Exclusive: Appeal launched over ‘Russian warship’ trademark rejection

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Exclusive: Appeal launched over ‘Russian warship’ trademark rejection

Russian ship 600-compborder.jpg

The phrase ‘Russian warship, go fuck yourself’ went viral in the wake of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, but the corresponding EUTM application failed

The applicant behind an EU trademark application for the phrase 'Russian warship, go fuck yourself' has appealed against the EUIPO’s decision to reject the filing in December, Managing IP can reveal.

Legal representatives for the Administration of the State Border Guard Service of Ukraine filed an appeal on Tuesday, February 21.

The administration’s representatives, Brussels-based law firm Bukovnik & Kulbaba IP Guardians, said the rejection decision was groundless and that they planned to take their appeal as far as necessary.

“The decision says people would consider the mark to be immoral, but there is no evidence as to why,” said Taras Kulbaba, a partner at the firm.

“The examiner also said there is no evidence that mark has a positive message but does not explain why.”

Official grounds for the appeal must be submitted by April 23.

The EUTM application was filed in March last year, shortly after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. It was closely watched as an example of how the EUIPO would handle issues of morality.

Products launched using the mark, which sought to cover goods including merchandise and clothes, would have been used to encourage donations to Ukraine.

At first, the application was filed under the name Roman Hrybov, which is the Ukrainian version of Roman Gribov, the soldier who first uttered the phrase.

In June, ownership of the mark was transferred to the State Border Guard Service, the body tasked with policing Ukraine’s borders.

The application was a homage to Gribov’s parting call to an advancing Russian warship before he and other soldiers were captured and detained last February.

The phrase went viral on social media soon after and became a symbol of defiance in support of Ukraine.

But unlike other EUTMs filed in a similar vein, such as 'Je suis Charlie' and 'I can't breathe', this one had an extra hurdle to clear: its use of a swear word increased the chances of it being refused on morality grounds.

However, some practitioners held the view that – in the EU at least – the phrase would not be considered immoral due to Europe’s support for Ukraine.

Tomorrow, February 24, marks exactly one year since Russia invaded Ukraine.

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

VO, which has offices in the Netherlands, Belgium and Germany, is the second European IP firm to secure external backing this week
The Bardehle Pagenberg attorneys-at-law discuss the firm’s Managing IP EMEA Awards 2026 success, Unified Patent Court litigation strategy, and evolving European patent trends
A patent battle between two legal tech companies and a loss for Elon Musk’s xAI against OpenAI were also among the top talking points
With drug prices a hot topic in the US, courts are seemingly more reluctant to prevent the entry of generics to the market
Academic Eden Sarid joins us during Pride Month to discuss queer expression and IP law, Patagonia v Pattie Gonia, and how queer and AI-generated creations both pose novelty concerns
Patent attorney Michael Henson joins the firm to lead its freshly launched blockchain and digital assets practice
A dispute over mammogram technology, and a development in the case between GSK and Moderna were also among the top talking points in recent weeks
With rankings for Western Europe set to be published on June 25, we sat down with our research lead to find out what practitioners and law firms can expect
Peter O’Sullivan, a professional services executive, says he is looking forward to helping Pearce IP become the leading life sciences firm in Australia and New Zealand
Matteo Di Lernia, advocate at LCA Studio Legale, unpicks the CJEU’s ruling in M.M. Ristorazione v Villa Ramazzini, including its impact on litigation strategies
Gift this article