Specified positions of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation correspond to positions of subparagraph (b) of paragraph 2 of Article 14 bis of the Berne Convention for the Protection of 
Literary and Artistic Works from 9th September 1886 (farther Berne Convention) which establishes 
that in the countries of Berne Union where legislation recognize authors as primary possessor of 
copyrights about author's cinematographic work who brought creative contribution in creation of this work; if they pledged to bring creative cont ribution in creation of cinematographic work and 
they have not some restrictive or special conditions, these authors may not prevent to use 
cinematographic work for reproduction, spreading,  public presentation and performance, report 
along wires for general information, broadcast on the air or another public report the work, and 
also forbid a subtitling and a duplication text of cinematographic work. 
 Thereby author of music may conclude with a person who has organized the creation of a complex object License Contract about the use of his musical work in complex object, e.g. in the film, or 
contract for the alienation the exclusive right by created musical work. 
 In case when concluding License Contract with author of musical work are used in the film, author 
of music grant to producer of film right to use his musical work in the film in all methods of use the 
film including public performance (in case of use in cinema, for example), communication over the air or by the cable. Moreover in accordance with paragraph 5 of Article 1263 of the CC RF 
composer shall keep the exclusive right to his work and may use his work in any method not 
prohibited by law, if he hadn't transfer exclus ive right to his work to the preparer in full. 
 The procedure of Conclusion a Contract for the alienation the exclusive rights of the musical work 
is use when a musical work is created spatially for being included in audiovisual work. 
 
5. Article 1245 (IP/N/1/RUS/O/2 at 367): Please clarify what rightholders are 
covered by authors, performers and manufacturers in the sound recording context. 
Chapter 71 addresses the manufacturers of and performers on sound recordings, but there is no mention of their author. When you refer to the author of the sound recording 
receiving 40% of the fee collected, do you me an the author of the musical composition 
that is recorded? How is the musical composition encompassed on a sound recording compensated under Article 1245?   IP/Q/RUS/1 • IP/Q2/RUS/1 • IP/Q3/RUS/1 • IP/Q4/RUS/1 
 
- 18 - 
 
  In Article 1245 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation rightholders who have the right to 
compensation for free reproduction of phonograms and audiovisual works exclusively for personal 
purposes are authors (authors of musical works (music and text) fixed in the phonograms and 
authors of audiovisual works); performers (performers who fixed their performance in the 
phonograms and performers who fixed their perfor mance in the audiovisual works); preparers of 
phonograms and preparers of audiovisual works who have the exclusive rights acting (have 
recognized) on the territory of the Russian Federation in accordance with Articles 1256, 1321 and 
1328 of the Civil Сode of the Russian Federation. 
Rightholders have right to compensation in accordance with paragraph 2 of Article 1273 of the 
Civil Code of the Russian Federation. 
Importers and manufacturers of equipment and storage devices used for reproduction for personal 
purposes shall pay compensation to indicated righ tholders in accordance with Article 1245 of the 
Civil Сode of the Russian Federation. 
Chapter 71 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federa tion are mentioned in the question is dedicated 
to general questions of rights related with copyright. 
6. Article 1249 (IP/N/1/RUS/O/2 at 369): We are concerned that this may impose a 
formality. Do rightsholders have to register  computer programs or databases for those 
items to receive protection or need to regi ster "legally-significant actions" regarding 
computer programs and/or databases? What  must be registered under Article 1249? 
 As defined in paragraph 4 of Article 1259 CC RF for th e protection of copyright, the registration of 
the work or other formalities is not required. With respect to computer programs and databases, 
registration is possible in accordance with su bparagraph 2 of paragraph 4 of Article 1259 and 
Paragraph 1 of Article 1262 CC RF. Such registration  is not right-establishing and is optional. 
 
If the rightholder has registered a computer program or a database in the Federal body of executive authority for intellectual property, contract s for the alienation of the exclusive right to a 
computer program or database as well as passa ge of the exclusive right to such program or 
database are subject to registration in the Fede ral body of executive authority for intellectual 
property (Paragraph 5 of Article 1262 CCRF)  
Article 1249 CC RF does not provide any provisions on registration of computer programs or 
database or connected legally significant action s being obligatory. The article considers fees 
collected for the taking of legally significant actions connected with state registration of computer 
programs, databases, contracts for the alienation of the exclusive right to a computer program or 
database as well as passage of the exclusive righ t to such program or database (paragraph 1 of 
Article 1249 CC RF)  
Unlike other results of intellectual activity or means of individualization, registered in the Federal 
body of executive authority for intellectual proper ty, fees for which are set by the Government of 
the Russian Federation, fees connected with computer programs, databases and topology of 
integrated circuits are established by the legislation of the Russian Federation on taxes and levies. 
The Tax Code of the Russian Federation establishes a list of legally significant actions for the taking of which state fees shall be collected, their amounts, procedure and times for payment, and 
also the bases for freeing from payment of the state fees, reduction of their amounts, 
postponement of payment or return of fees. 
 
7. Articles 1273 and 1306 (IP/N/1/RUS/O/2 at 379 and 390): These articles appear 
to provide an overly broad permission for re production for personal use. Please explain 
how these articles address the 3-step test  under TRIPS Article 13, including whether 
and how these provisions permit reproduction of only one copy for personal use, where 
that reproduction is made fr om a lawfully acquired copy. 
 Limitations and restrictions from rightholder's exclusive rights were formulated in Berne 
Convention for the Protection of Literary an d Artistic Works from 9 September 1886 (Berne 
Convention). In accordance with paragraph 2 of Article 9 of Berne Convention members have right IP/Q/RUS/1 • IP/Q2/RUS/1 • IP/Q3/RUS/1 • IP/Q4/RUS/1 
 
- 19 - 
 
to foresee in national legislation the restrictions of rights for reproduction of literary and artistic 
works on condition that in national legislation shall be indicated cases of such restrictions and it shall not cause harm to normal exploitation of works and infringe author's legal interests.   
Provisions of paragraph 2 of Article 9 of Berne Convention reflected in Article 13 of the TRIPS 
Agreement as a quota about possible restrictions or  limitations from the exclusive copyrights and 
related rights. 
 
Paragraph 2 of Article 1229 of the Civil Code of  the Russian Federation correspond to above-
mentioned international contracts which determines that provided cases of free reproduction for personal purposes do not cause unjustified harm to the ordinary use of the results of intellectual 
activity and do not impair in an unjustified manner the lawful interests of the rightholders. 
 Article 1273 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation establishes cases of free gratuitous 
reproduction of works (established provisions concern by related rights also in accordance with 
Article 1306 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federati on), if it are realized with next conditions: 
 
 individual person realize the reproduction; 
 the reproduction are realized exclusively for personal purposes; 
 a work lawfully made subject by the reproduction. 
 
Herewith the indicate Article contains list of free gratuitous reproduction. These are cases when 
even intention to use corresponding work for personal purposes do not liberate a citizen from necessity to get rightholder's permission and to pay appropriate compensation. Herewith with a 
passing of Part 4 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation such cases were complemented by 
two new limitations:  
Video recording of an audiovisual work in case of its public performance at a please open for free 
attendance or at a place where there are a significant number of persons present not belonging to the usual circle of a family is not admitted even for personal purposes (subparagraph 5 of Article 1273 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation); 
 
Reproduction of an audiovisual work with the ai d of professional equipment not meant for use in 
home conditions is not admitted (subparagraph 6 of Article 1273 of the Civil Code of the Russian 
Federation). Both indicated limitations allow to intensify fight with fabrication of a pirate 
production.  
Accordingly in accordance with indicated quotas individual person have right to reproduce (means 
to manufacture for satisfaction of own, family, household and other needs are not connected with realization of entrepreneurial acting) a copy of the film from TV broadcast, to reproduce work are placed in Internet in memory of computer, to make copy of audio recording (phonogram) or 
magazine article on a tape-recording or on a copier. Herewith the reproduction shall be realized 
such person personal purposes of who taken in attention.  
Provisions of Article 1273 of the Civil Code of th e Russian Federation don't spread to legal person 
who may not refer to inner needs as to basic to reproduce work free even if such actions are not related with person's commercial activity or are made to individual person's order. 
 
8. Article 1274 (1) (1 and 2) (IP/N/1/RUS/ O/2 at 380): These copyright exceptions 
(IP/N/1/RUS/O/2 at 379) appear overly broad. Both Articles 10 (1) and (2) of Berne 
Convention, which are incorporated in Article 1274 (1 and 2), require that such use be 
compatible with fair practi ce. Please explain how this fair practice limitation is 
addressed by Article 1274 (1 and 2). 
 
Provisions 1 and 2 of Article 1274 of the Civil Co de of the Russian Federation provide the use of 
works without the consent of the rightholder and wi thout the payment of compensation in case of 
citation in the original language or in translation for scientific, polemical/critical, or information purposes of works lawfully made public in an amount justified by the purpose of citation, including 
the reproduction of excerpts from newspaper and magazine articles in the form of press surveys 
and also in cases of use of works lawfully made public and excerpts from them as illustrations in IP/Q/RUS/1 • IP/Q2/RUS/1 • IP/Q3/RUS/1 • IP/Q4/RUS/1 
 
- 20 - 
 
  publications, radio and television broadcasts, and sound and video recordings of an instructional 
nature in an amount justified by the purpose thereof. 
Necessary to note that provisions of Article 1274 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation are 
not subjected to widened interpretation and ap ply in the relationship with paragraph 5 of 
Article 1229 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation establishes that limitation from exclusive 
rights to results of intellectual activity shall be established on the condition that such limitation 
does not contradict to the ordinary use of the wo rks or object of the related right and does not 
impair the lawful interests of the rightholders. Indicated provision corresponds to Article 13 of 
TRIPS. 
9. Article 1274 (1)(6) (IP/N/1/RUS/O/2 at  380): We are concerned that this 
exception is overly broad. Woul d a non-profit entity be able to use this exception when 
the copyright owner has made the work available in the same format? 
 
In accordance of provision 1 of Article 1274 CC RF  right to use of work lawfully made public 
without the consent of the rightholder and with out the payment of compensation in case of 
reproduction without the extraction of profit in do t-relief type or other special means for the blind. 
No matter organizational legal form of entity who use work for purpose of reproduction for the 
blind. In present case shall be observed next cond itions: such reproduction shall be realized from 
work lawfully made public; such reproduction an d further spreading of work shall be realized 
without extraction of profit. 
 Works representing the copy of work in any material  form in quantity which enough for satisfaction 
of requirement of public from depending of ch aracter of work are admitted be made public. 
Indicated provisions do not provide limitation of ex clusive right of works to benefit of persons with 
limited possibility including disabled persons about hearing as it provided in legislation of United 
States of America, for example. 
In some countries (e.g.in Article 37 of the Copyri ght Law of Japan from 1970) such limitation of 
exclusive right spreads by works lawfully prom ulgated (but not made public as in Russian 
legislation) that widen volume of this limitation. 
10. Article 1274(3) (IP/N/1/RUS/O/2 at 380): This exception appears to be overly 
board. Please explain how the exception limi ts taking only the portion of the work 
necessary for the purposes of the parody.  
The possibility of creation of work s in the genre of a literary, musical, or other parody, or in the 
genre of caricature on the basis of work lawf ully made public without the consent of the 
rightholder and without the payment of compensation  and subsequent use of caricature or parody 
without the payment of compensation to author of original work are established in paragraph 3 of 
Article 1274 of the Civil CodeCivil Code of the Russian Federation.  
 Provisions of paragraph 3 of Article 1274 of the Ci vil CodeCivil Code of the Russian Federation on 
free creation and use in the genre of a literary, musical, or other parody, or in the genre of 
caricature on the basis of another (original) work lawfully made public without the consent of the author of such original work appeared in Russian  legislation as a result of borrowed approach of 
Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliame nt and of the Council of 22/05/2001 "On the 
harmonization of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society" according to sub point (k) of point 3 of Article 5 of the Directive what admit may provide for exceptions or limitations in case of use for the purpose of caricature, parody or pastiche.  
 
Article 1274 of the Civil CodeCivil Code of the Russian Federation provides that parodies and 
caricatures shall be used in for Informational, Scholarly, Instructional, or Cultural Purposes, how it 
show name of Article. 
 In this way author of original work have not right to prohibit to use his work in indicated method 
on the basic of provisions of Part 4 of the Civi l CodeCivil Code of the Ru ssian Federation, but in 
case if parody or caricature denigrate honor, dign ity or reputation of author of original work, he IP/Q/RUS/1 • IP/Q2/RUS/1 • IP/Q3/RUS/1 • IP/Q4/RUS/1 
 
- 21 - 
 
have right to protect it in order are established in Article 125 of the Civil CodeCivil Code of the 
Russian Federation.  Should take in attention that creation of parody or caricature is not a recast of primary (original) 
work; it is creation of new, independent work. Pa rodies and caricatures are recognizable that is 
associated with primary (original) works because of likeness of maintenance (what is not copyrighted), but not because of likeness wit form (what is copyrighted). 
 
11. Article 1280(4) (IP/N/1/RUS/O/2 at 382): This language appears to be overly broad. Please explain how this article addr esses the requirements of the 3-step test 
under TRIPS Article 13. 
 
The provisions of the Article 1280 explains in de tail rights of the owner of a copy a computer 
program or a database. These rights are limited to some cases. The main condition of the article is 
that the person has the obligation to own the copy lawfully. Paragraph 4 of the article 4 
implements the provision of Article 13 of the TR IPS Agreement, making an explanation that the 
application of the provisions provided by the Article must not cause unjustified harm to the normal 
use of a computer program or database and must not impair in an unjustified manner the lawful 
interests of the author or rightholder. 
 
12. Articles 1285 and 1307 (IP/N/1/RUS/O/2 at 383 and 391): We are concerned that 
Articles 1285 and 1307 appear to limit a ri ghtsholders ability to enter into exclusive 
licenses for a specific right and to require the rightsholders to transfer the "work in full." Can a rightsowner transfer one exclusiv e right, for example, e.g., the right to 
perform a work, and still maintain owners hip of the other exclusive rights, e.g., 
reproduction, synchronization?  
Author or subject of related right have right to conclude with other person contract of alienation 
(transmission) of the exclusive right to the concrete result of intellectual activity that is mean transmission of the exclusive right in full withou t author's possibility to keep right to use such 
result in accordance with Articles 1285 and 1307  of the Civil CodeCivil Code of the Russian 
Federation. 
 In this way in case if rightholder transferred the ex clusive right to use result of intellectual activity 
to other person, he does not keep right to use such result. 
 Herewith the Civil CodeCivil Code  of the Russian Federation provides also another model of 
disposal of the exclusive right when rightholder have right to grant for other persons right to use 
result of intellectual activity by means of conclusion License Contract are provided in Articles 1286 and 1308 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. Under the conditions of License Contract rightholder stay as holder of the exclusive right an d the licensee acquires right to use object on the 
conditions established by a contract only (e.g. the reproduction only or the public performance 
only) on the definite territo ry in definite terms.  
 
13. Article 1334(2) (IP/N/1/RUS/O/2 at 399) : Any copyrighted work or object of 
related rights incorporated into a database must be subject to the rightholders' exclusive rights. Please explain how Article 1 334(2) accounts for the rights of authors of 
works included in a database. 
 Paragraph 2 of Article 1334 stipulates that exclusive rights of the preparer of a database are recognized and are effective regardless of the righ ts of authors of works included in a database. 
 
14. We have numerous questions to help us understand Section 6 of Chapter 71 and how the rights of a publisher of a scientific, li terary or artistic work differ from the rights 
of the authors and the authors' assignees/tra nsferees of those works, as set forth in 
Chapter 70: 
 
(a) Please explain the relationship betw een the publisher protected here and the 
author/assignees protected in chapter 70.  Specifically, how does this section 
relate to chapter 70, which gives these rights to the author and her assignees? Who has the rights to the work, the author/assignees under 
chapter 70, or the publisher under Chapter 71? IP/Q/RUS/1 • IP/Q2/RUS/1 • IP/Q3/RUS/1 • IP/Q4/RUS/1 
 
- 22 - 
 
   
(b) Article 1337(1) (IP/N/1/RUS/O/2 at 400) appears to take works out of the 
public domain and give the publisher exclusive rights to that work. What works can be removed from the public domain? 
 
(c) Article 1340 (IP/N/1/RUS/O/2 at 401) appears to override the copyright 
term provided Article 1281 and override any contract or agreement that an 
author may have entered with a publisher. Please explain. 
 Intellectual Rights to works of scholarship, literature, or art first made public after their passage into the public domain are rights neighboring on copyright (neighboring rights) according to 
Article 1303 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. 
 Section 6 of Chapter 71 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation dedicated to publisher's right to 
works of Scholarship, Literature and Art. 
 
According to Article 1337 CC RF publisher is the citizen who lawfully made public or organized the 
making public of a work of scholarship, literature,  or art previously not made public and that has 
gone into the public domain (Article 1282 CC RF) or that is in the public domain by virtue of the 
fact that it is not protected by copyright. 
 
Author or other person with author's consent have the right to make the work public according to 
Article 1268 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federati on. In this case if author during the life did 
not made public his work himself or not gave consent to do such actions to other person (also in 
case if author did not lived any prohibition during his life) than such work may be made public by 
author's successor during the period of validity of exclusive right to work. 
 
Upon the expiration of the time period of effect iveness of the exclusive right, a work including 
previously unpublished, shall enter the public domain and may be used freely by any person 
without any consent or permission and without payment of author's compensation in accordance with Article 1282 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation.  
 
For purpose of making public of previously unpubli shed works Division 6 of Chapter 71 of the Civil 
Code of the Russian Federation provides other pe rsons possibility to make public of work after 
termination of guarding of exclusive rights in case of absence author's written prohibition such 
work. 
 
I n  t h i s  w a y  p u b l i s h e r  i s  n o t  a u t h o r  o f  w o r k  o r  s u c c e s s o r ,  h e  i s  p e r s o n  w h o  m a d e  p u b l i c  w o r k  
previously unpublished and is entered the public domain.  
 
Publisher has publisher's exclusive right to work ma de public by him and right to indicate his name 
on exemplar of work made public and in other cases of use (including translation or other recast of 
work). Publisher's exclusive right to work coincides with habitual copyright to use work in content, 
only with taking of right to translate, recast an d realize an architectural, designer, town-planning 
landscape project. In this way publisher of work may not control of use of work in translated or 
reprocessed form.   
Outside publisher's sphere of control is spreading of original or exemplars of work are imposed in 
civil use (principle of depletion of rights) lawfully.  Publisher's right in the Civil Code of the Russian Federation is right that not make damage to 
author's interests and to his successor. Publisher's right is made to protect the interests of 
investigator, allow to reward them for long or pe rennial search and further to open new creative 
results. 
 
Need to mark that protection of right of persons who make public previously unpublished works 
and are entered the public domain are provided in provisions of Article 4 of Directive of European 
Union 93/98/EEC of 29/10/1993 harmonizing the te rm of protection of copyright and certain 
related rights, in accordance with it any person who, after the expiry of copyright protection, for 
the first time lawfully publishes or lawfully communicates to the public a previously unpublished 
work, shall benefit from a protection equivalent to the economic rights of the author. 
 IP/Q/RUS/1 • IP/Q2/RUS/1 • IP/Q3/RUS/1 • IP/Q4/RUS/1 
 
- 23 - 
 
The Civil Code of the Russian Federation establishes several important requirements about object 
of publisher's right: 
 
 It shall be work of scholarship, literature or art; 
 
 This work shall be recognized as object of copyright in accordance with acting Russian 
legislation; 
 
 It shall not be made public previously; 
 
 The work shall not be in state and municipal archives; 
 
 The work shall be made public firstly on the territory of the Russian Federation or beyond 
the boundaries but by citizen of the Russian Federation. 
 
Replacement of terms in comparison with Article 1281 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation 
in Article 1240 indicated do not happen. 
 
Introduction in Russian legislation of publisher's rights are stipulate for necessity of cultural development of society in relations with promulgati on of work of Scholarship, Literature and art 
previously unpublished that is mean unknown t ill this event and for encouragement of persons 
who made these work are known for society (made them promulgation – public). 
 The work which have expired term of exclusive righ t enters to the public domain that is mean it 
may be used freely by any person without any consent or permission and without payment of 
author's compensation. But there is question abou t possibility to use unknown work is entered to 
the public domain. 
 
In case of made public work is entered to the pu blic domain on the condition that such publishing 
do not contradict the author's will, publisher have right to use such work (the publisher's exclusive right) effective for 25 years counting from January 1 of the year following the year of publishing, 
namely to use the work with methods are prov ided in subpoints 1-8 and 11 of point 2 of 
Article 1270 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation.  
15. We remain concerned that Russian law might not adequately protect foreign works 
and related rights, including pre-existing wo rks and related rights. We have noted that 
there are numerous provisions dealing with this issue (Articles 1231, 1256, 1304, 1318, 
1321, 1324, 1328 and 1341), but were unable to  confirm the required coverage. Some of 
our concern may relate to translations issu es or to the accuracy of IP/N/RUS/0/2.  
 
Article 1256 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federati on defines realization of the exclusive right to 
Works of Scholarship, Literature, and Art on the territory of the Russian Federation because of 
publishing on the territory of the Russian Federation  or because of principle of author's citizenship 
of such works (or them successor). 
 
Russian legislator proceeds from place of publishing of work (or his existence in objective form in case of absence of publishing) to give the exclus ive right to work on the territory of the Russian 
Federation. 
 
In case if work made public on the territory of the Russian Federation than the exclusive right to 
such work shall be recognized for authors (or their legal successors) regardless of their citizenship. 
 
It concerns also cases when work not made public existing in some objective form on the territory of the Russian Federation. 
 
A work also shall be considered first made public by publication in the Russian Federation if, in the course of thirty days after the date of first pub lication, it was published on the territory of the 
Russian Federation. 
 In case if work made public beyond the boundarie s of the territory of the Russian Federation, need 
to take by attention author's citizenship (or his legal successor). If work made public beyond the 
boundaries of the territory of the Russian Federati on author of work (his legal successor) being IP/Q/RUS/1 • IP/Q2/RUS/1 • IP/Q3/RUS/1 • IP/Q4/RUS/1 
 
- 24 - 
 
  citizen of the Russian Federation, Russian legislat or keeps the exclusive right to work by such 
persons.  It concerns also cases when work not made public exists in some objective form beyond the 
boundaries of the territory of the Russian Federation at author or his legal successor who are 
citizens of the Russian Federation.  
In other cases the exclusive right to works made pu blic or existing in some objective form beyond 
the boundaries of the Russian Federation and shall be recognized, in accordance with international treaties of the Russian Federation, for authors (or their legal successors) who are citizens of other states. Herewith the time period of the exclusive right established in the country of origin of the 
work may not exceeds the time period of the exclusive right to these works in the Russian 
Federation. In case if the time period of the exclus ive right in the country of origin of the work has 
expired and the exclusive right have entered the pu blic domain than this work enters the public 
domain in the Russian Federation too. Moreover primary rightholder is determined in accordance 
with a law of state where was happened a fact which is basis for acquisition of the copyright.  
According to point 3 of Article 1304 of the Civil Code  of the Russian Federation the granting on the 
territory of the Russian Federation of protection for objects of neighboring rights in accordance 
with the international treaties of the Russian Federation shall be conducted in case if in the country of origin of the work it have not entered the public domain and have not entered the public domain 
on the territory of the Russian Federation. 
 In other articles of the Civil Code of the Russi an Federation Russian legislator proceeds from 
principle of the citizenship/place of location or implementation (for the performance are not fixed 
in phonograms) / promulgation (phonograms) on the territory of the Russian Federation aside 
from the conditions of the international treaties of the Russian Federation for granting legal 
protection to some object of neighboring rights. 
 
16. Please advise which specific Article requires coverage for: 
 
(a) Authors who are nationals of a Bern e country for published and unpublished 
works 
 
The rights of the authors, who is a citizen of the Russian Federation – member of Berne 
Convention, are protected in accordance with subpo int 2 of point 1 of Article 1256 of the Civil Code 
of the Russian Federation. 
 
The rights of the authors who are citizens of other states works of whom made public beyond the boundaries of the territory of the Russian Federati on – member of Berne Convention, are protected 
on the territory of the Russian Federation on basi s of subpoint 3 of point 1 of Article 1256 of the 
Civil Code of the Russian Federation (international-l egal criterion) in accordance with provisions of 
Berne Convention.  
N e e d  t o  m a r k  t h a t  n a t i o n a l  r e g i m e  ( a r e  p r o v i d ed in Article 3 of Berne Convention) give the 
possibility to any citizen's work of any state who is member of Berne Convention to use protection 
in all countries of Berne Union including the Russian Federation. 
 
(b) Authors who are not nationals of a Be rne country for works first published, 
or published within 30 days, in a Berne country 
 
The rights of a foreign author who made public his works on the territory of the Russian Federation 
– member of Berne Convention are protected in  accordance with subpoint 1 of point 1 and 
subpoint 2 of Article 1256 of the Civil Code of th e Russian Federation (criterion of the place of 
promulgation of work). 
 The rights of authors who are  citizens of other states who made public works beyond the 
boundaries of the territory of the Russian Federation but in country – member of Berne 
Convention, are protected on the territory of the Ru ssian Federation on basis of subpoint 3 of point 
1 of Article 1256 of the Civil Code of the Russian  Federation (international-legal criterion) in 
accordance with provisions of Berne Convention. 
 IP/Q/RUS/1 • IP/Q2/RUS/1 • IP/Q3/RUS/1 • IP/Q4/RUS/1 
 
- 25 - 
 
(c) Authors who are not nationals of a Be rne country but who have their habitual 
residence in a Berne country 
 
The rights of authors who are not nationals of a Be rne country are protected on the territory of the 
Russian Federation on basis of subpoint 3 of point 1 of Article 1256 of the Civil Code of the Russian 
Federation (international-legal criterion) in accordance with international treaties of the Russian Federation. 
 
However in indicated cases necessary to pass that in cases if foreign author made public his work on the territory of the Russian Federation (or his not made public on the territory of the Russian 
Federation work exists in some objective form) he have legal protection in accordance with point 1 
of Article 1256 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. 
 The Russian Federation participated in following international treaties about copyright: the 
Universal Copyright Convention on 6th September 1952 (revised in Paris on 24
th July 1971), The 
Agreement about collaboration in sphere of copyri ght and related right are concluded in Moscow at 
24th September 1993, Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works (in 
editing Parisian Statement at 24th July 1971) - since 13th March 1995, The World Intellectual 
Property Organization (WIPO) Copyright Treaty on 20th December 1996 – since 2009.  Moreover the Russian Federation as successor of the USSR is connected two-way international 
treaties about mutual protection of copyrights with some states, e.g. with Sweden (15th April 
1986), with Armenia concluded Agreement abou t mutual protection of copyrights at 
25
th June 1993. 
 
(d) Authors of an audiovisual works the maker of which has its headquarters or 
habitual residence in a Berne country 
 
(e) Authors of works of architecture cons tructed in a Berne country or artistic 
work incorporated in a building or structure located in a Berne country 
 
Answer to two previous questions: The rights th e indicated category of authors are provided on 
the territory of the Russian Federation analogically  as for cases are viewed above that is mean on 
basis of point 1 of Article 1256 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. 
 
Herewith need to keep in mind that in point 3 of Article 1256 of the Civil Code of the Russian 
Federation are shown a peculiarities of acting of international-legal criterion on the territory of the 
Russian Federation. In indicated quota are shown that author of work or another primary 
rightholder is determined by the law of state on what territory happened fact of acquisition of copyrights at granting the protection to work on the territory of the Russian Federation in 
accordance with international treaties of the Russian Federation. These quota are provided for 
legislation about copyright of states where auth or or primary rightholder is a legal person. 
 
17. Please confirm that Russian Law provid es the owners of musical compositions a 
public performance right when that musi c is contained in audiovisual works and 
exhibited in theaters. What provisio n of the law provides this right? 
 
According to point 5 of Article 1263 of the Civil Co de of the Russian Federation the composer of 
created work keeps the exclusive right to use his work separately from creating film in which composition are concluded his musical work on condition that such author did not enter (on basis of Articles 1234 and 1285 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation) the exclusive right to 
musical work full to person who organized the crea tion of film (the producer – Article 1240 of the 
Civil Code of the Russian Federation).  
18. What is the term of protection fo r audiovisual works? The authors of the 
audiovisual work are defined in Article 1263. Is  the term of protection 70 years from the 
death of the last surviving author under Ar ticle 1281 (1)? If not, what Article governs 
the term of audiovisual works? 
 The term of protection for audiovisual work is th e term when the audiovisual work has protection 
in the territory of the Russian Federation. The term  of protection for audiovisual work is provided 
in Article 1281 of the Civil Code of the Russian Fede ration according to what the exclusive right to IP/Q/RUS/1 • IP/Q2/RUS/1 • IP/Q3/RUS/1 • IP/Q4/RUS/1 
 
- 26 - 
 
  work created in coauthorship shall be effective for the whole life of the author outliving the other 
coauthors plus seventy years, counting from January 1 of the year following the year of his death.  Moreover the Civil Code of the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic from 1964 what was 
acting before Law of the Russian Federation at 9th July 1993 № 5351-I "About copyright and 
related rights" provided legal person's copyrigh t (herewith according to Article 498 of the Civil 
Code of the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic from 1964 rights are arisen among legal 
persons primarily acted in perpetuity; in case of  reorganization of such legal person copyright 
entered by legal successor, and in case of liquid ation – by state). The copyright of legal persons 
what has raised before 3rd August 1993 stops after 70 years since the date of lawfully made public w o r k ,  i f  w o r k  u n p u b l i s h e d  t h a n  s i n c e  d a y  o f  c r e at i o n  o f  w o r k  w h a t  p r o v i d e d  i n  A r t i c l e  6  o f  t h e  
Federal Law of the Russian Federation from 18th December 2006 No. 231-FL "About introduction 
by acting Fourth Part of the Civi l Code of the Russian Federation". 
 
19. Article 1252.1.4 (IP/N/1/RUS/O/2 at 370). Please clarify what is meant by "non-
bona fide acquirer."  
 In case of breach of the exclusive right to the results of intellectual activity and to means of 
individualization rightholder have right in particul ar by the making of demand about the taking of 
the physical carrier are used or are destined for fulfillment of breach against the producer, 
importer, keepers, carrier, seller, other distributor, or bad faith recipient.  
 The bad faith recipient is a person who has acquir ed (with or without compensation) the physical 
carrier for fulfillment of breach from person who had not the right to alienate it about what 
acquirer knew or shall be known. Such definition  of the bad faith recipient follows from Article 302 
of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation.  
20. Article 1252.5. Provision allows equipment and materials used for infringing to be 
withdrawn from circulation and destroyed at  infringers expense, "except when being 
subject to be converted into the revenue of the Russian Federation." In light of 
Article 46 of the TRIPS Agreement, please expl ain the scope of this exception, and when 
it applies.  According to Article 46 of the TRIPS Agreement the judicial authorities shall have the authority to 
order that goods that they have found to be infringing be, without compensation of any sort, 
disposed of outside the channels of commerce in such a manner as to avoid any harm caused to the right holder, or, unless this would be contrary to existing constitutional requirements, 
destroyed. The judicial authorities shall also have the authority to order that materials and 
implements the predominant use of which has been  in the creation of the infringing goods be, 
without compensation of any sort, disposed of outside the channels of commerce in such a manner 
as to minimize the risks of further infringements. 
 Legislation of the Russian Federation provides quot as govern that counterfeit copies of works and 
turn materials and implements the predominant us e of which has been in the creation of the 
infringing of the intellectual rights shall be disposed of outside from commerce turn (point 5 of 
Article 1252 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation).  
Indicated actions may be realized by decision of court. Herewith legislation of the Russian 
Federation may comprise quotas allowing to exact to income of state materials and implements the predominant use of which has been in the creation  of the infringing of the intellectual rights. In 
particular in cases when introduction in commerce turn such goods is necessary for public 
interests, rightholder shall have the right to demand removal at the expense of the infringer of counterfeit goods, labels, and packaging of the goods on which an unlawfully used trademark or indication similar to it to the point of confusio n according to point 2 of Article 1515 of the Civil 
Code of the Russian Federation. In other words, in cases when goods on which counterfeit 
trademark are necessary for state in societal interests (e.g. on social need to children's community etc.) than counterfeit trademark are deleted and subject by recovery to income of the Russian 
Federation. 
 IP/Q/RUS/1 • IP/Q2/RUS/1 • IP/Q3/RUS/1 • IP/Q4/RUS/1 
 
- 27 - 
 
21. Article 1302 (and Art. 1312) (IP/N/1/RUS/ O/2 at 389) The title of this article 
"Security for a claim in a copyright violation case," does not seem to match its contents which forbids "using [counterfeit copies of a work] in civil-law transactions." Please 
clarify, because as written it appears that the scope of the article is much larger than its 
title. 
 Article 1302 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation establishes the right of court to forbid a 
defendant or other person with respect to whom there are sufficient bases to suppose that he is an 
infringer of copyright rights to take specific with the purpose of introducing into civil commerce copies of a work with respect to which it is supposed that they are counterfeit.  
 
The court also may impose seizure on all copies of a work with respect to which it is suspected 
that they are counterfeit and also on materials and equipment used or meant for their preparation or reproduction. 
 
In other words Article 1302 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation corresponds to her name (Security for a Claim in Cases on the Infringement of Copyright) and provides the possibility of 
application of security remedy with respect to co ntroversial copies of works and also corresponding 
materials and implements. 
 
22. Paragraph 4 of Article 1349 (IP/N/1/RU S/O/2). The Objects of Patent Rights 
 
4. The following shall not be objects of patent rights: 1) human cloning techniques; 
2) the techniques for modifying the ge netic integrity of human embryo cells; 
3) the uses of human embryos for industrial and commercial purposes; 4) other developments inconsistent with the public interest and humane and moral 
principles. 
 
Does "inconsistent with the public inte rest and humane and moral principles" in 
paragraph (4) have the same meaning as "protect[ion of] ordre public  or morality" as 
used in Article 27(2) of the TRIPS Agreement? 
 23. Paragraph 6 of Article 1349, provides: 
 
6. No legal protection shall be prov ided to the following as inventions: 
1) varieties of plants, breeds of animals and the biological methods for producing 
them, except for microbiological methods an d products produced by such methods; 
2) integrated circuit layout-designs.  (a) Article 27(3)(b) of the TRIPS Agreement requires Members to provide for sui 
generis protection for plants, if patent s cannot be granted for varieties of 
plants. How does the Russian Federati on provide protection for plants?  
Decree No. 735 of 14/09/2009, the Russian Federation Government 
Approving the Regulation on Patent Fees  and Other Types of Fees Related to 
Plant Variety Patents and State Regi stration of Agreements Assigning 
Exclusive Rights on Plant Variety, is no ted, but has this decree been notified 
to the WTO? 
 (b) How does the Russian Federation prov ide protection for integrated circuit 
designs? Order No. 323 of October 29, 2008 of the Ministry of Education and 
Science of Russia (Approving the Administrative Regulations to Govern the 
Performance by the Federal Service fo r Intellectual Property, Patents and 
Trademarks of its Functions to Process and Examine Applications for the 
Registration of Topographies of Integrated Circuits as well as to Grant of 
Certificates of State Registration of To pographies of Integrated Circuits in 
accordance with Established Procedure) is noted, has this order been notified 
to the WTO? 
 IP/Q/RUS/1 • IP/Q2/RUS/1 • IP/Q3/RUS/1 • IP/Q4/RUS/1 
 
- 28 - 
 
  Answers for three previous questions. 
 Paragraph 4 of Article 1349 CC RF as a whole establishes exclusions from patent rights of solutions contradicting societal interests and principles of humanity and morality, which are common 
exclusions from patent rights. Subparagraphs 1-3 of the abovementioned paragraph emphasize 
solutions recognized as subject to exclusion from patent rights. Similar approach is used on the European Union level: Additional Protocol on the Prohibition of Cloning Human Beings of 1998 to 
the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Dignity of the Human Being with regard to 
the Application of Biology and Medicine of 1997, Directive 98/44/EC.  It should be noted that provisions of 4quarter Article of the Paris Convention for the Protection of 
Industrial Property, according to which "The grant of a patent shall not be refused and a patent 
shall not be invalidated on the ground that the sale of the patented product or of a product obtained by means of a patented process is subject to restrictions or limitations resulting from the 
domestic law". Thus limitations or reductions of sales of a product in which the invention as well as 
utility model or industrial design applied for may be embodied, cannot serve as a basis for the recognition of the object of patent rights applied for as contradicting societal interests, principles of 
humanity and morality with the exception of the cases of direct prohibition of usage (sales) on the 
territory of the Russian Federation of such partic ular product as contradicting societal interests, 
principles of humanity and morality. The list of objects in Paragraph 4 of Article 1349 CC RF includes solutions commercial usage of which shall be prevented for the sake of public order 
maintenance and morality protection, including protection of life and health of the population as 
well as preventing extensive damage to the environment.  
Seemingly provisions of Paragraph 4 of Article 1349 CC RF imply the same meaning as provisions 
of TRIPS Article 27(2).  
Paragraph 6 of Article 1350 CCR F (in the ques tion Article 1349 was named mistakenly): Legal 
protection as inventions shall not be granted to: varieties of plants, breeds of animals and biological methods of obtaining them, with the exception of microbiological methods and products obtained through the use of such methods; the to pology of integrated circuits. Such objects are 
recognized as independent result of intellectua l activity (Paragraph 1 of Article 1225 CC RF) and 
are provided by CCRF with a separate ("special"») legal protection.  
Legal protection of varieties of plants and breeds of animals is granted by Chapter 73 CC RF as to 
achievements of breeding.  
Legal protection of integrated circuit layouts is  explained in Chapter 74 CC RF. CC RF retains the 
principles of protection and use of integrated circuit layouts established in Law of Russian Federation № 3526-I d.d. 23.09.1992 "On legal protection of topology of integrated circuits" in 
force prior to Part 4 CC RF. The legal protection gr anted by the present Code shall extend only to 
an original integrated circuit layout created as the result of the creative activity of an author 
and/or specialists unknown to the author in the area of integrated circuit layout development on the date of its creation (Paragraph 2 of Article 1448 CC RF). 
 
According to Article 1452 CC RF the rightholder, during the time period of effectiveness of the exclusive right to the layout may at his option register the layout with the Federal agency of 
executive authority for intellectual property. The rules of such optional state registration of 
topology of integrated circuits are determined  by the Administrative Rules of Procedure of 
execution by the Federal agency of executive authority for intellectual property, patents and 
trademarks functions of receiving applications for state registration of topology of integrated 
circuits and of their consideration and issuance in accordance with the established procedure of a 
certificate on state registration of an integrated circuit layout, approved by Order № 323 
d.d. 29.10.2008 of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation. 
 
24. Article 1359 (IP/N/1/RUS/O/2). Actions Not Deemed an Infringement of the Exclusive Right to an Invention, Utility Model or Industrial Design 
 
The following are not deemed an infrin gement of the exclusive right to an 
invention, utility model or industrial design: 2) the carrying out of scientific resear ch of a product or method in which the 
invention or utility model is used or of scie ntific research of an article in which the IP/Q/RUS/1 • IP/Q2/RUS/1 • IP/Q3/RUS/1 • IP/Q4/RUS/1 
 
- 29 - 
 
industrial design is used or the carrying out of an experiment in respect of such 
product, method or article; 
 Would experiments using protecte d inventions or designs to experiment on other things 
infringe a protected invention or design? For example, if a medical instrument is 
patented or protected as an industrial design , would use of a copy of that instrument in 
medical testing infringe the patent  or industrial design right? 
 
25. Article 1359, continues, providing:  
3) the using of the invention, utility mo del or industrial design in emergency 
circumstances (natural calamities, disaster s, accidents), with the patent holder 
being notified of this use as soon as possible and with commensurate compensation being paid henceforth to the patent holder; 
 
According to Article 31(a) of the TRIPS Agr eement, each use without authorization of 
the rights holder shall be considered on its individual merits. Furthermore, Article 31(b) 
of the TRIPS Agreement clarifies that the re quirement to make reasonable efforts to 
obtain permission may be waived by a Memb er if certain conditions apply. How does 
Article  1359 provide for a decision on a case by case basis? 
 
26. Article 1359, continues, providing in paragraph 4: 
 
4) which provides the use of the inventio n, utility model or industrial design for 
meeting personal, family, household or other needs other than entrepreneurial 
activity, unless profit-makin g or making earnings is the purpose of the use; 
 
This provision may conflict with a normal expl oitation of the patent and encroach on the 
legitimate interests of the patent owner, wh ere the invention or design is intended for 
household use. Please explain how th e provision addresses these concerns. 
 
Answers for three previous questions. 
 Paragraph 2 of Article 1359 CC RF: the conduct of scientific study of a product or method in which 
the invention or utility model is utilized, or scientific study of a manufacture in which an industrial 
design is utilized or the conduct of an experiment on such a product, method, or manufacture; thus third parties without infringing the exclusive right can only study a patented object, but 
cannot utilize it as a mean o conducting a research. 
 Not considered as infringing the exclusive right: the conduct of scientific study of a product or method in which the invention or utility model is utilized, or scientific study of a manufacture in 
which an industrial design is utilized or the cond uct of an experiment on such a product, method, 
o r  m a n u f a c t u r e .  T h i s  r u l e  a l l o w s  a n y  p e r s o n  t o  m a k e  s u r e  o f  t h e  a c t u a l  p r o p e r t i e s  a n d  characteristics declared in the description to the patent or in the rightholder's advertisement prior 
to contacting the rightholder and only after doin g so to make a decision on reasonability of 
entering negotiations with the rightholder on purchasing the right of use of the invention. 
 
This only refers to experiment or scientific resear ch conducted on the patented product, method or 
manufacture themselves but not to experiment or  scientific research conducted with their help. 
Thus the abovementioned rule does not imply co mmercialization of a patent-protected invention 
during the conduction of scientific experiment on an object containing the invention by third 
parties. 
 Paragraph 3 of Article 1359 CC RF: Not considered as infringing the exclusive right: the utilization 
of an invention, utility model, or industrial design in extraordinary circumstances (natural 
disasters, catastrophes, accidents) with notification of this use to the patent holder as soon as possible and with subsequent payment to him of proportionate compensation. The legislator does 
not limit scope of persons authorized to utilize patented objects without rightholder's pemit should 
the abovementioned circumstances arise, however such persons shall notify the rightholder about 
the utilization as soon as possible with subsequent payment to him of proportionate compensation.  IP/Q/RUS/1 • IP/Q2/RUS/1 • IP/Q3/RUS/1 • IP/Q4/RUS/1 
 
- 30 - 
 
  This exclusion from the exclusive rights of a patent holder is attributed to the importance of an 
urgent use of an invention in public interest in case of extraordinary circumstances which should the necessity of preventing or recovering the consequences of natural disasters, catastrophes and other accidents. Also this exclusion from the exclusive rights concerns only extraordinary 
circumstances and does not extend to other accidents and disasters. Extraordinary circumstances 
are declared by public authorities of a particular country or by international organizations providing aid in such circumstances.  
 
H o w e v e r  t h e  p a t e n t  h o l d e r  s h a l l  b e  n o t i f i e d  o f  s u c h  u s e  a s  s o o n  a s  p o s s i b l e  w i t h  s u b s e q u e n t  payment of proportionate compensation to him. That regulation corresponds with Article 31 of the TRIPS Agreement. Russian jurisdiction lacks precedents on that matter at present. Also the 
legislator does not determine notification proced ure of the patent holder of such use of an 
invention, utility model, or industrial design an d does not declare neither the way of paying the 
compensation nor its time limitations. 
 
Paragraph 4 of Article 1359 CC RF: Not considered as infringing the exclusive right: the utilization of an invention, utility model, or industrial design for the satisfaction of personal, family, home, or 
other needs not connected with entrepreneurial activity if the purpose of such utilization is not the 
receipt of profit or income. As defined in Paragr aph 1 of Article 2 CC RF business activity shall be 
an independent activity, performed at one's own ri sk, aimed at systematically deriving a profit 
from the use of the property, the sale of commodities, the performance of work or the rendering of 
services by the persons, registered in this ca pacity in conformity with the law-established 
procedure. Also a citizen, engaged in business ac tivities without forming a legal entity with the 
violation of the requirements of Item 1 of the pres ent Article, shall have no right to refer, with 
respect to the deals he has thus effected, to the fact that he is not a businessman. That means 
that the primary criteria of an activity not recognized as infringing exclusive rights is it being non profit-seeking. 
 
Thus the legislator protects the interests of those members of society who use the patented object without gains.  
For example, a person can legally assemble and use a fishing tent the patent on which is held by 
another person, moreover the person's family and friends can also use the tent. However, selling 
such tent, even secondhand, with profit shall be recognized as infringement of the exclusive right 
of the patent holder. 
 When applying Article 1359 CC RF one should bear in mind that according to Paragraph 5 of Article 
1229 CC RF the limitations on exclusive rights to results of intellectual activity are established on 
the condition that they do not cause unjustified harm to the ordinary use of the results of intellectual activity or means of individualization and do not impair in an unjustified manner the lawful interests of the rightholders. 
 
27. Article 1360 (IP/N/1/RUS/ O/2). Using an Invention, Utility Model or Industrial 
Design in the Interests of National Security 
 
In the interests of national security the Gove rnment of the Russian Fe deration is entitled 
to permit the use of an invention, utility mo del or industrial design without the consent 
of the patent holder, with the patent holder being notified as soon as possible and with a 
commensurate compensation being paid to the patent holder.  According to Article 31 of the TRIPs Agreemen t, each use without authorization of the 
rights holder shall be considered on its indi vidual merits. Please explain how this Article 
addresses consideration on the individual me rits.  Also, the term "National Security" 
appears overbroad and not well defined.  Was "national emergency or other 
circumstances of extreme urgency" intended? 
 Article 1360 of the Civil Code of the Russian Fede ration regulates relationships about use of an 
Invention, Utility Model, or Industrial Design in th e Interests of National Security. According to this 
Article the Interests of National Security are interests of defense and security. In conformity with Item 1 of Article 1 of the Federal Law №61-FZ of 31st May 1996 "About Defense" the Defense is 
system of politic, economic, military, social, legal and other measures for preparation by armed 
protection and armed protection of the Russian Federation, integrality and untouchability of the IP/Q/RUS/1 • IP/Q2/RUS/1 • IP/Q3/RUS/1 • IP/Q4/RUS/1 
 
- 31 - 
 
territory. In conformity with Item 6 of the Strategy  of National Security of the Russian Federation 
until 2020 ratified by Decree of President of the Russian Federation №537 of 12 May 2009 a notion 
"National Security" is condition of security of personality, society and state from home and foreign threats what give to secure constitutional the rights, freedoms, worthy quality and standard of 
living of citizens, sovereignty, territorial in tegrality and stable development of the Russian 
Federation, the defense and security of the state. In conformity with Article 1 of the Federal Law 
№390-FZ of 28
th 2010 "About Security" the main subjects of guarantee of security are federal 
state authorities, state authorities of subjects of  the Russian Federation, municipal authorities in 
range of security and the Security Council of the Russian Federation also.  According to Article 1360 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation in the interests of national 
security the Government of the Russian Federation  as an executive authority assignee to ensure 
the security is entitled to permit the use of an invention, utility model or industrial design. That is mean the legislator has endowed the Government of the Russian Federation the right to give to 
other persons right to use patented Invention, Utility Model or Industrial Design in certain 
conditions and without the consent of the patent holder. Herewith the legislator has established that the patent holder may be notified about use of his invention, utility model or industrial design 
as soon as possible and with payment of proporti onate compensation to him. But Article 1360 of 
the Civil Code of the Russian Federation do not defi ne an order and term of notification by patent 
holder about use of invention, utility model or in dustrial design and does not provide a method of 
calculation of compensation. 
 
28. Article 1362 (IP/N/1/RUS/0/2 at 408): Th e Compulsory License for an Invention, 
Utility Model or Industrial Design 
 
1 .  I f  a n  i n v e n t i o n  o r  i n d u s t r i a l  d e s i g n  i s  n o t  u s e d  o r  i s  i n s u f f i c i e n t l y  u s e d  b y  t h e  patent holder within four years after the issuance of the patent, and a utility model 
within three years… or industrial design -- if the patent holder refuses to conclude a 
licence contract with this person on te rms meeting the prevailing practices -- is 
entitled to file a claim with the court …..   
In paragraph 1, does "terms  meeting the prevailing practi ces" have the same meaning 
as "reasonable commercial terms" as used in Article 31(b) of the TRIPS Agreement? 
 
29. The article also provides "A compulsor y simple (non-exclusive) licence may be 
terminated in a judicial proc edure at a claim of the patent  holder, if the circumstances 
due to which the licence has been issued are no longer existing and it is unlikely that 
they are going to appear again. In this case the court shall establish a term and 
procedure for termination of the compulsory simple (non-exclusive) licence and of the 
rights that have come into being due to the receipt of the licence." 
 
Article 31(c) of the TRIPS Agreement states that the scope and duration of such use 
shall be limited to the purpose for which it was authorized. This article appears to require the patent holder to sue for termin ation of the compulsive license. Is this 
correct? 
 
30. Furthermore, the article provides "If the patent holder having an exclusive right to 
such dependent invention manages to prov e that it is an important technical 
achievement and that is has significant ec onomic advantages over the invention or 
utility model of the holder of the first patent, the court shall take a decision on granting 
a compulsory simple (non-exclusive) licence thereto. The right of using the invention 
protected by the first patent obtained under such licence shall not be assigned to other 
persons, except for the case of a lienation of the second patent." 
 
Article 31(l)(ii) of the TRIPS Agreement provid es conditions for when a patent owner is 
entitled to a cross license. Please explain how this situation is addressed in the Russian 
system. 
 
31. Article 1362, compulsory licenses. This ar ticle makes the provisions of compulsory 
licenses equally applicable to industrial de signs as patents, and results in compulsory 
licensing (forfeiture) of rights if the patented  invention or design is not used or worked 
within a set time. Paris Convention Article 5(B)  provides that the protection of industrial IP/Q/RUS/1 • IP/Q2/RUS/1 • IP/Q3/RUS/1 • IP/Q4/RUS/1 
 
- 32 - 
 
  designs, "shall not, under any circumstances be subject to any forfeiture, either by 
reason of failure to work or by reason of importation of articles corresponding to those 
which are protected." Article 2(1) of the TRIPS Agreement requires compliance with 
Article 5, among other parts,  of the Paris Convention. Pl ease explain how Article 1362 
addresses the requirements of Arti cle 5(B) of the Paris Convention. 
 32. Finally, as to Article 1362, Articles 31 (i) and (j)of the TRIPS Agreement requires 
that judicial review by a distinct higher authority be available.  How does the Russian 
Federation provide for such judicial review?  Answers for five previous questions. 
 
Article 1362 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation is devoted to detailed regulation of questions of the compulsory  licensing. Quotas regulating the Compulsory  licensing are founded on 
the provisions of the Paris Convention for the Protec tion of Industrial Property (Article 5 item A(2)) 
and the TRIPS Agreement (Articles 31 and 40).  
Semantic maintenance of the notion "conditions corresponding to established practice" is used in 
Article 1362 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation and the notion "reasonable commercial conditions" is used in Article 31(b) of the TRIPS Agreement are same.  
In case of insufficient using of invention or industrial design during four years since the date of 
granting of the patent or utility model – during th ree years since the date of granting of the patent 
and a patent holder's refusal to conclude license contract with an interested person on conditions 
corresponding to established practice, this person shall have the right to go to court with a suit 
against the patent holder for the granting of a compulsory simple licence (non-exclusive license) for the use of an invention, utility model, or industrial design. In the demand in the lawsuit, the 
interested person must indicate the proposed th e terms of a license, including the scope and the 
conditions of use of the patented object, the amount, procedure, and times of payments. The court makes decision about the granting of the compulso ry license if the patent holder does not show 
that nonuse or insufficient use of the patented object is based on valid causes. All cases of using of 
the patented object are defined in the court decision. The rights which are is provided in 
conformity with the compulsory license ma y not be transferred to third persons. 
 
If the circumstances that were the basis for the granting of simple (nonexclusive) license cease to 
exist and their reappearance is unlikely, then acti ng of the Compulsory license may be terminated 
by judicial procedure on a suit by the patent hold er. This quota corresponds to Article 31(c) of the 
TRIPS Agreement. A duty of proof of absence a/n circumstance is encharged to patent holder. In 
this case the term and procedure of termination of  distributed license and termination of right is 
arised with getting of this license are established by court.  
Article 31(I)(ii) of the TRIPS Agreement foresees a "cross license". Analogous quota is contained in 
item 2 of Article 1362 of the Civil Code of the Ru ssian Federation. Present item establishes rules 
for situation when the using of one patented Invention is connected with the using of other 
patented Invention or patented Utility Model. If other person have the patent to this other 
Invention or Utility Model than using of first patented Invention needs to get a permission from other patent holder. In case of refusal of other pate nt holder to get license, first patent holder shall 
have the right to go to court with a suit for the granting of the Compulsory license. Observation of 
conditions "an important technical achievement" and "a significant economic advantage" is directed to protection of hindering patent holder's interests and this quota provides some balance of interests of both patent holders and the society in full so long as the society interested in 
creation of an important technical achievement, pa tenting them and use. In case of the granting 
the Compulsory license by court decision second patent holder acquires the right to get from second patent holder analogous license to such Invention for procuring of use which is provided 
the Compulsory license. Necessary to mark that positions in this item do not provide a possibility 
to demand a submitting the Compulsory license for procuring of possibility to use patented Utility Model. Such limitation stipulated for the fact that the patent to Utility Model is distributed without 
a verification of her patentability. 
 The provisions of Article 1362 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation about the Compulsory 
licensing in case of insufficient use the Industrial Design during forth years do not contradict to 
Article 5(B) of the Paris Convention for the Prot e c t i o n  o f  I n d u s t r i a l  P r o p e r t y  s o  l o n g  a s  t h e  IP/Q/RUS/1 • IP/Q2/RUS/1 • IP/Q3/RUS/1 • IP/Q4/RUS/1 
 
- 33 - 
 
submitting of the Compulsory license to patented Industrial Design does not mean a cessation of 
his legal protection.  A reconsideration of court decisions is realized in conformity with the Civil Procedural code of the 
Russian Federation and the Arbitration Procedural code of the Russian Federation. 
 The procedure of reconsideration of court decisions about the Compulsory licensing on basis of 
Article 1362 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federa tion is provided in procedural legislation. 
 33. Article 1508: (IP/N/1/RUS/0/2 at 463): Article 1508 (1) states that a trademark 
may be considered generally-r ecognized in the Russian Federation as the result of 
intensive use. Can the GOR clarify whether "i ntensive use" includes knowledge in the 
Russian Federation which has been obtained  as a result of the promotion of the 
trademark?  
 
The main conditions for an acknowledgement of designation as generally known in the Russian Federation trademark are his intensive use, wide known of this designation in the Russian 
Federation among the corresponding consumers, an d wide known with respect to goods of person 
who think his trademark is generally known (A rticle 1508 of the Civil Code of the Russian 
Federation).   
The intensity of use is estimated proceeding from concrete situation, kind of trademark, goods and 
amount of advertising campaign, speed of mastering of market and other factors.  
For confirmation of the intensive use of trademark on the territory of the Russian Federation may 
be shown in particular: date of starting of use th e trademark, the list of populated locality where 
realization of goods are marked with trademark is made, the amount of realization these goods, 
methods of use the trademark, average annual amount of consumers of good, position of 
manufacturer on the market in certain economic sector etc.; countries where trademark have wide known, the expenditure to advertisement of tradem ark (e.g. annual financial reports), cost (value) 
of trademark in conformity with data in annual fi nancial reports, the results of interrogation of 
consumers in question of generally-known of tr ademark is produced by specialized independent 
organization. 
 
34. Article 1515 Second sentence (IP/N/1/ RUS/O/2 at 466): "If the placing of the 
goods in transactions is required for the pub lic interest the right holder is entitled to 
demand removal at the infringer's expense of the illegally used trademark...." The 
provision appears to allow for a broad exce ption. Article 46 of the TRIPS Agreement 
allows for the removal of infringing mark s only in "exceptional circumstances." 
(Article 46 of the TRIPs Agreement: "In re gard to counterfeit trademark goods, the 
simple removal of the trademar k unlawfully affixed shall not be  sufficient, other than in 
exceptional cases, to permit release of th e goods into the channels of commerce.") 
Please explain how proposed Article 1515, whic h allows for removal of infringing marks 
for claims of "public interest," addre sses Article 46 of the TRIPS Agreement. 
 
Article 46 "Other Remedies" of the TRIPS Agreem ent provides that the simple removal of the 
trademark unlawfully affixed shall not be sufficient,  other than in exceptional cases, to permit 
release of the goods into the channels of commerce. 
  
Part 2 of Article 1515 of the Civil Code of the Ru ssian Federation corresponds to shown provision 
of the TRIPS. In conformity with this Article two main methods of protection to trademark are 
provide: 
 
 The rightholder's demand of removal from commerce and destruction of counterfeit 
goods on which an unlawfully used indication; 
 The payment of compensation instead of indemnity of damage. 
 
The possibility of presentation of demand about removal of indication is exception from the general 
rule and it may be shown instead of demand about removal from commerce and destruction of counterfeit goods, and in case only when "the introduction of such goods into commerce is necessary in societal interests". Herewith there is talk about valid social significancy of the IP/Q/RUS/1 • IP/Q2/RUS/1 • IP/Q3/RUS/1 • IP/Q4/RUS/1 
 
- 34 - 
 
  introduction of certain kind of good in civil commerce and about possible negative consequence of 
destruction for customers what will have make a breach of social interest (e.g. foodstuffs). 
 
Other laws (which seem not to have yet been notified) 
 
35. Article 18.6 of the Law on Circulation of  Medicines (as last amended on June 25, 
2012) states: "The results of the nonclinical trials of medicinal products and clinical 
trials of medicinal products submitted by the applicant for state registration of the 
medicinal products shall not be obtained, disclosed, used for commercial purposes and 
for purposes of state registration without a pplicant's permission within six years from 
the date of the state registration of the me dicinal product. Violation of the prohibition 
specified by this Clause shall entail the resp onsibility in accordance with the legislation 
of the Russian Federation. The circulation of medicines in the Russian Federation 
registered with violation of this  Clause shall be prohibited." 
 
How this provision is implemented? Is the six- year term of protection in force? Are there 
any implementing regulations that would ex plain (1) what procedures the MOH would 
follow in order to protect originator's data from both disclosure and from reliance by 
generic companies and (2) what procedures would generic companies follow to obtain 
state registration for medical products.  Plea se explain the relationship of Article 18.6 
with Article 26 of the same law, which allows for the accelerated review of the 
marketing authorization applications for generic drugs. 
 
Article 18 of Federal law FZ-61d.d. 12.04.2010 has been complemented with section 7 of the 
following content: «It prohibited to receive, disclose, commercially use and use for state 
registration any information on non-clinical research of medical products and clinical research of medical products, provided by the applicant for stat e registration of medical products without their 
permission for six years since the date of state registration of a medical product.  
 Non-observance of the prohibition stated by th e abovementioned section entails amenability in 
compliance with laws of the Russian Federation. 
 
Turnover of medical products registered with vi olation of this section on the territory of the 
Russian Federation is illegal» 
 
The abovementioned section applies after 22 August 2012.   
To observe requirements of Section 7 of Article 18  and prevent violations of exclusive rights of 
developers of medical products the Ministry of Heal th of the Russian Federation in its draft bill «On 
amendments to Federal law «On turnover of medica l products» and to article 333.32.1 of part two 
of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation» made an amendment to the composition of the 
registration dossier (article 18, section 3) by including documents that verify: 
 
"12) presence of intellectual rights 
 
13) presence of consent of an applicant of an original medical product to use information about 
results of non-clinical and clinical researches of the original medical product in case less than six 
years has passed since the registration of the original medical product." 
 Article 26 FZ-61 d.d.12.04.2010 «On turnover of medical products» applies only to urgent production of experts evidence but not to urgent  registration. Since rapid production of experts 
evidence may be applied to reproduced medical products provision of information obtained during 
non-clinical and clinical researches of the original medical product and published in specialized publications is possible during such procedure if the original medical product is not covered by 
patent protection. 
 At the same time the Russian Federation according to the Doha Declaration (on the TRIPS 
Agreement and Public Health) of 2001 in which a concern about the impact of intellectual property 
rights on medical products prices was expressed and ultimately reserves the right to consider 
applying Article 8 of the TRIPS Agreement in terms of implementing the right to health, which states that during drafting or amending of national laws or regulations member-states can take 
measures necessary in protecting population's health, as well as Article 30 of the TRIPS agreement IP/Q/RUS/1 • IP/Q2/RUS/1 • IP/Q3/RUS/1 • IP/Q4/RUS/1 
 
- 35 - 
 
which contemplates some exclusions from excl usive rights granted by patents while barring 
unjustified limitations of rights of patent-holders and third parties. Particularly the right to «early usage» does not contradict this article (the so-called Bolar provisions) which allows generic drugs producers to conduct all the procedures and trials  necessary to registration of a generic drug 
before patent to the original drug expires (or exclusive research data regulations). As a result they 
are guaranteed the possibility of entering generi c product to the market right after the stated 
period has expired. 
 
Actually a series of amendments in the Law on Ci rculation of Medicines N61 is considered by the 
Government.  
4.2  Responses to Follow-Up Questions
7 
Follow-Up to Question 1:  We would like to confirm our understanding of your response: 
Article 1232 does not apply to works protected by copyright and related rights, and that 
although certain types of copyrighted works may register under this Article 
(i.e. computer programs and databases), such registration is voluntary and not required 
to receive copyright protection. The phrase "m eans of individualization" is used a few 
times throughout this document and we woul d appreciate an explanation, perhaps just 
in different words, of what this phrase mean s. We imagine it may be simply a translation 
issue and may relate to original authorship  but would be grateful for clarification. 
 
We confirm that the provisions of the Article 1232 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation do 
not apply to works, protected by copyright and re lated rights. Regarding such copyright objects as 
computer programs and databases state registration is conducted at the option of the right holder 
and may be made at the Patent Office. Such registration is voluntary. Computer programs and 
databases are copyright-protected regardless of the fact that the registration has been made or not by the right holder (subparagraph 2 paragraph 4 of Article 1259 and paragraph 1 of 
Article 1262 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation (hereinafter - CC RF)). 
 
The term "means of individualization" is used  in the CC RF as generalized and systematic 
(paragraph 1 of Article 2; Article 128; paragrap h 4 of Article 129; paragraph 1 of Article 1225 of 
the CC RF etc.). It includes types of an intellectual property intended for individualization of legal 
entities, goods, works, services and enterprises.   
Means of individualization include: 
(1) Trade names (2) Trade marks and service marks 
(3) Appellations of origin 
(4) Commercial names 
 The means of individualization are described in chapter 76 of the CC RF. 
 
Follow-Up to Question 2: We would like clarification regarding the first concern raised: 
Can an author provide an exclusive license li mited to only one right (i.e., reproduction) 
and maintain ownership of the other exclusiv e rights? And could you confirm that there 
is no requirement to register a transfer or assignment of exclusive copyright rights? We 
understand your last paragraph here to mean  that Article 1234 does not apply to works 
protected by copyright or related rights; and that "result of intellectual activity" is a 
patent-related activity or other non- copyright activity. Is that correct? 
 Yes, an author can provide an exclusive license lim ited to only one right (i.e., reproduction) and 
maintain ownership of the other exclusive rights.  
 For example, the author of the literary composition can provide an editor with an exclusive license 
to reproduction and distribution of the copies, while maintaining other rights (particularly the right 
to the translation into other languages, film right,  stage right and right to bringing to the public 
etc.).  
 
                                               
7 Responses circulated in document IP/C/W /592/Add.1 to questions posed in document 
IP/C/W/589/Add.1 IP/Q/RUS/1 • IP/Q2/RUS/1 • IP/Q3/RUS/1 • IP/Q4/RUS/1 
 
- 36 - 
 
  We confirm that that there is no requirement to register a transfer or assignment of exclusive 
copyright and related rights. 
 
A state registration of an exclusive copyright transfer is required only in case when a computer 
program or database has been registered at the wish of the right holder at the Patent Office. Such 
registration is required only in case of alienation of an exclusive copyright for computer program or database, or in case of an exclusive copyright transfer under the procedure of universal legal 
succession (inheritance, legal entity reorganization). A state registration of a license contract for 
such computer program is not required. 
 
Article 1234 of the CC RF establishes general rules regarding the contract on the exclusive right 
alienation as special type of civil law contract. This article applies to all the law-protected types of 
intellectual property, including copyright and related rights objects. A question of a state registration of an exclusive copyright alienation (paragraph 2 of Article 1234) shall be resolved 
pursuant to the paragraph 2 of Article 1234 of the CC RF. It provides that a state registration of an 
exclusive copyright transfer or assignment is requ ired only in case when according to the law an 
exclusive right arises on the ground of mandatory state registration. An exclusive right for 
copyright and related rights objects arises from the moment of its creation. The registration of the 
copyright and related rights objects or compliance with other formalities is not required for origin, realization and protection of the copyright an d related rights (paragraph 4 of Article1259 and 
paragraph 2 of Article 1304 of the CC RF). The re quirements of the paragraph 2 of Article 1234 
regarding state registration are not applied to the exclusive copyright and related rights alienation  
contracts (except for contracts of alienation of exclusive right for a registered computer program or database – paragraph 5 of Article 1262 of the CC RF).   
 
The term "the results of intellectual activity", is used in the CC RF as generalized and systematic as well as term "means of individualization" (parag raph 1 of Article 2; Article 128; paragraph 4 of 
Article 129; paragraph
 1 of Article 1225 of the CC RF etc.). Re sults of intellectual activity includes 
objects of copyright and related rights, inventions , utility models, industrial designs, breeding 
achievements, topographies of integrated circuits, secrets of production (know-how).  
Follow-Up to Question 3:  We would like to confirm our understanding of your response: 
is it true that, like Article 1234, Article 1235 does not apply to works protected by 
copyright and related rights?   
 
No. Article 1234 and Article 1235 of the CC RF are located in Chapter 69 «General provisions» and thus apply to all the objects of intellectual pr operty, including works protected by copyright. 
 
Follow-Up to Question 4:  Paragraph 3 of Article 14 bis of the Berne Convention provides 
that "unless the national legislation provides to the contrary, the provisions of 
paragraph (2)(b) above shall not be applicab le to authors of scenarios, dialogues and 
musical works created for the making of the cinematographic work, or to the principal 
director thereof." Does Article 1240 or anothe r Article of Russian law provide that the 
provisions of Berne Article 14 bis be applied to authors of scenarios, dialogues and 
musical works created for the making of th e cinematographic work? We would also like 
clarification of how Article 1240 impacts an au thor's contract with a film producer. In 
other words, could you describe what rights an author retains in his work when that 
work is part of a film? And could you spec ify where those rights are provided for in 
Russian law? For example, can an author's contract maintain some rights, such as the right of public performance?  
The provisions of paragraph (2)(b) of the Article 14 bis of the Berne Convention are provided by 
the Articles 1240 and 1263 of the CC RF. 
 
Under paragraph 2 of Article 1263 of the CC RF the authors of an audiovisual work are: 
(1) the director (2) the author of the script  
(3) the composer being the author of a musical work (with or without a text) specifically 
created for the audiovisual work 
 If an author of the film (a producer) makes contra cts with these three persons on the alienation of 
theirs exclusive rights, the exclusive right on film will transfer to him in general. The other authors IP/Q/RUS/1 • IP/Q2/RUS/1 • IP/Q3/RUS/1 • IP/Q4/RUS/1 
 
- 37 - 
 
of the works that are incorporated in an audiovisual work, either existing before (the author of the 
work that underlies the script, and others) or create d in the course of working on it (photography 
director, art director and others) have their exclusive rights to their works (but not to a film in general). These rights shall be also acquired by  a film producer on the grounds of a contract. 
 
Article 1240 of the CC RF establishes that if an object of intellectual property is created specially to be included in the film, such contract shall be deemed an exclusive right alienation contract, 
except as otherwise envisaged by agreement of the parties. Thus, this rule applies to all three 
authors of a film (paragraph 2 of Article 1263 of the CC RF), and to any other authors, whose works have been specially created for this film (for example to a dialogues author, art director, 
photography director). 
 
The transfer of an exclusive right from an author to a producer is a subject to the contract. Under 
paragraph 1 of Article 1240 of the CC RF this contract is considered as an exclusive right alienation 
contract. This provision is defined as dispositive, so the parties of a contract have a choice to 
conclude a license contract or an exclusive right alienation contract.  
 
Paragraph 2 of Article 1240 of the CC RF provides that the terms of a license contract are invalid 
when they limits the use of the intellectual property when this property is a part of a complex work. This rule reflects the content of Article 14 bis of the Berne Convention as it aimed to prevent 
the refusal of an author to entitle a person who has created a complex object (inter alia, a 
producer) to use his works which are necessary to dispose the rights to use complex works in 
general. 
 
So, director, author of the script, composer, dialogue writer and any other person who created a 
work specifically for its use in a film in accordance with Article 1240 of the CC RF are covered by a general rule of para.2(b) Article 14 bis of the Berne Convention which complies with a provision of 
paragraph 3 Article 14 bis of the Berne Convention which allows to establish in national legislation 
the rules which are different from those set in paragraph 2(b) of the named Article. 
 
The list of rights conferred to authors of any co pyright objects is contained in paragraph 2 of 
Article 1270 of the CC RF. If the contract on the al ienation of the exclusive right is concluded, all 
the rights conferred to authors entirely transfer to a producer. Exception to this rule is the right of 
a composer for «a fair compensation» for use of his work as a part of an audiovisual work which is 
charged when this audiovisual work is publicly pe rformed and also when it is broadcasted or cable 
transmitted (paragraph 3 of Article 1263 of the CC RF ). Composer reserves this right even it has 
been alienated unless otherwise is expressly provided by his contract with a producer. 
 
Entering into a license contract the parties establish themselves a list of rights which are transferred from an author to a producer for using its work. However, this list cannot be narrower than it is necessary for a film use in general (paragraph 2 of Article 1240 of the CC RF). Since a 
producer needs a right of pubic performance in order to use the film in general, this right could not 
be reserved by the author.  
Follow-up to Question 6: In the second paragraph, could you further explain the 
different actions one must take to transfer or assign ownership depending on whether a 
computer program or database is  registered or unregistered? 
 
In accordance with paragraph 5 of Article 1262 of the CC RF contracts for the alienation of the exclusive right to a registered computer progra m or database as well as the transfer of the 
exclusive right to such a program or database to other persons without a contract shall be subject 
to state registration. 
 
In accordance with Article 1241 of the CC RF the transfer of an exclusive right to a registered 
computer program or database to another person without a conclusion of a contract with the right 
holder is admissible in the cases and on the grounds established by law, for instance, in line of universal succession (inheritance, the reorganization of a legal entity) and in the event of the levy 
of execution on the right holder's property. 
 
The license contracts on the granting of the ri ght to use registered computer programs and 
databases are not required to be registered. 
 IP/Q/RUS/1 • IP/Q2/RUS/1 • IP/Q3/RUS/1 • IP/Q4/RUS/1 
 
- 38 - 
 
  Regarding unregistered computer programs and databases there is no requirement to register 
transfer or granting the rights to such programs and databases.   Follow-Up to Question 7: Is there 1) a limit on the number of copies that can be made by 
an individual as a free reproduction under Article 1273, and/or 2) a requirement that 
such copies be made from a lawfully acquired  copy of the work? And in reference to your 
penultimate paragraph, we do not see a definition of "household" within the civil code; 
is this meant to be understood as one's immediate family (as opposed to a dormitory 
housing fifty students, for example)   1) The CC RF doesn't contain any indications on a limit on a number of copies that can be made by 
an individual as a free reproduction. However, the CC RF clearly defines boundaries within which 
an individual is entitled to make a free copy of the work: 
 
Firstly, subparagraph 2, paragraph 5 of Article 1229 of the CC RF stipulates that the provided 
cases of free reproduction for personal use should not cause unjustified harm to the ordinary use of the results of intellectual activity and impair in an unjustified manner the lawful interests of the 
right holders. 
 
Secondly, paragraph 1 of Article 1273 of the CC RF states that the free reproduction is limited to a necessity of an individual and exclusively for pe rsonal purposes, which Article 1273 defines as the 
subsequent non-commercial use of such copy in order to satisfy personal needs or the needs of its 
family. 
 
2) In accordance with Article 1273 of the CC RF only legally promulgated works may be subject to 
free reproduction for personal purposes. 
 
Highest judicial bodies of the Russian Federation - the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation – also indicate such matter by 
stipulating in the paragraph 34 of the Resolution of Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian 
Federation No.5, Resolution of Plenum of the Su preme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation 
No.29 dated on 26 March 2009 «On certain issues arisen in connection with coming into effect of the Part IV of the Civil code of the Russian Fede ration», that while applying the Article 1273 of the 
CC RF, the courts should take into consideration the fact, that the reproduction should not be 
considered as a violation of the exclusive rights fo r reproduction only if at the moment of making 
the copy the work itself is used legitimately.  
 
Thus, reproduction, made with counterfeit copies of work or at unlawful bringing the work to the public (including the unlawful placement on the Internet) shall be considered as a violation of the 
exclusive rights to the work. 
 
The term «household» is taken not from the CC RF, and was used in our explanation to describe «the use for personal proposes».  
 
Follow-Up to Question 9:  We remain conc erned that this exception might be broader 
than the 3-step test permits and would lik e clarification. For example, would a non-
profit entity be able to use this exception to reproduce a work in dot-relief type (which 
we understand to be Braille) when the copyright owner has made the work available in dot-relief type? 
 
No, it wouldn't. If the author published the work in dot-relief type or in any other special type intended for persons with visual impairment, the provisions of the subparagraph 6 paragraph 1 of Article 1274 of the CC RF are not applied. If the work was published for the first time in a legal 
way in any other type (not in a special type), it may be used in special type by any person in 
accordance with the provisions of subparagraph 6, paragraph1 of Article 1274 of the CC RF. 
 
Follow-Up to Question 10: We are not concer ned about the ability to provide exceptions 
for the purposes of parody and caricatures; rather, we remain concerned about the 
breadth of the specific exception itself. Is this exception limited to taking only the 
portion of the work necessary for the purposes of the parody? In other words, we are 
interested in how the parody exception it self complies with the three-step test. 
 IP/Q/RUS/1 • IP/Q2/RUS/1 • IP/Q3/RUS/1 • IP/Q4/RUS/1 
 
- 39 - 
 
It would be rather difficult to formulate such pr ovisions in a law. For example, paragraph 4 of 
Article L122-5 of French Intellectual Property Co de does not contain any details regarding the 
possible scope of work use for the purposes of a parody creation. These questions are resolved by 
a judicial practice. The courts are also guided by three-step test. 
 
In the ruling of the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation dated 11 November 2013 № 5861/13 on a claim of "Pervoe muzykalnoe izdatelstvo" (English: "First music 
publishing company"), LLC to "M TF Production", LLC to recover a compensation for violation of 
exclusive rights for a musical work with lyrics, the Court satisfied claims of the plaintiff and reversed a judgments of courts of inferior juri sdiction. The Supreme Arbitration Court specified 
that the courts of inferior jurisdiction considered  the music video as a subject of parody but did not 
take into account that it was accompanied with the music works which had not been arranged for 
parody. So, since music works themselves were not subjects of parody, it was necessary to obtain the permission for their use and it means that excl usive rights for these works were infringed. It 
seems that such ruling of the court shows that judicial practice forms a right approach to such 
adjudgements.  
 
Follow-Up to Question 13: This answer seems to indicate that this Article impermissibly 
usurps the exclusive rights of the auth ors whose works are incorporated into a 
database. Please explain how Article 1334(2) accounts for the rights of authors of works 
included in a database. 
 
Wording of a paragraph 2 of Article 1334 of the CC RF  provides only that related rights arising for 
author of a database, whose creation requires significant financial, material, organizational or 
other costs, regarding the retrieval of data from such database don't affect copyrights on data, 
which constitutes this database, itself and also copyrights of author of such database. For example, similar provision is contained in paragrap h 4 of Article 1260 of the CC RF. This rule allows 
to consider exclusive rights for works from a database and rights for a database in general as 
separate, not creating a co-authorship, not absorbing each other, requiring the protection individually. 
 
Rights of the authors of materials included into the database are protected under paragraph 3 of 
Article 1260 of the CC RF, which states that any auth or of derivative or complied work (database is 
considered as a complied work – paragraph 2 of Article 1260 of the CC RF) exercises his copyrights 
p r o v i d e d  t h at  t h e  r i g h t s  o f  a u t h o r s  o f  w o r k s ,  u s e d  i n  d e r i v a t i v e  o r  c o m p l i e d  w o r k  c r e a t i o n ,  a r e  
respected.  
 
The Federal Law dated 12 March 2014 No.35 "On amendi ng Parts I, II and IV of the Civil Code of 
the Russian Federation and certain legislative acts of the Russian Federation" supplemented the Article 1303 of the CC RF by paragraph 3. In accordance with this paragraph «related rights are exercised with observance of the author rights to th e works of science, literature or art, used while 
creating objects of related rights. Related rights  are recognized and exercised regardless of the 
existence and operation of copyrights for these works». This provision comes into force from October 1, 2014 and applies to all the cases when the related rights objects may contain objects of 
copyrights, including to the provisions of section 5 Chapter 71 of the CC RF. 
 Follow-Up to Question 14: We would like further clarification. Do we correctly 
understand that Chapter 71 protects scientif ic, literary and artistic works after the 
copyright term has expired and those works have fallen into the public domain and 
Chapter 70 applies to those works while  they are protected by copyright? 
 
No, this understanding is not correct. 
 
Firstly, First, Chapter 71 of the CC RF regulates the relationships of the use of all the objects of 
related rights. The rights of the publisher are regulated by only one section (section 6) of the 
Chapter 71 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation.  
 
Secondly, the right of the publisher can arise not only in case when protection of an exclusive right 
to work expired and this work has fallen into publ ic domain but also in case when the work has 
never been protected by copyright. As an example of the second case could be the publication of 
the work unknown before, whose author had created this work prior to the beginning of legal 
copyright protection in Russia (till 1828). IP/Q/RUS/1 • IP/Q2/RUS/1 • IP/Q3/RUS/1 • IP/Q4/RUS/1 
 
- 40 - 
 
   
Provisions of section 6 Chapter 71 of the CC RF are formulated by analogy with the Article 4 of the Directive 2006/116/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 on the 
term of protection of copyright and certai n related rights (the codified version).  
 
Follow-Up to Question 14: What type of wo rks could be protected under Chapter 71?   
 
Chapter 71 of the CC RF protects the objects of related rights. Section 6 of Chapter 71 of the 
CC RF protects scientific, literary or artistic work (music works, works of art, literary works, etc.), 
previously not made public and that have fallen into the public domain or that are in the public domain by virtue of the fact that they are not protected by copyright. 
 
Follow-Up to Question 14: Paragraph 3 of the answer notes that "Article 1337 CC RF 
publisher is the citizen who lawfully made public or organized the making public of a 
work of scholarship, literature, or art previo usly not made public and that has gone into 
the public domain (Article 1282 CC RF) or that is in the public domain by virtue of the 
fact that it is not protected by copyright."  Could you furthe r explain what types of rights 
this would confer, and to whom? 
 The publisher is a citizen who has legally promul gated or organized the promulgation of a work 
that was in the public domain and was unknown fo r the public. Such citizen could be, for example, 
someone from descendants of the dead author, but also could be any citizen who found 
somebody's manuscripts or illustrations at his attic or dustbin, provided that such works correspond to the provisions of paragraph 1 of Article 1337 of the CC RF and a such citizen made 
an effort to promulgate these works. 
 
The provisions of Article 1337 of the CC RF prov ide the following rights to the publisher: 
 
(1) exclusive right to: reproduction of the wo rk, distribution, public show, import, hiring 
out, public performance, radio or tele vision broadcasting, cable communication, 
bringing the work to the notice of the public . Exclusive right of publisher covers almost 
all the authorities as the exclusive right of the author, except for the translation or 
other processing of the work as well as the pr actical implementation of an architectural, 
design, town planning or landscaping project;  
 
(2)  the right to indicate his name on copies of a work which he made public and in other 
cases of its use including translation or other processing of a work (of course this right 
by no means doesn't except the necessity to indicate the name of its author at this 
work). 
 Follow-Up to Question 14: Also, does this Chapter protect publication of works that are 
outside the scope of copyright (i.e., "not pr otected by copyright"), such as ideas, 
procedures, methods of operation or mathemat ical concepts? This may be a translation 
problem, but we remain unclear about whether/how non-copyrightable works are 
protected and why they would be protected here. 
 According to paragraph 2 of Article 1337 of the CC RF the rights of the publisher extend to works 
that, irrespective of the time of creation ther eof, could be deemed objects of copyright in 
accordance with the rules of Article 1259 of the CC RF. 
 
In accordance with Article 1259 of the CC RF copyright does not extend to ideas, concepts, 
principles, methods, processes, systems, manners or  the resolution of technical, organizational or 
other problems, inventions, facts, programming languages.  
 
Thus, ideas, procedures, methods of operation and mathematical concepts are not covered by 
Chapter 71 of the CC RF.  
Follow-Up to Question 14: Finally, we would like to confirm understanding that the 
25-year term set forth in Article 1340 only applies to publications of unpublished works 
that occur after the term of the exclusive right set forth in Article 1281 has expired. 
 
Yes, it's true. 25-year period establishes for the earlier unpublished works if the general term of IP/Q/RUS/1 • IP/Q2/RUS/1 • IP/Q3/RUS/1 • IP/Q4/RUS/1 
 
- 41 - 
 
copyright, established by Article 1281 of the CC  RF, had already expired. Thus, protection of 
publisher rights doesn't rival the copyright for the work, but establishes in addition to such protection.   
Follow-Up to Question 15 : We understand in your response that the Russian Federation 
uses the "rule of the shorter term," a familiar concept permitted under the Berne 
Convention for works. We would like some fu rther clarification, however. Would a US 
work published in the US in 1975 be protecte d under Russian law? In the United States, 
for example, a work published here in 1975 would initially be protected under the 1909 
US Copyright Act and would be protected from the date it was published with a 
copyright notice. That work would initially ha ve been protected for a term of 28 years 
from that date for the first term and then, due to amendments to US law, automatically 
extended another 67 years for the second te rm for a total of 95 years from 1975. Would 
a US sound recording published in the US in 1975 be protected under Russian law? 
(keeping in mind that a sound recording in the US is a "work" but under Russian law a 
sound recording receives neighboring rights  protection, and the Rule of the Shorter 
Term only applies to Berne works).  
 
The term of protection granted by Article 7 of th e Berne Convention doesn't depend on the date of 
accession to this Convention and by general rule shall be no less than 50 years after the death of the author (paragraph 1 of Article 7 of the Berne Convention). 
 
According to paragraph 4 of Article 1256 of the CC RF  the legal protection to the works on territory 
of Russian Federation according to international tr eaties of Russian Federation is granted to works 
which have not fallen to the public domain in the country of origin due to the expiration of such 
exclusive right validity term for these works and have not fallen to the public domain of Russian Federation due to the expiration of exclusive righ t validity term for them in accordance with the 
C C  R F .  A t  t h e  s a m e  t i m e  v a l i d i t y  t e r m  o f  a n  e x clusive right on territory of Russian Federation 
cannot exceed an exclusive right validity term set out in a country of origin of a work. 
 
In accordance with the provisions of the CC RF th e principle of calculating the term of protection 
depending on the date of death of the author is set as a general rule for calculating the exclusive 
right validity term: the exclusive right to a work shall be effective for the whole lifetime of the author and 70 years from January 1 of the year  following the year of the author's death 
(subparagraph 1. Paragraph 1 of Article 1281 of the CC RF).  
 
The exclusive right in a work created by co-authors  shall be effective for the whole lifetime of the 
author who survives the other co-authors and 70 years from January 1 of the year following the 
year of his death (subparagraph 2, paragraph 1 of Article 1281 of the CC RF). At the same time, if 
the work is promulgated after the author's death the exclusive right for such work shall be 
effective for 70 years after the promulgation thereo f from 1 January of the year following the year 
of the promulgation, provided the work is promulgated within 70 years of the death of the author 
(paragraph 3 of Article 1281 of the CC RF). 
 
Thus the work which received the protection in the US since 1975 for a general term of 95 years, 
will be protected under Russian legislation from  1975 for a term of the author's life and 70 years 
after his death, if the 95-years term under US legisl ation is expired earlier this term (in such case 
the protection will be expired on the base of shorter term rule). 
 
Slightly different conditions of legal protection are provided in respect of solely sound recordings 
(phonograms) - objects of related rights. 
 
In the Russian Federation recognition of foreign right holders' exclusive rights for phonograms is 
conducted in accordance with the international trea ties of the Russian Federation provided that two 
conditions are respected, that is: with respect to phonograms that (1) have not passed into the 
public domain in their countries of origin due to th e expiry of the effective term of exclusive rights 
to such object established in those countries, and (2) have not passed into the public domain in the Russian Federation due to the expiry of the ef fective term of exclusive right envisaged by the 
CC RF (paragraph 3 of Article 1304 of the CC RF). 
 
Thus, if the phonogram falls into the public domain in the country of its origin, it will not be protected in the Russian Federation, even if the term of protection of such phonogram has not IP/Q/RUS/1 • IP/Q2/RUS/1 • IP/Q3/RUS/1 • IP/Q4/RUS/1 
 
- 42 - 
 
  expired in the Russian Federation. 
 
Both the Russian Federation and the US are the members of the WIPO Performances and 
Phonograms Treaty. In accordance with Article 17 of this Treaty the term of protection to be 
granted to performers shall last, at least, until the end of a period of 50 years computed from the 
end of the year in which the performance was fixed in a phonogram; the term of protection to be 
granted to producers of phonograms shall last, at  least, until the end of a period of 50 years 
computed from the end of the year in which the phonogram was published, or failing such 
publication within 50 years from fixation of the ph onogram, 50 years from the end of the year in 
which the fixation was made. 
 
Regarding the term of validity of the exclusive right to a phonogram, Article 1327 of the CC RF also 
fixes a 50 year term from January 1 of the year following the year in which the recording took 
place. However if the phonogram is promulgate d before the end of this 50-years term, the 
exclusive right validity term will be expired after 50 years from the moment of its promulgation but 
not from the moment of its recording.  
 
Thus, a sound recording, promulgated in the US in 1975, will be protected in accordance with the 
Russian law as an object of related rights fo r 50 years from the date of its promulgation.  
 Follow-Up to Question 15: Could you also clar ify what is meant by a work "made public" 
in the third paragraph of your response? More  precisely, do you mean "published?" "first 
published" and/or "simultaneously published"?  
In accordance with Article 1268 of the CC RF making the work public means an action which opens 
the work to the public for the first time by means of publication, public show, public performance, 
broadcast or cable or in any other manner.  
 
In such case the publication (release to the world) is the release for circulation of copies of the work which are copies of the work in any materi al form in a quantity sufficient for meeting the 
public's reasonable needs depending on the nature of the work.  
 
Thus, publication (release to the world) of the work  is one of the means of making the work public 
(promulgation of a work).  
 
Follow-Up to Question 16(a): Because of the manner in which it was translated, we 
would like to confirm that subpoint 3 of poin t 1 of Article 1256 grants protection for US 
authors for published and unpublished works. ("the works promulgated outside the 
territory of the Russian Federation or non-pr omulgated but located in any objective form 
outside the territory of the Russian Federation, and it is recognized on the territory of the Russian Federation to be held by author s (their successors) being citizens of other 
states or stateless persons in accordance with international treaties of the Russian 
Federation.")  
Yes, subparagraph 3, paragraph 1 of Article 1256 of the CC RF in accordance with the Berne 
Convention, both Russian Federation and the US ar e its members, grants protection to US authors 
for published and unpublished works. 
 
Follow-Up to Question 16(b): We would like to confirm that subpoint 3 of point 1 of 
Article 1256 grants protection to non-Berne authors for works first published in the US  
Yes, subparagraph 3, paragraph 1 of Article 1256 of the CC RF in accordance with the Berne 
Convention, both Russian Federation and the US ar e its members, grants protection to non-Berne 
authors for works first published in the US 
 
Follow-Up to Question 16(c): We would like to confirm that subpoint 3 of point 1 of 
Article 1256 grants protection to authors wh o are not nationals of a Berne country but 
who have their habitual residence in the US 
 Yes, subparagraph 3, paragraph 1 of Article 1256 of the CC RF in accordance with the Berne 
Convention, both Russian Federation and the US are its members, grants protection to authors 
who are not nationals of a Berne country but who have their habitual residence in the US IP/Q/RUS/1 • IP/Q2/RUS/1 • IP/Q3/RUS/1 • IP/Q4/RUS/1 
 
- 43 - 
 
 
Follow-Up to Questions 16(d) and (e): We wo uld like to confirm that subpoint 3 of point 
1 of Article 1256 grants protection to 1) authors of audiovisual works the maker of 
which has its headquarters or habitual reside nce in the US and 2) authors of works of 
architecture constructed in the US and 3) authors of artistic works incorporated in a 
building or structure located in the US 
 
Yes, subparagraph 3, paragraph 1 of Article 1256 of the CC RF in accordance with the Berne 
Convention, both Russian Federation and the US are its members, grants protection to: 
(1) authors of audiovisual works the maker of which has its headquarters (in case of legal entities)or habitual residence (in case of indivi duals) in the US and (2) authors of works of 
architecture constructed in the US and (3) authors of any other artistic works incorporated in a 
building or structure located in the US  
Follow-Up to Question 17: We would like clarif ication, specifically when a work is not 
used separately but within an audiovisual work. Since authors of musical compositions 
contained in audiovisual works are considered authors of the audiovisual work under 
Article 1263, does the author of the musica l composition have a public performance 
right when that music is contained in th e audiovisual works and communicated to the 
public via television broadcasting or exhibi ted in theaters under Article 1263, point 3?. 
 
Paragraph 3 of Article 1263 of the CC RF assigns to  the composer who is the author of a musical 
work (with or without lyrics) used in the audiovisual work only the right for "fair" remuneration for public performance, as well as for communication by wireless means or by wire of an audiovisual 
work. This right is not in any way connected to the right for public performance, including 
exhibition in theaters or communication to the public via television broadcasting. 
 
The authors of an audiovisual work on the base of the exclusive right alienation contract 
(Article 1234 of the CC RF) or on the base of a license contract (Article 1234 of the CC RF) transfers to the producer (creator of the audiov isual work) the right to use their work in the 
composition of a complex audiovisual work. 
 
Furthermore as we already mentioned, in accordance with Article 1240 of the CC RF the provisions of the license contract restricting the right to use an audiovisual work shall be invalid. Please note 
that we are talking about the use of an audiovisual work. 
 
Thus, by concluding contract with producer (the creator of an audiovisual work), authors transfer 
or grant him the rights for such a work as a wh ole, and therefore the producer has an exclusive 
right for public performance, including exhibition in theaters or communication to the public via 
television broadcasting.  
Follow-Up to Question 18: We would like to  confirm our understanding. For audiovisual 
works created after August 2, 1993, the term  of protection is 70 years following the 
death of the last surviving author (countin g from January 1 of the year following the 
year of her death), and for audiovisual works created before August 3, 1993, the term of 
protection is 70 years after the date of publication. 
 
In accordance with paragraph 2 of Article 1263 of  the CC RF the authors of an audiovisual work 
are: 1) the director; 2) the author of the script;  3) the composer being the author of a musical 
work specifically created for the audiovisual work. Taking to account this provision, if an audiovisual work is created after August 2, 1993 the term of its protection is 70 years following the 
1 January of the year following the year of death of the last surviving author  
 
At the same time, if an audiovisual work created after 2 August 1993 was published after the 
death of author (authors), the exclusive right to su ch work shall be effective during the course of 
70 years after the work was made public, counting fr om 1 January of the year following the year of 
its publication, provided that the work was made public within the course of 70 years after the 
death of the author (paragraph 3 of Article 1281 of the CC RF). 
 
Regarding the works created before 3 August 1993 the term of protection is 70 years from the 
date of its legal publication, and 70 years from the date of its creation if it was not published.  
 IP/Q/RUS/1 • IP/Q2/RUS/1 • IP/Q3/RUS/1 • IP/Q4/RUS/1 
 
- 44 - 
 
  Follow-up to Question 20: We understand this to be a question related to TM-counterfeit 
goods but would like clarification about what "societal interests" would be considered 
appropriate for counterfeit goods to be reco vered; what would happen to those goods; 
and who might benefit from th at recovery (We do not understand the meaning of the 
phrase "subject by recovery to in come of the Russian Federation.") 
 
The provisions of clause 2 of article 1515 of th e CC RF establish a removal from circulation of 
goods at the expense of an infringer. The exception is made for cases when commercialization of 
such goods is necessary for public interests. In this case a trademark which is being illegally used must be erased from goods, labels and packages at the expense of infringer. The public interest 
may be determined only by the Court or Governme ntal authority. For example, in the case of 
natural catastrophe or disaster.  
 Expression «to the state revenue» according to the Article 1515 of the CC RF is not used. The 
«commer сialization» term is used in CC RF regarding not only for questions connected with 
commercial benefit, but in general sense regarding possibility of making a deal with such goods (including free deals) (Article 129 of the CC RF). In case a Court or any Governmental authority 
sets a necessity of use of goods for the public benefit, so in these cases there is no way to get 
commercial benefit. 
 
Follow-up to Question 21: Article 1312 refe rs back to Article 1302 and we therefore 
understand this Article to amount to an inj unction. Is that a correct reading? Could you 
describe what Article 1312 adds to 1302 th at is not inherent in Article 1302? 
 
Article 1302 of the CC RF refers to measures to secure a claim for copyright infringement, 
including court injunction for a person to take specific actions (e.g. reproduction, sale, import) with the purpose of introducing into commercial circulation copies of a work suspected to be 
counterfeit. 
 
Article 1312 of the CC RF extends the provisions of  Article 1302 of the CC RF with relations in the 
field of related rights, which means the possibility of a court injunction for a person to take specific 
actions listed in Article 1302 of the CC RF, not only  in relation to works protected by copyright but 
also in relation to objects of related rights. 
 
Provisions of Article 1312 of the CC RF do not add new or limit any provisions of Article 1302 of the 
CC RF.  
4.3  Responses to Additional Follow-Up Questions
8  
Additional Follow-Up to Question 3: This is  likely a translation problem, but we would 
like to confirm our understanding of your ex planation of Article 1232 and therefore will 
restate our previous question:  Would a fore ign author who enters a license contract 
have to register the license contract in Russia?   If a foreign author does not register the 
license contract in Russia, what consequences, if any, would the failure to do so have on 
the validity of the license? 
 
If in question 3 author is considered as citizen who created a work of science, literature or arts (object of copyright) by his creative work, it is necessary to take into consideration that the Civil Code of the Russian Federation (hereinafter – CC RF ) does not require the state registration of the 
license contract under which the author or other rightholder of work provides or undertakes to 
provide the right to use this work to the other party. 
 
At the same time it should be borne in mind that the in CC RF the term "author" is used not only in 
relation to the authors of works (objects of copyright). The CC RF also establishes provisions for the authors of other results of intellectual activi ty, for example, the authors of Topographies of 
Integrated Circuits (Article 1450 of the CC RF). 
 
According to para 2 of Article 1460 of the CC RF, if  the topology of integrated circuits has been 
registered in the Federal executive authority on intellectual property (Article 1452), a granting of 
                                               
8 Responses circulated in document IP/C/W/592/Add.2 to Additional Follow-Up Questions posed in 
document IP/C/W/589/Add.2. IP/Q/RUS/1 • IP/Q2/RUS/1 • IP/Q3/RUS/1 • IP/Q4/RUS/1 
 
- 45 - 
 
right to use topology under a license contract shall be subject to state registration in the manner 
prescribed by Article 1232 of the CC RF. In this case, it is necessary to take into account para 6 of Article 1232 of the CC RF. This para stipulates that if the requirement of state registration of granting of right to use an integrated circuit layout to another person under a license contract was 
not met, the granting of right to use is considered invalid. 
 Additional Follow-Up to Question 4:   The Russian Federation notes that portions of the 
Russian Civil Code correspond to Article 14bis of the Berne Convention.  Article 14bis 
permits countries to establish, by legislation,  ownership of cinematographic works.  If a 
country has established among the copyright owners in the cinematographic work the 
authors who have brought contributions to the making of the cinematographic work, 
such country may provide that authors who co ntribute to cinematographic works cannot 
object to certain uses of the works (e.g., re production, distribution, public performance) 
in the absence of any contrary or special st ipulation.  The Russian Federation's answer 
to our question does not appear to address th e specific language of Article 14bis "in the 
absence of any contrary or special stipulat ion."  The Russian Civil Code appears to 
prohibit contrary and special stipulations  (which 14bis(2)(c) permits a country to 
require in writing).  As an example:  In th e U.S., music composers maintain the right of 
public performance in their contracts when  their musical works are used in motion 
pictures, and then license the public performa nce of their music when the motion picture 
is communicated to the public via television or cable.  This does not appear to be a 
possibility under your law. Please explain how Russian law complies with 
Article 14bis(2)(b).  
 
The provisions of Part 4 of the CC RF contain the references to the "contrary or special conditions" 
as provided by Article 14 bis (2) (b) of the Bern e Convention. According to subpara 4 of para 2 of 
Article 1263 of the CC RF the producer of audiovisual work shall be entitled to an audiovisual work 
as a whole, unless otherwise follows from the contracts concluded by him with the authors of an 
audiovisual work (director, script writer and composer).  
 
In this case, the right to use audiovisual work w ill oblige the user to obtain the consent not only 
from the producer of an audiovisual work, but also from the author of such work. 
 Additional Follow-Up to Question 10:  We would like to confirm our understanding of the 
application of the three-step test to exceptio ns for parody and caricatures.  The Russian 
Federation's response noted that courts ar e generally guided by the three-step test 
when considering parodies and caricatures.  Please confirm our understating that in 
Russian law, parodies and caricatures are ge nerally considered to comprise exceptions 
to copyright law, but that courts must apply the three step test when considering whether the parody or caricature exception is  applicable in any particular case.  Also, 
please confirm our understanding of the Russ ian case referenced in the Government's 
response.  It appears that the court decide d that the defendant's use of the musical 
work was an infringement because the musica l work was not a subject of parody even 
though the music video itself was a parody.  
 
We confirm your understanding of three-step test applied to exceptions for parodies and 
caricatures. 
 
In relation to the case on the claim of "Pervoe muzykalnoe izdatelstvo" (English: "First music publishing company"), LLC to "MTF Production", LLC  the court concluded that the subject of parody 
was certain elements (dances) of music band perf ormance, recorded by technical means. It was 
dancing at the center of stage number. Musical works (with text) accompanying the parody 
performance are not the subject of parody and thus their use resulted in a violation of the copyrights of right holders. 
 
Additional Follow-Up to Question 13: The Ru ssian Federation's response explains that 
under the Russian Civil Code exclusive rights for works from a database and rights for a 
database itself are separate and "not abso rbing each other."   Please confirm our 
understanding that a copyrighted work that  happens to be included in a database 
retains its separate copyright and that the righ t in the database only protects the overall 
selection, coordination and arrangement.  
 IP/Q/RUS/1 • IP/Q2/RUS/1 • IP/Q3/RUS/1 • IP/Q4/RUS/1 
 
- 46 - 
 
  According to Article 1260 of the CC RF the author of  database owns the copyright in the selection 
or arrangement of materials (compilation).  
 
The inclusion of the work in the database requires  the consent of the author or other right holder 
of the original work. 
 
Author of the work, included in a database, has the right to use his work, regardless of the 
database, unless otherwise provided by the contract with the author of the database. 
 Additional Follow-Up to Question 17:  As explained in the further follow up to Question 4, 
the Russian Federation notes that portions of the Russian Civil Code correspond to 
Article 14bis of the Berne Convention.  Articl e 14bis permits countries to establish, by 
legislation, ownership of cinematographic wo rks.  If a country has established among 
the copyright owners in the cinematograp hic work the authors who have brought 
contributions to the making of the cinematographic work, such country may provide that 
authors who contribute to cinematographic wo rks cannot object to certain uses of the 
works (e.g., reproduction, distribution, pu blic performance) in the absence of any 
contrary or special stipulation.  The Russian  Federation's answer to Questions 4 and 17 
does not appear to address the specific lang uage of Article 14bis "in the absence of any 
contrary or special stipulation."  The Russian Civil Code appears to prohibit contrary and 
special stipulations (which 14bis(2)(c) permit s a country to require in writing) and the 
response suggests that such provisions would be invalid.  As an example:  In the U.S., 
music composers maintain the right of public performance in their contracts when their musical works are used in motion pictures, and then license the public performance of 
their music when the motion picture is comm unicated to the public via television or 
cable.  This does not appear to be a possi bility under your law.  Please explain how 
Russian law complies with the provision in Berne Convention Article 14bis(2)(b) which 
allows authors who contribute to cinematogr aphic works to make a special stipulation 
retaining the right to object to certain uses  of their work (e.g., public performance).  
 
The provisions of Part 4 of the CC RF contain the references to the "contrary or special conditions" 
as provided by Article 14 bis (2) (b) of the Bern e Convention. According to subpara 4 of para 2 of 
Article 1263 of the CC RF the producer of audiovisual work shall be entitled to an audiovisual work 
as a whole, unless otherwise follows from the contracts concluded by him with the authors of an 
audiovisual work (director, script writer and composer).  
 
In this case, the right to use audiovisual work w ill oblige the user to obtain the consent not only 
from the producer of an audiovisual work, but also from the author of such work. 
  Additional Follow-Up to Question 20:  Please provide examples, if any, of instances when 
courts or other governmental authorities de termined that counterfeit goods should be 
recovered for societal interests. 
 
There are no any court decisions providing that counterfeit goods should be recovered for societal 
interests.  
 
However, in the enforcement practice of customs authorities there are cases when counterfeit 
goods seized in the framework of administrative pr oceedings, after the court decision to confiscate 
the subject of an administrative offense, are no t destroyed, and passed with the consent of the 
right holder to the social institutions (orphanages,  hospitals, nursing homes, etc.), provided that 
these products are not dangerous for life and health of consumers. 
 
__________