IP/C/W/592/Add.2  
 
18 December 2014  
(14-7350)  Page: 1/3  
Council for Trade-Related Aspects of 
Intellectual Property Rights  Original: English  
 
 REVIEW OF LEGISLATION 
 
RESPONSES FROM THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION TO ADDITIONAL FOLLOW-UP  
QUESTIONS POSED BY THE UN ITED STATES OF AMERICA 
Addendum 
By means of a communication from the dele gation of the Russian Federation, dated 
17 December 2014, the Secretariat has received the following responses to additional follow-up questions posed by the United States, as circulated in document IP/C/W/589/Add.2. 
 
_______________ 
 
 
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 
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 IP/C/W/592/Add.2 
 
- 2 - 
 
  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.  
 
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 IP/C/W/592/Add.2 
 
- 3 - 
 
  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. 
 
 
 
__________