A Win for Peppa Pig

In early 2022, eOne entertainment, the owner of the trademarks and copyrights to the well-known cartoon series, Peppa Pig has initiated a copyright infringement lawsuit against a Russian content creator, Sconnect, for creating animated characters which allegedly, borrowed heavily from Peppa Pig, without authorization from eOne, thereby infringing eOne’s copyright and trademark rights.

Precisely, Sconnect’s animated shows is about an anthropomorphic young wolf named Wolfoo, his family, and friend. eOne entertainment claimed that this is similar to the Peppa Pig shows, which features the stories of the main character, Peppa, an anthropomorphic female piglet, and her family, and her friends which are portrayed as other animal.

The Arbitration Court’s Controversial Decision

At first instance, the Arbitration Court has made an unexpected decision whereby the court dismissed eOne’s copyright infringement case in Russia pursuant to no.79 of the President’s Decree, “On the application of special economic measures in connection with the unfriendly actions of the United States of America and foreign states and international organizations that have joined them.” Consequently, the Court found that the said suit was made in bad faith. Since Peppa Pig originated from the UK, it was said that this decision was made in retaliation for the UK’s sanction against Russia.

This essentially meant that Russian will now be able to freely abuse copyrighted materials without consequences, and this has undoubtedly opened a floodgate to intellectual property litigation.

Court of Appeal Reverses the Decision

Nevertheless, the Court of Appeal later overturned the decision of Arbitration Court on the grounds that the intellectual property rights of foreign organization should be protected since Russia is one of the signatories of Berne Convention and the Madrid Agreement.

In particular, the Court stated that: “… the equal protection of intellectual property of foreign organizations, including those registered in the UK, is guaranteed on the territory of the Russian Federation. Consequently, the filing of a claim in itself cannot be recognized as an act of bad faith in relation to Article 10 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. The motives given in the decision of the court of the first instance are not based on the correct application of substantive law.”

Although eOne Entertainment still managed to assert their rights in the end, it appears that there is still a long way to go for trademark owners in Russia. This is because following the sanctions, many applications were made to register marks that are identical to big brands, taking advantage of the fact that many big brands have suspended or halted their business operations in Russia. That said, the decision of the Court of Appeal certainly did reduce the uncertainties surrounding this area of law. This is definitely a long-overdue relief for those seeking to protect their intellectual property rights in Russia.