Maxim Shaskolsky, who leads the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Russian Federation (FAS), has argued for widening the parallel import framework so it covers all product categories. His stance is that by removing rigid price-setting by copyright holders and distributors, Russia could curb artificially high monopoly prices and improve consumer access. The officials behind this plan contend that a broad extension would align with a principle of exhaustion of rights that many countries recognize: once a product is legitimately sold abroad, the rights holder should not block its sale in another market. In practice, this would mean that imports from international markets could circulate domestically without triggering the same licensing or price-control hurdles that currently constrain competition. The idea is to create a more level playing field for goods that move across borders, reducing the leverage that copyright owners sometimes wield to coordinate price strategies across distribution channels. (RBC)
Shaskolsky notes that the country could reintroduce a form of international rights exhaustion that existed within Russia prior to 2002. Under this approach, goods released abroad would not face the same prohibitions or extra licensing barriers when sold inside Russia. Proponents argue this would foster fair competition by preventing monopolists from maintaining inflated prices simply because parallel routes to market are restricted. The aim is to ensure that imports can meet demand more efficiently and that consumers enjoy a broader selection at more affordable prices, while still preserving legitimate intellectual property protections where appropriate. The FAS envisions a transitional policy: while the broad parallel-import regime would be implemented, certain domestic manufacturers, those who invest in local production facilities, and firms that create jobs could be given temporary exemptions from the parallel-import rules. This compromise seeks to protect long-term domestic investment and industrial capability while still opening markets to cheaper or unique foreign goods on a temporary basis. (RBC)
In recent public remarks, Boris Titov, the entrepreneur rights advocate who previously held a presidential mandate to defend business interests, highlighted a specific example in the context of parallel imports. He asserted that Coca-Cola products, when sourced through parallel channels, could safely enter the Russian market and be available for purchase through alternate platforms such as Alibaba. Titov framed the issue as a practical one, asking what problems would arise from such a path and suggesting that parallel imports could play a significant role in expanding consumer access to well-known brands. He discussed these ideas during discussions at the SPIEF gathering, emphasizing that the friction often seen in retail could be mitigated through more permissive import frameworks and clearer regulatory signals. The conversation touched on broader questions about how foreign-brand goods are priced, distributed, and marketed in a way that benefits shoppers without undermining legitimate intellectual-property rights or investment in local manufacturing. (SPIEF) (Reuters)