American Commission

Recently, on everyone's lips patent wars that are taking place between the IT giants. Quite often they are involved and small software companies. For example, a small Canadian company Mosaid Technologies, has developed and patented technology maps of DRAM, multimillion-dollar compensation sued the company Samsung. However, the patent wars spread to other areas. Patent War, for example, a well-known corporation Kodak for 20 years Polaroid sued for the right to release digital cameras with instant photos. Almost all cases have been lost, Kodak failed to produce similar cameras. Founder of Polaroid in time and carefully patented the idea of instant photography, by which earned millions of dollars on its exclusive distribution. Almost three years have gone, Sharp and Samsung to fight over patents on some of the components of liquid crystal panels. The dispute began in August 2007 when the company Sharp has filed a U.S. lawsuit against Samsung, claiming that produced LCD panels violate five issued U.S. patents Sharp. Samsung has filed counter-claims dispute later examined by the European courts and the Commission on International Trade in the U.S.. As a result, the Hague court ruled in favor of Sharp, and banned the importation of products Samsung, infringing patents Sharp, a similar resolution adopted American Commission. All this, apparently, Samsung has pushed for an agreement with Sharp. Its details were not disclosed, we know only that it provides for cross licensing of technologies. Consideration of a patent dispute laissez-passer (patent or certificate) – a document, the anchor for its owner a monopoly in any particular market sector (in technology, product, or symbol). The only possibility to deprive a competitor of monopoly – is to stop the patent or certificate. To date, the Chamber of Patent Disputes inundated with claims and objections on the early termination of the legal protection of registered trademarks, patented inventions and utility models. Reasons for early termination of exclusive rights may be different, but the goal is always the same – to deprive the competitor's monopoly. Very often the first step in this process is the filing of objections or statement to the Chamber of Patent Disputes. If the decision of the House does not satisfy either side of the process, the next step could be filing a claim in court against the decision of the House. Especially frequent disputes over utility models. Unlike invention, utility model during the registration does not pass a substantive examination (only formal examination). All responsibility for the fact that utility model does not violate the rights of third parties is at the patentee. This used by unscrupulous competitors who often record over previously known solutions, and, sometimes, and patented earlier decision. In this case, to deprive a competitor of exclusive rights can only be ahead of schedule annulling the patent. I came, I saw a patent is interesting that some companies are specially created to look for unpatented innovations and profitable ideas. Patent them, they try to sell patent is in fact its the same owners or competitors. It is also possible that a patent decision known abroad, but not represented, and not patented. Thus, the patent holder tries to bring to Russian market a new product by copying it to foreign counterparts, while secure for itself the exclusive right to use it.

Federal Constitutional Law

In accordance with Article 103 of the Constitution to conduct State Duma to add "hear annual reports of the Russian Federation on the results of its activities, including on issues raised by the State Duma," and under Article 114 Constitution of the Russian Federation and added a new commitment of the Government of the Russian Federation to the State Duma: "… the State Duma is an annual report on its activities, including on issues raised State Duma … ". The adopted amendments to the Constitution of the Russian Federation were the amendments to the Federal Constitutional Law "On the Government of the Russian Federation," according to which "the preparation of annual reports on the results of Government of the Russian Federation, including on issues raised by the State Duma, according to the procedure prescribed by the Regulations of the Government of the Russian Federation. " However, in the regulation of the Government If Prime Minister will not be able to attend a meeting of the State Duma? Are there an analogy, where according to the Rules of the Government of the Russian Federation: "Members of the Government shall at the invitation of the Chambers Federal Assembly … to attend the meeting and answer questions … the State Duma in the order determined by the regulations of the chambers … In case no possibility of the presence in the meeting chambers of the Federal Assembly member of the Government shall notify the House of the reason for his absence with an indication of a person who may attend the meeting and answer questions.