Sally Yoon is an IPilogue Writer and a 2L JD Candidate at Osgoode Hall Law School.

Russian theatres are turning to pirated films to stay alive during these trying times - and it may not be working. , some theatres in Russia have resorted to screening pirated movies to offset the Hollywood sanctions while others are practicing more caution by renting out spaces to show the films to certain individuals, with or without a fee.

Following the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Hollywood has protested by putting a halt to the release of films in Russian theatres. , going one step beyond its initial commitment to pause all future projects and acquisitions in the country, thereby putting an indefinite stop to the development of four Russian originals. Shortly after , marking the general suspension of the US film and TV business in Moscow. The harsh sanctions have particularly been interesting because . In fact, to ensure that their films would be released in Nazi Germany, Hollywood used from the credits during the 1940s.

Russians are avid cinemagoers and are particularly hard-hit by the sanctions. , Russia had the highest number of admissions in Europe – 145.7 million in 2021. Moreover, ��ܲ�������’s cinema market seemed to also be bouncing back since the start of COVID. According to data from the International Union of Cinemas (UNIC), represented in the table below, Russia was one of the major territories that performed strongly in its recovery in cinema admissions. compared to 2020. , Paul Heth, CEO of ��ܲ�������’s cinema operator Karo Group, predicted that they would achieve the near $1 billion box office receipts that they saw in 2019, this year. However, the current situation with Ukraine has prevented box office receipts from approaching anywhere close to those figures.

Image from

So far, there seems to be no consequences for these illegal showings. In March, Russia in an effect to mitigate sanctions imposed by Western nations, thereby legalizing piracy of several entertainment forms, including films. , the Russian government has announced that its companies will no longer be required to pay patent holders from countries that have sanctioned the country for the use of intellectual property, effectively legalizing piracy throughout the country.

But despite efforts to keep the industry alive, the results have not been encouraging – compared to the same time last year. Moreover, the Association of Theatre Owners has that “at least half the movie theatres in Russia would go out of business in the next two months”. Russia is encountering further issues with screening costs, , there has been a sharp increase of about 80% in the cost of lamps and components for projectors, with an estimated 50% of the Russian cinema screens already dark because of the lack of films and equipment. For now, pirated films continue to keep the theatres dimly lit, but it might not be too long before the Russian cinema industry faces a total blackout.

The post Russian Cinemas Resort to Pirated Films to Stay Alive appeared first on IPOsgoode.

. On Monday, March 7, Russian Prime Minister, Mikhail Mishustin signed a motion stating that payment to patent holders from these counties will be 0%. This means that, in Russia, it is legal for individuals to make use of or reproduce intellectual property originating from any of their enemy states.

Many countries, including the United States and Canada are refusing to do business with Russia in attempt to discourage their invasion of Ukraine. Russia first responded to these sanctions by declaring that they would pay back their debts to these countries only in rubles, which are currently valued at 0.0072 US dollars. Now, Russia attempts to combat sanctions by promoting intellectual property theft. The protection of intellectual property is important because it provides inventors with a level of control over how their inventions will be used. Russia knows that these rights are important to inventors and thinks by removing them they can pressure these states into lifting sanctions.

��ܲ�������’s ongoing attack on Ukraine has caused millions of Ukrainians to leave their homes, in search of refuge. ��ܲ�������’s president, Vladimir Putin, claims Ukraine is a threat to ��ܲ�������’s peace and security, and claims that it is a country that promotes bullying, genocide and Nazification. Putin’s claims are unfounded. Ukraine is a democratic state led by a Jewish president. This points to a larger issue of dictatorships and total control being in the hands of one person. Putin sees Ukraine’s democratic nature as a threat to his authoritarian control. Putin has served three terms as president. Under his leadership, Russia has experienced suppression of free speech in the media, corrupt election processes and prison sentencing for contrarian politicians and leaders.

There is no lack of consensus among the general population that these atrocious acts by the Russian government are unethical. However, because all states are sovereign entities, there is no authority that can force Russia to evacuate Ukraine. The United States is a very strong political and financial power. With them and many other states refusing to engage in business with Russia, the consequences for ��ܲ�������’s economy could be dire. And without money, Russia will not have money to fund their war. The best response to ��ܲ�������’s invasion of Ukraine would be to follow the actions of these countries that are imposing sanctions against Russia, and bankrupt Russia. No money means no power, and then ��ܲ�������’s efforts to combat these sanctions will be of no effect because the country will have no power.

The post Russia responds to imposed sanctions by legalizing intellectual property theft against all countries in the European Union, and 23 others appeared first on IPOsgoode.

Photo by Tina Hartung ()

Pankhuri Malik is an IPilogue Writer and an LL.M Candidate at Osgoode Hall Law School.

As , Russia is now responding to sanctions by removing the protection of IP rights in its territory for owners from “unfriendly” countries. On , Russia released an executive order acknowledging the unfriendly actions of the United States of America and its allies, including Canada, the UK, and all EU states.

��ܲ�������’s of Ukraine elicited a show of solidarity from the western world. As several countries imposed political and economic sanctions on Russia, the United States of America and its allies banned the export of luxury goods into Russia. Various USA-based companies like also responded by winding down their operations in Russia. The value of the Russian ruble dropped to ,. In retaliation, starting with the list of “unfriendly” countries, Russia proceeded to worth of property from sanctioning states.

Suspension of Association with Russian Patent Offices

On , the United States Patent and Trademark Office announced that it would no longer associate with the Russian and Belarusian Patent Offices. This announcement closely followed a similar one from the .

President Putin responded by suspending the operation of IP rights in Russia for owners either residing in or operating in “” countries. As a result, US-based companies can no longer enforce their IP rights in Russia. Included in the scope of these rights are protections flowing from patents, trademarks, and copyright.

Putin announced compulsory licensing, without any remuneration, of patents held by sanctioning states. Following this order, a Russian Court the trademark rights of Hasbro Inc. in its “Peppa Pig” and “Daddy Pig” marks, stating that the sanctions imposed on Russia “prejudice” the dispute. Russia has also suspended the operation of IP rights for “certain goods”, the ambit of which is unclear.

Russia has been accused of of IP rights in the past. Unsurprisingly, ��ܲ�������’s suspension of IP rights has only aggravated the situation. for various deceptive  marks have emerged, bearing similarity to renowned MNCs such as McDonald’s, Starbucks, Instagram, and Ikea. Russian entities will be able to like McDonald’s, Ford, and General Motors at their existing manufacturing facilities in Russia.

Going Forward

With the events in Russia and Ukraine still unfolding, it is difficult to say if we can expect IP rights to be restored in Russia anytime soon. Even if they are, Putin’s actions appear to have changed ��ܲ�������’s relationship with the rest of the world. US and Canadian companies do not have any way to enforce their IP rights in Russia. In this situation, the best move may be to restrict Russian-made infringing goods in foreign markets through .

The post Modern World’s Dirty Uncle Sal: Suspension of IP Rights in Russia appeared first on IPOsgoode.

Maria Prymachenko, (1982)

Claire Wortsman is an IPilogue Senior Editor and a 2L JD Candidate at Osgoode Hall Law School.

On February 25, invading Russian forces the Ivankiv Historical and Local Museum, and the many culturally and historically significant pieces it housed, to the ground. The Museum’s collection included 25 paintings by Maria Prymachenko, the celebrated Ukrainian artist world-famous for her colourful folk art style. Prymachenko’s great-granddaughter that a local man ran into the burning building and was able to save some of the precious works. Yet many more pieces were lost, and millions of artworks and monuments at risk from ��ܲ�������’s military onslaught. These those dating back to the Byzantine and Baroque periods, as well as UNESCO World Heritage sites.

Ukrainian Minister of Culture Olexandr Tkachenko has that Russia lose its UNESCO membership. The destruction of Ukrainian cultural heritage at the hands of Russia is not a novel occurrence -  the 2014 annexation of Crimea and the conflicts in Donetsk and Luhansk to the loss of dozens of archaeological, historical, and artistic collections. James Cuno, President of the J. Paul Getty Trust, released a condemning the cultural atrocities taking place in Ukraine alongside the unfathomable human and environmental losses. Cuno identifies that cultural heritage has the power to unite us, and is critical for achieving peace, making it a common target in war; a means of destroying a society by erasing its memory. Officials preserving and protecting cultural legacies in times of conflict has the power to bind local people and foster peace, once the shooting stops.

The importance of safeguarding cultural property extends beyond the borders of Ukraine. The preamble of the recognizes that “… any damage to cultural property, irrespective of the people it belongs to, is a damage to the cultural property of all humanity, because every people contributes to the world’s culture.” Putin’s continued violation of international law is a blow to the international legal order – one that Yale Law School’s Oona Hathaway and Scott Shapiro must be met with an aggressive and resolute response.

Uncertainty and crisis in Ukraine have left many fleeing their homes, while museum employees remain behind to look out for their collections in whatever way they can – whether by standing guard, hiding art in basements, or (for those farther away from the war zones) transforming into a place of temporary respite for those who have fled. Fedir Androshchuk, the director of the National Museum of the History of Ukraine, is standing alongside two colleagues in an to safeguard the museum from attack or looting. He that “the museum is located in the middle of a rich cultural heritage area near three fine churches, but also close to some possible targets (the Ukrainian security service and border forces).” This proximity to potential military targets is significant from an international law perspective, [1], as the carves a “military necessity” exception out of its protections for cultural property. As by Captain Joshua E. Kastenberg, “Where a defender state harbors items of military value… in or near cultural property, the property loses its legal protections.”[2]

Androshchuk also , “there is no guarantee that the Ukrainian cultural heritage will not be plundered and transferred to Russian museums, especially given that Kyiv has a special place in Putin’s interpretation of Russian history and its roots.” The destruction of Ukraine’s cultural heritage serves the narrative of Vladimir Putin, who that Ukraine is a nation and that Ukrainians are a people. Perpetrators of the intentional destruction of cultural heritage seek to destroy the communities for which the heritage is perceived as an essential element of their own life, cultural identity, and distinctiveness.[3] Yet Putin’s assault has backfired – Ukraine itself, the West against Russia, and images of Prymachenko’s uniquely Ukrainian style around the world.

[1] Captain Joshua E. Kastenberg, “The Legal Regime for Protecting Cultural Property During Armed Conflict,” Air Force Law Review 42 A.F.L Rev. (1997)

[2] Ibid

[3] Federico Lenzerini, “Intentional Destruction of Cultural Heritage,” The Oxford Handbook of International Cultural Heritage Law (2020)

The post A Dove Has Spread Her Wings and Asks for Peace: Ukrainian Cultural Heritage at Risk appeared first on IPOsgoode.

Junghi Woo is an IPilogue Writer and a 3L JD Candidate at Osgoode Hall Law School.

On July 2, 2021, Russian President Vladimir Putin signed that redefined the world’s infamous bubbly drink. According to this change, only Russian-made Shampanskoye can use the prestigious “champagne” label in Russia. Non-Russian producers must now label their competing products as “sparkling wine” in Russia. 

This legislation contrasts (EU) to enforce geographical indication protection for wines and spirits. The term “champagne” was originally reserved for sparkling wine produced in the Champagne wine region of France. . Incidentally, they import cultural and economic value to such labels due to the quality or reputation attached to the geographical origin. For France, champagne is one of the most prestigious and expensive spirits in the market. Its objections were unsurprising, to say the least.

Despite its threats to suspend exports to Russia upon hearing of the news, Moët Hennessy, the world-famous champagne producer responsible for Veuve Clicquot, Ruinart, Mercier, Krug, and Dom Pérignon, retracted and announced that “

(WTO) that gives them a monopoly over the use of their brands. Franck Riester, France’s foreign trade minister, discussed the possibility of defending the interests of French champagne producers through legal action. European Commission spokeswoman Miriam Garcia Ferrer emphasized that the EU would support France in this endeavor to protect its rights.

, entitled “Geographical Indications”, and , which prohibits states from introducing special requirements that would “unjustifiably encumber” the use of affected trademarks, both may apply in this scenario. While trademark law protecting geographical indications is fairly straightforward, Article 20 caused a fair amount of political debate this past decade.

For example, in 2020, , prohibiting brand logos, designs, emblems, and slogans. This decision was upheld due to health concerns over the use of bright, flashy packaging to undermine health warnings and promote smoking. The WTO justified this decision as discouraging the consumption of a harmful and deadly product.

However, there appears to be no policy considerations for this legislative change as President Putin previously made similar decisions for Russia. For example, in 2014, to promote local products. In a way, this affects economic competition between products as now French champagne producers may not be able to realize the full value of their products. The label’s misunderstandings may also confuse future generations on the true origins of “champagne”, one of the primary concerns of trademark law. In contrast, geographical indications may arguably lead to a monopoly and deter users from purchasing the same product merely because it comes from different locations. While geographical indications are not perfect, their impact may simply be fact-dependent.

This future ultimately depends on if France or the EU files a complaint to the WTO. The outcome of this case would serve as a strong landmark ruling on the international significance of the history and cultural heritage of your everyday glass of … sparkling wine.

The post Redefining an Industry: Where is Champagne From? appeared first on IPOsgoode.