Bad Faith and Trademark Squatting in Russia: Combating Pattern Filers Through Article 1512 and Unfair Competition Law

Trade mark squatting has become a significant and growing problem in Russia, particularly since 2022 when numerous foreign brands suspended or ceased operations in the country. Opportunistic filers — some acting individually, others systematically — have rushed to register well-known foreign marks or their imitations. Russian law provides several mechanisms to combat bad faith registrations, centred on Article 1512 of the Civil Code and the unfair competition provisions of the Federal Law on the Protection of Competition.

The Legal Framework: Multiple Pathways

Unlike some jurisdictions that have a single “bad faith” ground for invalidation, Russia addresses bad faith registrations through several interconnected legal provisions:

• Article 1512(2) — Invalidation based on statutory grounds: A registered mark can be invalidated through the Chamber of Patent Disputes (Палата по патентным спорам) of Rospatent if the registration violated any of the grounds listed in Article 1483 (absolute or relative grounds). For relative grounds (paragraphs 6, 7, and 10 of Article 1483), the invalidation must be filed within five years of the publication date. For absolute grounds (paragraphs 1–5, 8, and 9), the invalidation can be filed at any time during the mark’s validity.
• Article 1512(2)(6) — Unfair competition and abuse of rights: A trade mark registration can be challenged at any time during its validity if the registration is declared to constitute unfair competition (недобросовестная конкуренция) or an abuse of rights (злоупотребление правом). This is the primary weapon against bad faith squatters.
• Article 14.4 of the Federal Law on Protection of Competition: This provision specifically prohibits the unfair acquisition and use of exclusive rights to means of individualisation (including trade marks). The Federal Antimonopoly Service (FAS) has jurisdiction over these cases.

The Two-Step Procedure for Unfair Competition/Abuse of Rights

Invalidation based on unfair competition or abuse of rights under Article 1512(2)(6) requires a two-step procedure:

• Step 1 — Obtain a finding of unfair competition or abuse of rights: The legitimate brand owner must first obtain a formal decision from either the FAS (through an unfair competition complaint) or a court (through an abuse of rights claim) establishing that the trade mark registration constitutes unfair competition or an abuse of rights.
• Step 2 — File for invalidation at the Chamber of Patent Disputes: Based on the FAS decision or court ruling, the brand owner then files an invalidation action at the Chamber of Patent Disputes of Rospatent, requesting cancellation of the registration.

The two-step requirement means that the brand owner cannot go directly to the Chamber of Patent Disputes to argue bad faith — a preliminary finding from the FAS or a court is required first.

Proving Bad Faith and Unfair Competition

To succeed in an unfair competition claim before the FAS, the claimant must demonstrate:

• Competing relationship: The trade mark owner and the claimant must be in a competitive relationship — both operating or intending to operate in the same or related market.
• Contravention of business customs and good faith: The registration and/or use of the mark contradicts established business customs and the requirements of honesty, reason, and justice.
• Harm or potential harm: The registration has caused or may cause harm to the claimant’s business interests.

For an abuse of rights claim before a court, the claimant must show that the trade mark owner’s activity is solely aimed at causing harm to the defendant without a legitimate business interest.

The Observation Letter: An Early Intervention Tool

While Russia does not have a formal opposition system for pending applications, any person may file an observation letter (отзыв) with Rospatent drawing the examiner’s attention to grounds for refusal. Observation letters can cite prior rights, misleading character, bad faith indicators, and other non-registrability grounds. Rospatent is not obligated to act on observation letters, but in practice they are frequently considered during examination — making them one of the most effective early-stage tools against squatters.

Pattern Filers and the Post-2022 Landscape

Since 2022, Rospatent has seen a surge in applications for marks identical or confusingly similar to well-known foreign brands. Hundreds of applications have been filed for imitations of brands such as ASOS, Netflix, Louis Vuitton, and many others. Rospatent’s examination on both absolute and relative grounds has been an effective first line of defence — many obvious copycats are refused during examination for similarity to prior registrations or for being misleading as to the commercial origin of goods. However, squatters have adopted more sophisticated strategies, including filing in unrelated classes, using creative imitations, or targeting marks where the original owner’s registration has become vulnerable to non-use cancellation.

Strategic Recommendations

• Monitor aggressively: Use Rospatent’s free search platform and professional monitoring services to detect bad faith filings early.
• File observation letters promptly: When a squatter’s application is detected during examination, file an observation letter immediately — it is cost-effective and can prevent registration.
• Maintain your registrations: Ensure your Russian registrations remain in force and used. Non-use cancellation is the squatter’s primary weapon for removing obstacles to their own applications.
• Consider back-up filings: If you have ceased commercial operations in Russia, consider filing new back-up applications to maintain priority and blocking effect on the register.
• Pursue the two-step procedure: For registered squatter marks, engage the FAS or court to obtain an unfair competition finding, then proceed to the Chamber of Patent Disputes for invalidation.
• Gather evidence of the squatter’s pattern: A portfolio search against the squatter’s name revealing multiple filings of foreign brands strengthens both the unfair competition and abuse of rights arguments.

Key Takeaway

Russian law provides robust mechanisms to combat trade mark squatting, but the procedures are more complex than in many other jurisdictions. The two-step process for unfair competition invalidation, the observation letter tool for pending applications, and Rospatent’s own examination on absolute and relative grounds form a layered defence system. For brand owners — particularly those who have reduced operations in Russia — proactive monitoring, timely intervention, and maintenance of existing registrations are essential to protecting brand rights against an increasingly active squatting environment.