Read our overview below to learn about legislative changes, the legalisation of parallel imports and modern tools for combating counterfeit goods.

What Has Changed in Anti-Counterfeiting Enforcement?

Despite numerous media reports, there have been no major changes either in the legal regulation

of intellectual property or in enforcement practice.

The widely reported "cancellation of compensation" for foreign rights holders from "unfriendly

countries" applies only to payments under compulsory licences for patented inventions in the

interests of national security under Article 1360 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation.

This provision is applied only in exceptional circumstances. The only examples of its

implementation concerned remdesivir, a medicine used to treat COVID-19. It is therefore

difficult to imagine that this rule will have any effect on the children’s products industry in

Russia.

Court decisions refusing to protect intellectual property rights on the ground that the rights

holder is registered in an "unfriendly country"[1] are rare exceptions in current judicial practice,

rather than the general rule.[2] Russia also remains a party to all major international conventions

in the field of intellectual property.

In other words, rights holders continue to have access to a wide range of anti-counterfeiting tools

that are consistent with international standards. They may cooperate with the police and customs

authorities, seek administrative, criminal and civil liability for infringers, demand the seizure and

destruction of counterfeit goods, and claim compensation for infringement.

The only legislative changes of real significance to the children’s products industry concern the

legalisation of parallel imports.

Parallel Imports in the New Environment

In response to sanctions pressure, the Government of the Russian Federation decided to legalise

parallel imports for certain categories of goods.[3] The relevant list was approved by Order No.

1532 of the Ministry of Industry and Trade of Russia dated 19 April 2022

Accordingly, original goods included in the approved list may currently be imported into Russia

without the consent of the rights holder, including through channels other than the official

distribution network.

It should be emphasised that the legalisation of parallel imports does not legalise counterfeit

goods or reduce product quality requirements.

The Ministry of Industry and Trade has also stressed that products imported into Russia must

comply with all applicable quality requirements and standards and must be accompanied by the

necessary permits and authorisations.[4]

The Ministry’s Order entered into force on 7 May 2022 It is still too early to draw conclusions

about its application by the customs authorities. In the absence of official guidance, only

preliminary observations can be made.

The approved list includes several categories relevant to the children’s products industry.

Examples include goods classified under EAEU Commodity Classification Code Group 95,

which covers toys, games, sports equipment and their parts and accessories, and Groups 61 and

62, which cover clothing and clothing accessories.

However, the approach of the customs authorities may differ depending on the category:

• EAEU Commodity Classification Codes 61 and 62, covering clothing, are listed without

reference to specific trade marks. It may therefore be concluded that the importation of

any goods falling within the relevant codes is permitted.

• Under EAEU Commodity Classification Group 95, covering toys, the list includes Code

9504 50 000 9 for video game consoles and the specific trade marks Xbox, PlayStation

and Nintendo. It may therefore currently be assumed that parallel imports are permitted

only for goods bearing those trade marks.

What Steps Can Be Taken in the Current Situation?

Monitor Customs Practice and Propose Amendments to the Parallel Import

List

The structure of the Order indicates that certain trade marks have been excluded from the list.

This applies, for example, to goods in EAEU Commodity Classification Group 33, covering

essential oils, resinoids, perfumery, cosmetic and toilet preparations.

It appears reasonable to assume that exclusions were made for brands that had not announced

their withdrawal from the Russian market.

Media reports previously cited the Minister of Industry and Trade, Denis Manturov, as stating

that the Ministry was prepared to amend the list of brands covered by parallel imports promptly,

depending on whether particular companies continued operating in Russia.[5]

Where a company has not announced its withdrawal from Russia and no shortage of its products

has arisen, it may therefore be appropriate to submit proposals to the Ministry of Industry and

Trade requesting an amendment to the list.

Record the Trade Mark in the National Customs IP Registers of EAEU

Countries

The legalisation of parallel imports for certain goods in Russia does not mean that the same rules

apply throughout all EAEU Member States.

Recording a trade mark in the national Customs Registers of Intellectual Property Objects of

Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan may help control the importation of goods into

those countries and their subsequent movement into Russia.

Use Modern Anti-Counterfeiting Tools

The reduction of previous levels of control by rights holders may result in the market receiving

not only genuine goods imported through parallel channels, but also low-quality counterfeit

products.

Anti-counterfeiting enforcement should therefore continue, as the reputation of the brand directly

depends on it.

Modern technologies can significantly simplify the identification of online offers for counterfeit

goods and reduce enforcement costs.

One such solution is GIPSECURITY, a service that monitors online offers for goods bearing a

protected intellectual property asset, such as a trade mark, on a 24/7 basis.

The service allows rights holders to obtain a comprehensive view of potential infringements

across different online resources and determine an appropriate enforcement strategy.

It can be used to send cease-and-desist letters and complaints to infringers, website

administrators, social media platforms, search engines, domain name owners, internet service

providers, registrars and hosting providers.

As a general rule, most infringements, approximately 80%, can be resolved at the pre-litigation

stage.

Where an infringer fails to respond, traditional enforcement measures remain available,

including preservation of evidence, test purchases, cease-and-desist letters and court

proceedings.

[1] The Peppa Pig case, Case No. A28-11930/2021, attracted significant public attention. At the

time of writing, the decision was being appealed before the Second Commercial Court of

Appeal.

[2] Examples of cases in which the courts rejected defendants’ arguments concerning the rights

holder’s connection with an "unfriendly country" include Cases Nos. A67-988/2022, A67-

1451/2022, A67-1389/2022, A67-2038/2022 and A27-10992/2021.

[3] See Resolution No. 506 of the Government of the Russian Federation dated 29 March 2022,

"On Goods and Groups of Goods in Respect of Which Certain Provisions of the Civil Code of

the Russian Federation on the Protection of Exclusive Rights to the Results of Intellectual

Activity Embodied in Such Goods and the Means of Individualisation Used to Mark Such Goods

May Not Be Applied".

[4] Ministry of Industry and Trade of the Russian Federation: "The removal of liability for

parallel imports will not affect the requirement for product marking."

[5] TASS report concerning the Ministry of Industry and Trade’s readiness to amend the list of

brands covered by parallel imports depending on companies’ decisions regarding their operations

in Russia.

14 July 2026