Answer to two previous questions: The rights the 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 author or primary rightholder is a legal person.

According to point 5 of Article 1263 of the Civil Code 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 creation of film (the producer – Article 1240 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation).

The term of protection for audiovisual work is the 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 Federation according to what the exclusive right to 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 copyright (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 liquidation – 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 work, if work unpublished than since day of creation of work what provided in Article 6 of the Federal Law of the Russian Federation from 18th December 2006 No. 231-FL "About introduction by acting Fourth Part of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation".

In case of breach of the exclusive right to the results of intellectual activity and to means of individualization rightholder have right in particular 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 acquired (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.

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 quotas govern that counterfeit copies of works and turn materials and implements the predominant use 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 confusion 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.

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 controversial copies of works and also corresponding materials and implements.

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 particular 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 question 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 topology of integrated circuits. Such objects are recognized as independent result of intellectual 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 granted 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.

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 particular 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 question 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 topology of integrated circuits. Such objects are recognized as independent result of intellectual 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 granted 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.

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 particular 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 question 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 topology of integrated circuits. Such objects are recognized as independent result of intellectual 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 granted 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.

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 conduct of an experiment on such a product, method, or manufacture. This rule allows any person to make sure of the actual properties and characteristics declared in the description to the patent or in the rightholder's advertisement prior to contacting the rightholder and only after doing 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 research 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 commercialization 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. 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. However the patent holder shall be notified of such use as soon as possible with subsequent 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 procedure of the patent holder of such use of an invention, utility model, or industrial design and 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 Paragraph 1 of Article 2 CC RF business activity shall be an independent activity, performed at one's own risk, 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 capacity in conformity with the law-established procedure. Also a citizen, engaged in business activities without forming a legal entity with the violation of the requirements of Item 1 of the present 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.

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 conduct of an experiment on such a product, method, or manufacture. This rule allows any person to make sure of the actual properties and characteristics declared in the description to the patent or in the rightholder's advertisement prior to contacting the rightholder and only after doing 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 research 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 commercialization 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. 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. However the patent holder shall be notified of such use as soon as possible with subsequent 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 procedure of the patent holder of such use of an invention, utility model, or industrial design and 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 Paragraph 1 of Article 2 CC RF business activity shall be an independent activity, performed at one's own risk, 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 capacity in conformity with the law-established procedure. Also a citizen, engaged in business activities without forming a legal entity with the violation of the requirements of Item 1 of the present 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.

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 conduct of an experiment on such a product, method, or manufacture. This rule allows any person to make sure of the actual properties and characteristics declared in the description to the patent or in the rightholder's advertisement prior to contacting the rightholder and only after doing 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 research 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 commercialization 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. 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. However the patent holder shall be notified of such use as soon as possible with subsequent 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 procedure of the patent holder of such use of an invention, utility model, or industrial design and 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 Paragraph 1 of Article 2 CC RF business activity shall be an independent activity, performed at one's own risk, 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 capacity in conformity with the law-established procedure. Also a citizen, engaged in business activities without forming a legal entity with the violation of the requirements of Item 1 of the present 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.

Article 1360 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation regulates relationships about use of an Invention, Utility Model, or Industrial Design in the 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 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 integrality 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 28th 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 proportionate compensation to him. But Article 1360 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation do not define an order and term of notification by patent holder about use of invention, utility model or industrial design and does not provide a method of calculation of compensation.

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 Protection 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 three 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 the 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 compulsory 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 may 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 acting of the Compulsory license 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 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 Russian 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 patent 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, patenting 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 Protection of Industrial Property so long as the 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 Federation is provided in procedural legislation.

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 Protection 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 three 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 the 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 compulsory 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 may 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 acting of the Compulsory license 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 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 Russian 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 patent 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, patenting 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 Protection of Industrial Property so long as the 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 Federation is provided in procedural legislation.

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 Protection 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 three 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 the 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 compulsory 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 may 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 acting of the Compulsory license 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 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 Russian 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 patent 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, patenting 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 Protection of Industrial Property so long as the 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 Federation is provided in procedural legislation.

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 Protection 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 three 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 the 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 compulsory 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 may 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 acting of the Compulsory license 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 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 Russian 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 patent 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, patenting 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 Protection of Industrial Property so long as the 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 Federation is provided in procedural legislation.

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 Protection 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 three 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 the 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 compulsory 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 may 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 acting of the Compulsory license 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 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 Russian 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 patent 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, patenting 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 Protection of Industrial Property so long as the 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 Federation is provided in procedural legislation.

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, and wide known with respect to goods of person who think his trademark is generally known (Article 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 the 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 trademark (e.g. annual financial reports), cost (value) of trademark in conformity with data in annual financial reports, the results of interrogation of consumers in question of generally-known of trademark is produced by specialized independent organization.

Article 46 "Other Remedies" of the TRIPS Agreement 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 Russian 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 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).