The 1992 Trademarks, Patent and Copyrights laws provide for remedy measures like preventive seizure, destruction of products and, confiscation of equipments as well as removing of the effects of the illegal acts and compensation. Article 41 and 43 of the Trademarks law provide for precautionary measures, seizure as well as destruction of illegal marks, products and packaging and tools and the article bearing the illegal marks. Article 58 of the Patent law provides for the precautionary seizure. The related amendment will determine the affectivity of the measure on the application of the patent as well. Article 61 of the same law provides for confiscation of the seized objects, destruction or effacing of the impacts of the violating actions, as well as the equipments and tools used in the falsification. The 1992 Copyrights law provides for the same measures. The amendments to the copyright law envisage enhancing these measures.

The provisions cited above are applicable to the other forms of intellectual property. The 1992 Patent law No. 44 for instance covers, in its Article 60, patents, utility certificates, know-how, inventions, processes or an element of know-how, industrial designs or any right protected by the law as rights protected against falsification or infringement. These illegal acts against the mentioned protected rights are subject the criminal procedures and monetary fines.

The Ministry of Information and Culture, which is responsible for copyrights, has received during the biennium (2000-2001) 128 claims categorized as follows: - vendors: 23 cases - video films : 33 cases - computer programs: 18 cases - smart cards concerning TV broadcasting by satellite: 8 cases - electronic games: 6 cases In addition to the natural persons, the claimants were from various concerned parties such as the Arab Union for Anti-Piracy, the Union of Computer Programs Producers, International Union for Audio products, etc. The procedure followed in dealing with such claims use to start with verifying the claimed cases by the Inspection Division in the Ministry of Information and Culture in order to ensure a minimum of certainty of the elements being claimed. After the inspection action, coordination is made with the police authorities in order to engage necessary raids and seizure. The case is then presented before the competent court. The Ministry of Information and Culture has also the competency to decide the closing of the establishments taking part in infringement and piracy under the Law. As far as the trademarks infringement is concerned, there is a few cases received in the Ministry of Economy and Commerce to date (35 claims) since 1992, which are dealt with in the same way explained for the Copyrights infringement. The United Arab Emirates will provide the US delegation with further statistics very soon regarding civil and criminal enforcement.

The Ministry of Information and Culture, which is responsible for copyrights, has received during the biennium (2000-2001) 128 claims categorized as follows: - vendors: 23 cases - video films : 33 cases - computer programs: 18 cases - smart cards concerning TV broadcasting by satellite: 8 cases - electronic games: 6 cases In addition to the natural persons, the claimants were from various concerned parties such as the Arab Union for Anti-Piracy, the Union of Computer Programs Producers, International Union for Audio products, etc. The procedure followed in dealing with such claims use to start with verifying the claimed cases by the Inspection Division in the Ministry of Information and Culture in order to ensure a minimum of certainty of the elements being claimed. After the inspection action, coordination is made with the police authorities in order to engage necessary raids and seizure. The case is then presented before the competent court. The Ministry of Information and Culture has also the competency to decide the closing of the establishments taking part in infringement and piracy under the Law. As far as the trademarks infringement is concerned, there is a few cases received in the Ministry of Economy and Commerce to date (35 claims) since 1992, which are dealt with in the same way explained for the Copyrights infringement. The United Arab Emirates will provide the US delegation with further statistics very soon regarding civil and criminal enforcement.

The exception related to the national security, public order and morality is applied to all natural persons or institutions, be they nationals or foreigners.

Geographical indications are protected through the 1992 Trade Marks Law No 37. Article 3 paragraphs 6 and 9 exclude from the registration (protection) geographical indications which have the purpose to mislead the public on the veritable origin of the product. Geographical indications related to the wine and spirituous are not registered in the UAE in pursuance of the 1992 Trade Marks Law Article 3 paragraph 2 (Public order and Morality).

The 1992 Patent and Design Law provide for the protection of patent which is granted for any new invention that is the result of an innovative idea or an innovative improvement on a patented invention whether in relation to new industrial product, to industrial processes or methods or to the applications of known industrial processes or methods (Article 4 of the 1992 Patent and Design Law No. 44). The draft amendment, when adopted, will extend the coverage of the protection of innovations in all fields of technology, including agriculture, hunting, fishing, handicrafts and services. The 1992 Patent Law in its current form excludes from that protection the product in the field of chemical invention in foodstuffs and pharmaceutical compositions (Article 6 of the 1992 Patent Law). Therefore the draft amendment will enable the UAE to extend the protection to these fields, regarding both product and method of processing. After the adoption of the above-mentioned amendment, the exceptions will be as follows: (i) plant and animal research, or biological processes for the production of plants or animals, with the exception of microbiological processes and products; (ii) scientific principles and discoveries; (iii) diagnostic, therapeutic and surgical methods for the treatment of humans or animals; in addition to inventions related to national defence or which would be contrary to public order and morality. Article 4 of the 1992 Patent Law considers patentable any new applications of known industrial processes or methods.

The micro-organisms are patentable in conformity with Article 6 of the 1992 Patent Law as mentioned above.

The 1992 Patent Law provides for compulsory licences (Articles 23 33). Article 23 determines in which cases compulsory licences are granted. For one or more of the following reasons, compulsory licence could be granted: (i) the invention covered by the patent is not being exploited; (ii) the exploitation of the invention is not sufficient to respond reasonably to the demand for the product; (ii) the exploitation has been suspended by the beneficiary for two consecutive years; (iv) the refusal of the owner of the patent to conclude a licence contract under fair terms has seriously impeded the development of industrial or commercial activities in the UAE. The draft amendment will provide measures to take into account the public interest and remedies to prevent anti-competitive practices and to reflect the drafting of the TRIPS Agreement.

Articles 23-24-25 of the Patent and Designs Law as recently amended state out that: If the owner of a patent or a utility certificate have not used the invention or have used it in an insufficient manner, any interested party may apply for a compulsory licence pursuant to the procedures indicated in article (29) of the law herein, according to the following conditions: - the lapse of at least three years after granting the patent; - the applicant for licensing should prove that he exerted, within a reasonable period of time, efforts for obtaining a licence from the patent owner with a reasonable compensation and under reasonable commercial conditions; - the licence shall be non-exclusive; - the licence should be basically for the purpose of fulfilling the demands of the local market; - the licensing decision should determine the scope and period of licensing pursuant to the purpose for which it was granted; - if the invention is related to semiconductors technology the licensing should only be granted for public and non-commercial use or to remedy a practice determined after Judicial or administrative process to be anti-competitive; - the granting of a compulsory licence shall not preclude granting of other compulsory licences. The competent court shall decide pursuant to the request of the interested parties, either to prevent the owner of the letters patent or the utility certificate, from using the invention itself, or otherwise grant him other licences for using thereof; - the competent court may not disregard the first and second item if the compulsory licence was granted as a result of public emergency, the dire need of the public for such, or for public and non-commercial uses; - a compulsory licence for exploiting the patent may be issued if the invention is important for the public interest; - pursuant to a decree by the Minister, a compulsory licence for exploiting the patent or utility certificate protected invention may be issued if the invention is important for the public interest; - the licensee shall have the right to use the civil and penal rights of the owner of the patent or the utility certificate to protect or to use the invention if such owner had omitted such use in spite of notifying or informing him of any illegal action; - article 25 of the above-mentioned Law provides that if it is impossible to use an invention protected by a patent or a utility certificate in the United Arab Emirates without violating rights derived from a patent or a utility certificate granted by virtue of a previous application, then it is permissible to grant the owner of the letters patent or the utility certificate a compulsory licence according to the conditions set forth in article (28) of such law to the degree necessary to use his invention if such invention serves industrial purposes different from such purposes related to the invention of the former patent or utility certificate or represents a marked technical advance in relation thereto; - if the two inventions serve the same industrial purpose, the compulsory licence shall be granted to the subsequent patent or utility certificate while keeping the right for the owner of the former patent or utility certificate to obtain a licence for the subsequent patent or utility certificate, if he applies for such; - the two parties may also agree in writing between them and notify the Administration of their agreement to record it in the related register. Article 29 of the same Law states out the following: - the application for the compulsory licence shall be submitted to the competent court in the form of an action filed against the owner of the patent or utility certificate, and the Administration shall be informed to arrange for the attendance of an administration representative. The court may grant the two parties a period of time it determines for them to come to an agreement and it is permissible to extend the period if the court recognizes a reason to do so. Upon the termination of the period, the court shall examine the application for either rejecting or granting the compulsory licence. If granted the court shall define the conditions and the scope thereof and determine the compensation for the owner of the patent or the utility certificate according to the provision of article (23) of such act, and the judgment shall be served to the other party and to the Administration to register it in the related register and to be published in the official gazette after paying the fixed fee, and the judgment shall have no impact concerning the third party except from the date of publication.

The current Law does not indicate the notion of anti-competitive practices as referred to in Article 31(k) of the TRIPS Agreement. However the draft amendment indicates that if the invention is related to semiconductors technology, the licensing should only be granted for public and non-commercial use or to remedy a practice determined after Judicial or administrative process to be anti-competitive. The notion of anti-competitive practices is indicated in various laws such as the Industrial Law and the Anti-fraud and Defraud Law.

The 1992 Patent and Industrial Design Law in its Article 35 provides for judicial review of the legal validity of any decision by administrative authorities relating to the compulsory licence.

In defending its position, the owner of the patent cannot introduce imported product as a valid ground. It does not present a legitimate reason for avoiding compulsory licensing if one or more of the reasons referred to in the above-mentioned Article 23 (Patent Law) are meet.

The Patent and Designs Law does not provide for any provision aimed at discriminating patents on the basis of the place of invention, the field of technology and whether the products are imported or locally produced. The approved amendment of the Article 23 of the Patent and Designs Law doesn’t stipulate any more that the importation of the product is not considered legal justification for the owner to avoid compulsory licence. Therefore, the Patent law related provisions are now in conformity with Article 27 and 31 of the TRIPS Agreement.

The term of patent protection is 15 years renewable for 5 additional years in accordance with the current law. The draft amendment will provide a protection for 20 years as referred to in TRIPS Article 33.

The existing Patent and Designs Law No. 44 (1992) does not provide for the principle of the reversal of burden of proof in a process patent litigation. However, the Draft amendment envisages the introduction of this principle in order to conform to Article 34 of the TRIPS Agreement. The new Article provides that in case of litigation concerning process patent, the court shall have the authority to order the defendant to prove that the manufacturing process, which he has used, is different from the patented process protected by a patent.

The 1992 Patent and Industrial Design Law No. 44 (Articles 39-42) governs the protection of know-how. According to this Law, protection of undisclosed information related to the know-how should ensured through a contract concluded for this purpose. In all cases, the holder shall take the necessary steps to preserve the confidentiality of its information. The Civil Service Act prevents from any disclosure of information made by the public servant. Article 39 of the 1992 Patent and Industrial Design Law No. 44 indicates that know-how is protected against any unlawful use, disclosure or communications by third parties unless it has been published or made available to the public.

The 1992 Patent and Industrial Designs law No. 44 defines in its Article 1 "know-how" as the technical information, data or knowledge that result from professional experience and are applicable in practice. Article 39 states that know-how shall be protected against any unlawful use, disclosure or communication by third parties unless it has been published or made available to the public. The same Article states clearly that in order to enjoy protection, the owner of the know-how shall take the necessary steps to preserve the confidentiality of its elements. Article 42 of the above-mentioned Law provides for a provision ensuring that a third party will not be allowed to use disclose or communicate any element of know-how without consent of its owner. The same Article states that any of these acts shall be deemed an unlawful act, provided that the person committing the act was aware of the confidential nature of the know-how or could not have ignored such nature. Furthermore, the Bylaws of the 1992 Patent Law (The 1993 Decision No. 11 of the Ministerial Council) lays down procedures required to ensure the protection of know-how as well as its contracting aspects. As regards pharmaceutical products specifically, the Law No. 4 of 1983 related to pharmaceutical institutions and pharmacy profession and its Bylaws provide for establishment of a Committee in charge of pharmaceutical registration and pricing. All the confidential information submitted to it must be kept confidential, provided that it is confidential and the owner has undertaken the necessary steps to keep it confidential.

The three intellectual property rights-related laws provide for measures aimed at preventing violation of intellectual property rights. - the 1992 Trade Marks Law No.37 in its Chapter VI on Penalty (Articles 37-43); - the 1992 Copyright Law in its Chapter VIII (Articles 38-44) on Penalty; - the 1992 Patent and Design Law in its Chapter V on Preventive Measures, Offences and Penalty (Articles 58-61) lay down measures to prevent any infringement or unlawful act which violate rights of the owner of intellectual property.

These laws also provides for remedy measures like preventive seizure, confiscation, destruction of products and equipment as well as removing of the effects of the illegal acts and compensation.