The client always needs one thing - a practical and efficient integrated solution to the problem; given the specifics of our company, such a solution cannot be provided without legal support. The legal department is exactly the structure that protects the rights and interests of the copyright holder.
The main goal here is to get involved in the client's business objectives and find the right solution that allows you to achieve the commercial goals of the project.
Nikolay Grinko, Arbitration Lawyer at TKM, answered several questions on legal topics, revealing the main principles of the company's arbitration department:
1. What is included in your main list of responsibilities, what tasks do you consider the most interesting in your specifics?
The most interesting, for sure, is to work with opponents during court hearings, especially if it is necessary to debate with an experienced colleague.
2. What is the duration of cases’ consideration in court; in general, how would you define the time frame for the consideration of the case (minimum/maximum period)?
It is difficult to define even an approximate range, it can last from 2 months to 1,5 years, but if to take the average value - about 4-6 months.
3. Has the number of cases won by the company in court increased in 2021 compared to 2020?
The number of cases won has certainly increased, as has the quality of the work itself. We endeavor to develop and both rely on our own experience and adopt the experience of colleagues, which has a positive effect on the results of TKM's activities.
4. Can you indicate the maximum amount of recovery in 2021?
Sure, the amount was about five million rubles.
5. How, in your opinion, has the judicial practice changed in the context of considering the illegal use of intellectual property? Is it possible to note any trend in the decision-making of the court in relation to offenders? Copyright holders?
It is impossible to say unequivocally about changes for the better or for the worse, as everything depends on the region, local practice and direct decision-making by the judges. However, I can share the following consideration: the practice is developing, and arbitration courts have begun to consider such cases in more detail. Nevertheless, there are a large number of nuances, which the courts have to improve for a long time.
6. If we are talking about the judicial system, what do you think can be improved there?
I think it would be rational to toughen the punishment for judges for overturned decisions. Courts can be negligent in the case due to both high workload and elementary illiteracy. Moreover, we must not forget about corruption, which has always been a huge problem. I believe that the relative impunity of judges for wrong decisions leads to indifference, which gives rise to wrong practices and injustice - priori unacceptable in the judiciary.
7. Finally, what do you think is the most effective way to deal with counterfeiting?
One of the main tools is feedback from the consumers themselves, who could inform the authorities or right holders about the discovery of counterfeit products. The issue of counterfeiting primarily negatively affects the consumer, not the seller. Accordingly, the most important is to establish communication channels with consumers, which will help to most efficiently and quickly detect counterfeit goods in order to further counter the illegal circulation of fakes.