Special Knowledge and Forensic Examination as a Procedural Safeguard of Intellectual Property Rights Protection

Forensic examination is an important procedural safeguard for the protection of infringed intellectual rights in cases where the use of special knowledge is necessary to resolve a dispute, and at the same time it should not be considered as a procedural safeguard and a means of protection in cases where special knowledge is not required to establish the fact of the use of an object of intellectual rights. At the legislative level, there is no legal regulation of the issue of the need for special knowledge to establish the fact of the use of an object of intellectual rights in disputes about their infringement, it is not complete at the level of clarifications of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation and the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, in some aspects it differs from the long-established Rospatent approaches and, therefore, it needs clarification. Due to the similar legal nature of industrial designs, trademarks (service marks) and copyright objects of a visual nature, the paper proposes to clarify and apply uniformly an approach by virtue of which special knowledge is not required but the perception of a narrow circle of buyers/users of the relevant goods/services may be used to assess their identity or similarity, general visual impression and derivative. In such cases, both the conclusion of a forensic examination and non-judicial expert opinions should not be treated as admissible evidence. In other cases, when special knowledge is necessary, it is proposed to consider only those conclusions of forensic examination and extra-judicial examinations that were carried out by persons qualified not only in the field of protection, examination and evaluation of intellectual property rights, but also in the field to which the object under study belongs. Such examinations can also be of a complex nature.

1. Diakonova OG. Special knowledge in judicial and other jurisdictional activities of the EAEU member states: theory and practice. Dr. Sci. (Law) Diss. Moscow, 2021. (In Russ.).

2. Novoselova LA. Vorozhevich AS, Grin OS, Korneev VA, et al. Novoselova LA (ed.). Intellectual property law. Vol. 3: Means of individualization. Moscow: Statut Publ.; 2018. (In Russ.).

3. Pfeiffer EG. Forensic examinations of the results of intellectual activity : theory and practice of appointment, conduct and evaluation of research results. Cand. Sci. (Law) Diss. Moscow; 2016. (In Russ.).

4. Popovsky MM. The signs of unfair competition related to the creation of confusion. The Modern Lawyer. 2018;2:167-176. (In Russ.).

5. Sakhnova TV. Expertise in civil procedure: theoretical research. Dr. Sci. (Law) Diss. Moscow; 1998. (In Russ.).

6. Savchenko AS. Theoretical and methodological foundations of the production of forensic examination of intellectual property objects. Cand. Sci. (Law) Diss. Moscow, 2021. (In Russ.).

7. Smirnova RA, Kuzmenko TV, Balakireva TS. Brands and trademarks as objects of sociological study in the practice of dispute resolution. Sociology. 2016;2:132-139. (In Russ.).

8. Tsaregorodtsev EA, Silina EV. Theoretical and Legal Problems of Forensic Expert Activity in Cases of Intellectual Property Rights Protection. Journal of the Intellectual Property Rights Court. 2019;25:53-57. (In Russ.).

9. Valeev DKh. The system of procedural guarantees of the rights of citizens and organizations in enforcement proceedings. Moscow: Statute Publ.; 2009. (In Russ.).