The next round of the "chocolate war" between

The next round of the "chocolate war" between "Primkonom" and "United Confectioners" will take place on August 22. The Court granted the warring parties time for written explanations. The essence of the issue is the right to use trademarks. Contested decision of the Trademark "Burenka", "School" and "Pilot". Earlier, the lawyers of "Seaside confectioner" said JSC "United Confectioners" had no right to register these marks, respectively court decision that had previously been rendered in favor of the "United Confectioners", violate the law on protection of competition and the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. It is worth recalling that the holding "United Confectioners" owns the exclusive right to trademarks, well-known since the days of the Soviet Union, the so-called "Soviet brands." In a statement filed at the end of 2012 the plaintiffs ("United Confectioners") requested to collect from the defendant ("Seaside pastry") in compensation of 5 million rubles for each trademark infringement, arguing that they are the owners of marks and those that of "Seaside confectioner" continues the production and sale of confectionery products marked with the notation similar to the notation of the holding. However, in parallel with this there was another situation where the deputies of the Legislative Assembly of Primorsky Krai in the last session, made a proposal to amend the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. Initiative members are connected with the situation around the company "Seaside confectioner." Initiated by the introduction of Part IV of the Civil Code. Maritimes MPs propose to make changes to the federal law, and the rate of return, which operated until 2007. It provides that a manufacturer who produced the products under the Soviet brand until 1992 retains the right to continue their free use. "After the abolition of the federal law of the Russian producers are in constant litigation between them" - said the deputy Valery Khan. During Soviet times, all confectioneries working to the same standards and producing chocolate and candy, similar in range and compounding. Product names can be registered by the parent company or the name of the developer. With the global shortage and the lack of real competition in trademark law was not necessary. Across the country produced candy and chocolate with the same name. According to the seaside deputies if permanent legal proceedings will occur in the future, a large number of people could lose wages and jobs, and the federal, regional and local budget accordingly - tax revenues. That is why federal legislation is necessary to establish that such trademarks should be the subject of collective ownership of enterprises.

Eugene Zhitnikova, RIA «VladNews»