Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
The Russian Vodka Saga
What do the fall of the Soviet Union, a heist of trademark rights, and Stolichnaya vodka have in common? They are all key components of the Russian Federation's efforts to reclaim its trademarks in Stolichnaya vodka. After a convoluted history both of the transfer of these marks and the litigation to recover these marks, Federal Treasury Enterprise Sojuzplodoimport (FTE), the entity seeking to recover the Stolichnaya marks for the Russian Federation, has finally survived a motion to dismiss its case of trademark infringement after sixteen years of litigation. Federal Treasury Enterprise Sojuzplodoimport v. Spirits International B.V., 2020 WL 4349840 (S.D.N.Y. July 29, 2020). So why did it take so long for FTE to get to this stage?
The Stolichnaya marks have passed through many hands in a series of confusing corporate transactions. They have taken the following path to their current disputed ownership:
- In 1969, a Soviet state entity named V/O-SPI obtained a United States trademark for Stolichnaya vodka.
- V/O-SPI is renamed to VVO-SPI.
- VVO-SPI assigned the United States mark to PepsiCo in 1991; this assignment would revert to VVO-SPI in 2001.
- VVO-SPI was privatized and renamed to VAO-SPI.
- VAO-SPI represented to PepsiCo that it was the successor of VVO-SPI so that it would revert the marks to VAO-SPI.
- VAO-SPI's successor-in-interest sold the reversionary rights to ZAO-SPI.
- ZAO-SPI sold the rights to Spirits International.
- Spirits International entered into several distribution agreements; relevant here, it entered into an agreement with WGS to sell and distribute Stolichnaya vodka in the United States in 2008.
On its face, these transactions, while convoluted, do not seem to imply that the Russian Federation is still the proper owner of the Stolichnaya marks. But the list of these transactions omits one key fact — the privatization of VVO-SPI to VAO-SPI was fraudulent, as the Second Circuit found in 2010.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
Use of Deferred Prosecution Agreements In White Collar Investigations
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.
The DOJ's New Parameters for Evaluating Corporate Compliance Programs
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.
CLE Shouldn't Be the Only Mandatory Training for Attorneys
Each stage of an attorney's career offers opportunities for a curriculum that addresses both the individual's and the firm's need to drive success.
Discovery of Claim Construction and Infringement Analysis May be Compelled Prior to a Markman Hearing
A defendant in a patent infringement suit may, during discovery and prior to a <i>Markman</i> hearing, compel the plaintiff to produce claim charts, claim constructions, and element-by-element infringement analyses.