UBA News (#07-08 July-August 2016)

Ukrainian Bar Association

Joint UBA Committees on IP Law and IT, Telecom & Internet Law

On 7 June 2016 the Ukrainian Bar Association’s seminar on Software Patenting was held. It was organized jointly by the Association’s Committee on IP Law and Committee on IT, Telecom & Internet Law. The discussion on the seminar was devoted to protection of IP rights to software in Ukraine. Among the main questions raised were: copyright or patent may ensure better protection for IT technologies? How to provide the most effective protection for such technologies, and others. Serhiy Petrenko, head of expert research center of the Intellectual Property Research Institute at the National Academy of Law Sciences of Ukraine, explained that Ukrainian copyright legislation and related rights do not meet modern requirements. The speaker paid special attention to the fact that it is impossible to patent software as it refers to objects of copyright. According to him, the invention must solve some technical problems as well as achieve a certain technical results. Kateryna Oliinyk, senior associate and head of IP practice at Arzinger Law Office, described the peculiarities ofsoftware and business methods patenting in the United States. Olena Vardamatska, lawyer, head of IP/IT practice at Wolf Theiss in Kiev, drew attention to the ways of granting software patents and showed statistics on filed patent applications. Thus, in 2015 out of 10,000 software patent applications in Europe only about 25% were satisfied. Ms. Vardamatska clearly explained the main advantages and disadvantages of software patenting. Mariya Ortynska, director of IPStyle Patent Law Company spoke in the support of patenting. During her speech, Ms. Ortynska admitted that registration of copyright to a computer program is the most obvious and easiest way, but is not always efficient in case of infringement. Petro Borovyk, managing partner of Borovyk & Partners, attracted the audience’s attention by saying that patent regulation should became an important element of a global competition policy. In general, the participants came to a common view that the topic should be developed and that Ukrainian patent legislation requires enhancement regarding patents in the IT sphere.

 

UBA Committee on International Law

On 30 June the UBA Committee on International Law held a round table dedicated to recovery of stolen assets. By way of introduction Yuri Kushnir, head of UBA International Law, managing partner of law firm Kushnir, Yakym’yak & Partners, said that this issue is gaining proper relevance thanks to new legislative initiatives.

During the roundtable Vitaly Vlasyuk, legal advisor of the ePravo law firm, explained why asset recovery is important to clients of law firms and our state. First of all, he noted that asset recovery can be carried out by the state or by specialist companies. While explaining the asset recovery algorithm, he said that the first stage is asset tracing: intelligence and evidence, and then securing assets. The next stage is the court process and after all this stages — enforcement of assets. He also answered the question why the main theme of the meeting is important for Ukraine. In particular, he noted two revolutions in just 10 years, world leading positions in corruption rating, PEPs are believed to steal state money regularly, and to move it abroad; and finally a lack of understanding of how international asset tracing and recovery functions work.

The participant discussed several cases such as Vladimiro Montesinos, long-standing head of Peru’s intelligence service, Frederick Chiluba Zambian politician, who was the second President of Zambia and Diepreye Alamieyeseigha, a Nigerian politician.

Karla Sheerin-Griffin, associate at Stephenson Harwood LLP, informed about recovery of assets in England and Wales, and explained why the English jurisdiction is so attractive for asset tracing. The main reason is that English legislation has a clear description of the return and freezing assets procedure. In her words, tracing is not a claim or remedy, but a process.

Finally, the audience learned about the role of a legal adviser during tracing and return of assets from Igor Semyonov, advisor of Eterna Law, coordinator of the search and return of assets practice. He drew attention to the main tasks of a legal counsel in asset tracing recovery, singling out such tasks as focusing on investigators on certain jurisdictions (on 2-3 most promising jurisdictions); working on evidence for further litigation/arbitration; developing a general legal strategy of dispute resolution and asset recovery.

In conclusion, the participants agreed that state and private companies consider asset recovery in different ways. For the most efficient asset recovery, the government should cooperate with private businesses, which have experience in such cases as well as international contacts.

Subscribe
The Ukrainian Journal of Business Law

Subscribe to The Ukrainian Journal of Business Law right now and enjoy the most relevant issues on doing business in Ukraine on your device or in print.

All this for just USD 9.99 a month.

 

Subscribe now