Press "Enter" to skip to content

Month: September 2016

Russian online cinemas must be controlled by Russians as believes Russian media communication union

Russian media-communication union, consisting of major communication operators and media holding companies, has proposed to reduce foreign participation in companies operating or owning online cinemas in Russia, like Ivi, Okko or Megogo. The idea is that foreign persons can own not more than 20% of company’s shares.

Comments closed

Russian ministry of education proposed unique way to fight plagiarism in scientific research

Despite there is no such legal definition as plagiarism in current Russian law, but in order to deprive someone’s scientific decree the fact of copyright infringement should be determined and proved in court under proposed rules. Only if the court decides that someone, who received academic decree, has infringed copyright by way of publishing of his scientific research, the scientific decree can be deprived.

Comments closed

Amendments to Michel Reimon’s draft opinion of EU action plan to enforce IP rights

According to the Commission, the cultural and creative sectors, often IPR intensive, already account for up to 4.5% of GDP and up to 8.5 million jobs in the European Union and are not only essential for cultural diversity but also significantly contribute to social and economic development. The key objective of the Action Plan should be to ensure the effective enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) which plays a key role in stimulating innovation, creativity, competitiveness, growth and cultural diversity.

Comments closed

BMI’s victory over DOJ’s rule of 100% licencing

BMI promptly sought a declaratory judgment that the Consent Decree does not require 100% (“full-work”) licensing. Nothing in the Consent Decree gives support to the Division’s views. If a fractionally-licensed composition is disqualified from inclusion in BMI’s repertory, it is not for violation of any provision of the Consent Decree.

Comments closed

Explanatory notes for Unjustified Threats Bill

The Intellectual Property (Unjustified Threats) Bill (the Bill) sets out reforms to the law of unjustified, or groundless, threats as it applies to patents, trade marks and designs. The law in this area provides a remedy for those who are affected by unjustified threats. Threats to sue for infringement are unjustified where they are made in respect of an invalid right or where there has been no infringement. These Explanatory Notes explain what each part of the Bill will mean in practice.

Comments closed

Russian pirate church intends to repeal Rutracker’s permanent blocking in Russian Supreme court

If a certain activity, considered from judicial point of view as a piracy, for some people is necessary due to their faith, regardless of whether sincerely or just for fun or for personal advantage, can it be respected by law and enforcement authorities and courts even if such activity infringes copyright law? Article 28 of Russian constitution guarantees the freedom of religion.

Comments closed