UKRAINE Trends and Developments Contributed by: Yaroslav Ognevyuk and Tetiana Ognevyuk, AMBASSADORS
In practice, this makes enforcement significantly more complex. The distinction between lawful paral- lel trade and unauthorised distribution is rarely obvi - ous. It requires analysing how supply chains operate in practice, including who controls them and where they diverge from intended structures. Customs enforcement plays a central role in this con- text. Border measures often represent the first point at which deviations in distribution can be identified. Their effectiveness depends not only on legal mechanisms but also on the ability to provide timely and precise information. In many cases, the effectiveness of bor- der measures depends less on the law itself and more on the quality of co-ordination with rights holders. At the same time, timing remains critical. Market con- ditions evolve quickly, and enforcement that is delayed may have limited practical impact. Even successful legal action may not restore a position once products have established themselves within the market. In this environment, IP protection is closely linked to the ability to understand and monitor distribution A significant share of IP-related disputes has gradually moved into the digital environment. In some cases, enforcement resembles a continuous process rather than a series of discrete actions. Online marketplaces, social media platforms and informal channels have become primary points of distribution. These environments are characterised by speed and constant change. Listings appear and dis- appear quickly. Sellers operate across multiple plat- forms without a stable or easily identifiable presence. This affects how enforcement is carried out. Traditional mechanisms, including litigation, remain relevant but are often insufficient on their own. By the time a formal process reaches its conclusion, the underlying activity may have shifted or reappeared elsewhere. rather than simply react to infringement. Digital markets and the fragmentation of enforcement
Effective protection therefore requires continuous monitoring and the ability to respond quickly within platform-specific frameworks, alongside broader legal strategies. The challenge is not only to address individual instanc- es of infringement, but to understand how they are organised and replicated across different channels. Trade secrets and military innovation: confidentiality as protection Another important development concerns the growing role of trade secrets. Technological development in Ukraine has acceler- ated, particularly in areas that combine engineering, defence and digital solutions. In many cases, these innovations are not protected through patents. Disclo- sure may be incompatible with security considerations or with the pace of technological change. As a result, businesses rely increasingly on confiden- tiality. This approach is no longer limited to defence-related sectors. It is also relevant in software, industrial pro- cesses and data-driven products, where control over information provides a competitive advantage. This is particularly evident in proprietary datasets and data- driven models, where traditional IP frameworks offer only partial protection. However, protection of trade secrets depends on organisational practice rather than formal registration. The existence of a trade secret must be supported by internal measures that demonstrate its confidential nature. Access to information needs to be defined and controlled. Contractual arrangements must be struc- tured to allow enforcement. Documentation must reflect that confidentiality is actively maintained. Where these elements are absent, protection may fail regardless of the importance of the information itself. For investors, this introduces additional complexity. Evaluating IP assets requires an understanding of internal systems as much as formal rights. The value
390 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook