Examen de la legislación de aplicación del Acuerdo sobre los ADPIC - Búsqueda

Restablecer
 
 

En el párrafo 2 del artículo 63 del Acuerdo sobre los ADPIC, se exige a los Miembros que notifiquen al Consejo de los ADPIC las leyes y los reglamentos hechos efectivos por el Miembro en cuestión y referentes a la materia del Acuerdo, con el fin de ayudar al Consejo en su examen de la aplicación del Acuerdo.

En esta página puede hacer búsquedas en las preguntas y respuestas de los Miembros sobre las leyes y los reglamentos notificados. Puede consultar los resultados de la búsqueda en la pantalla, descargarlos en formato Excel e imprimirlos. También puede descargar los distintos documentos.

* NO es necesario utilizar todos los campos de búsqueda que figuran a continuación (rellene solo los que sean pertinentes para su consulta).
* Tenga en cuenta que los criterios de búsqueda utilizados son acumulativos. Todos se reflejarán en los resultados de la búsqueda.


Página 674 de 677   |   Número de documentos : 13533

Signatura del documento Miembro que presenta la notificación Miembro que plantea la pregunta Pregunta Respuesta Fecha de distribución del documento  
IP/Q/JPN/1 Japón Unión Europea 14. From which point in time do the provisions of Article 14.1 14.3 of TRIPS apply to the rights of performers and producers of phonograms in phonograms under the Copyright Law?
The Government of Japan considers it desirable to provide a high level of protection for intellectual property rights and believes 50 year retroactive protection of the rights of performers and producers of phonograms (sound recordings) is appropriate. Therefore, a draft amendment to the Copyright Law is under preparation for submission to the Diet with a view to extending the period of retroactive protection for such rights to 50 years.
24/10/1996
IP/Q/NZL/1 Nueva Zelandia Unión Europea 1. Does New Zealand apply its copyright law to broadcasting organizations having their headquarters in the territory of a contracting state of the Rome Convention (1961) where the broadcasting organization concerned is not incorporated in a contracting state (Article 2.2 of the TRIPS Agreement in conjunction with Article 6 Rome Convention)? If the answer is negative, please explain the reasons for this.
Yes, New Zealand does so. A broadcast qualifies for copyright if: -it is made from a prescribed foreign country (Section 20 of the Copyright Act 1994); and -the author is either: a citizen or subject, a domiciled or resident individual, or a body incorporated under the law, of a prescribed foreign country. A work of joint authorship qualifies under this section if any of the authors meet these requirements (Section 18). It should be noted that: -an author is defined as the person who makes or relays a broadcast and can be a natural person or a body corporate (Section 5); -where a broadcast is made by more than one person then it is to be treated as a work of joint authorship (Section 6); and -a prescribed foreign country is one that is included in one of the schedules of the Copyright (Application to Other Countries) Order 1995 which came into force on 1 January 1996. In accordance with TRIPS Article 1.3, New Zealand has made a notification in terms of Article 6(2) of the Rome Convention.
24/10/1996
IP/Q/NZL/1 Nueva Zelandia Unión Europea [Follow-up question] What happens if a company is not incorporated in New Zealand or another WTO Member but has its headquarters or principal place of business in New Zealand or another WTO Member?
Under New Zealand law we would not regard a company as having its headquarters or principal place of business in a country unless it was also incorporated in that country.
24/10/1996
IP/Q/NZL/1 Nueva Zelandia Unión Europea 2. Does New Zealand intend to repeal § 76 of the Copyright Act 1994 (Article 8 of the TRIPS Agreement)?
The Government does not currently have any intention to repeal Section 76 of the Copyright Act 1994.
24/10/1996
IP/Q/NZL/1 Nueva Zelandia Unión Europea [Follow-up question] On which provision of the Berne Convention does New Zealand base its exception from the protection of literary and artistic works relating to medicines (Article 76)?
The Berne Convention does not cover distribution rights. Accordingly, the Berne Convention is not applicable to Section 76.
24/10/1996
IP/Q/NZL/1 Nueva Zelandia Unión Europea 3. Does New Zealand grant protection to authors of cinematographic works where the makers of such works have their headquarters in the territory of a WTO Member but are not incorporated in a WTO Member country (Article 9.1 of the TRIPS Agreement in conjunction with Article 4 Berne Convention)?
Yes, New Zealand does so. A film qualifies for copyright if the author is either: a citizen or subject, a domiciled or resident individual, or a body incorporated under the law, of a prescribed foreign country. A work of joint authorship qualifies under this section if any of the authors meet these requirements (Section 18 of the Copyright Act 1994 refers). It should be noted that: -an author is defined as the person who makes the arrangements necessary for making a film and can be a natural person or a body corporate (Section 5); -provision is made for works of joint authorship (Section 6); and -the Copyright (Application to Other Countries) Order is relevant (see response to question 1).
24/10/1996
IP/Q/NZL/1 Nueva Zelandia Unión Europea 4. With regard to the utilization (to the extent justified for the relevant purpose) of literary and artistic works by way of illustration in publications, broadcast or sound or visual recordings for teaching, does New Zealand require that the source and the name of the author be mentioned (Article 9.1 of the TRIPS Agreement in conjunction with Article 10(3) Berne Convention?
There is a general right for authors to be identified as the author of a work (Section 94) providing the right has been asserted (Section 96). There is only one exception to this right which is education related, namely things to do with examinations (Section 97). The right does, therefore, cover literary and artistic works by way of utilization in publications, broadcasting, and sound or visual recordings for teaching. New Zealand considers that education related exceptions are covered by Berne Article 9(3).
24/10/1996
IP/Q/NZL/1 Nueva Zelandia Unión Europea 5. Who is deemed under New Zealand copyright law to represent the author of literary and artistic works in relation to the enforcement of protected rights where the works are anonymous or pseudonymous and leave doubts as to his identity (Article 9.1 of the TRIPS Agreement in conjunction with Article 15(3) Berne Convention)?
New Zealand complies with Berne Article 15(3) in relation to anonymous or pseudonymous works. Where the name of the publisher appears on copies of the work as first published, the publisher is presumed, until the contrary is proven, to represent the author and is entitled to protect and enforce the author's rights (Section 126 of the Copyright Act 1994). An unknown author is not subsequently to be regarded as unknown if the identity becomes known (Section 7).
24/10/1996
IP/Q/NZL/1 Nueva Zelandia Unión Europea 6. Has New Zealand applied or does it intend to apply § 234(o)(i) and (iii) of the Copyright Act 1994 in relation to the authorization of the rental to the public of computer programs and/or films (Article 11 of the TRIPS Agreement)? Is there any evidence of widespread copying impairing the exclusive right of reproduction of authors of films (Article 11 of the TRIPS Agreement)?
New Zealand has not applied, and there are currently no proposals to apply, Section 234(o)(i) and (iii) in relation to the authorization of the rental to the public of computer programmes and/or films. While there is no apparent evidence of widespread copying impairing the exclusive right of reproduction of authors of films, there has been some evidence of this occurring. For this reason, New Zealand has provided authors with the right to authorize or prohibit the commercial rental to the public of originals or copies of their films (Section 9 of the Copyright Act refers).
24/10/1996
IP/Q/NZL/1 Nueva Zelandia Unión Europea 7. To what extent and for which purposes does New Zealand copyright law permit the playing or showing in public of broadcasts or cable programmes (Article 14.1 of the TRIPS Agreement)?
The owner of copyright has the right to play or show in public broadcasts or cable programmes (Sections 16 and 32 of the Copyright Act 1994). There are, however, limitations to this exclusive right as follows: -Section 47:A broadcast or cable programme, shown at a prescribed educational establishment, is deemed not to be a showing in public. -Section 57:A sound recording or film in an archive maintained by Radio New Zealand Limited, Television New Zealand Limited or the New Zealand Film Archive respectively, may be shown to the public provided any charge to the public is no more than that necessary to recover charges. This does not apply, however, where there is a licensing scheme in operation and the archive is aware of that fact. -Section 87:A broadcast or cable programme may be played or shown in public to an audience who have not paid for admission or, having paid a fee for admission, the fee is not attributable to the playing or showing. The purpose of this provision is to allow clubs, societies and prisons to play broadcasts. -Section 178:Performers' rights: This provision is equivalent in effect to Section 47. -Section 188:Performers' rights: This provision is equivalent in effect to Section 87.
24/10/1996
IP/Q/NZL/1 Nueva Zelandia Unión Europea To what extent does New Zealand copyright law restrict the rights of performers in relation to broadcasts included in a cable programme service (Article 14.1 of the TRIPS Agreement)?
Restrictions on the rights of performers in relation to broadcasts included in a cable programme service are provided for in Section 189 of the Copyright Act 1994. This section provides for the reception and immediate retransmission of a broadcast, made in New Zealand, in a cable service programme. The rights of performers are not infringed if, and to the extent that, the broadcast is made for reception in the area in which the cable programme service is provided. If the broadcast itself infringes any right which a performer may have, then the retransmission shall also be taken into account when assessing damages.
24/10/1996
IP/Q/NZL/1 Nueva Zelandia Unión Europea 8. Has New Zealand applied or does it intend to apply § 234(o)(ii) of the Copyright Act 1994 in relation to the authorization of the rental to the public of sound recordings (Article 14.4 of the TRIPS Agreement)?
New Zealand has not applied, and there are currently no proposals to apply, Section 234(o)(ii) in relation to the authorization of the rental to the public of sound recordings.
24/10/1996
IP/Q/FRA/1 Francia Estados Unidos de América 1. Please explain whether and how French law provides protection for works, phonograms and performances from other WTO Members, and whether and how it does so on the basis of national treatment, as required by TRIPS Article 3 (generally, with respect to all copyrights and neighbouring rights) and Article 9.1 (incorporating Berne Article 5(1)). In particular, please explain how national treatment is afforded with respect to the distribution of levies for private copying under the relevant provisions of your law.
In accordance with Article 55 of the Constitution, international agreements are directly incorporated into the internal legal system. France has been a party to the Berne Convention since 5 December 1887. The two fundamental rules laid down by the Berne Convention in favour of authors, national treatment and moral rights, are therefore granted to foreign authors. Levies for private copying for American authors of musical and audiovisual works are paid through collective management companies responsible under the law for collecting and distributing the levies.
22/10/1996
IP/Q/FRA/1 Francia Estados Unidos de América 2. Does France apply the "rule of the shorter term" to phonograms and performances from other WTO Members? If so, please explain how you justify such action under TRIPS Article 4.
The Law of 3 July 1985 (Article L-211.4, Intellectual Property Code) fixes the duration of protection for neighbouring rights of performers and producers of phonograms at 50 years. France complies with the provisions of European Directive No. 93/98 of 29 October 1993, which provides for the same duration (Articles 3.1 and 2).
22/10/1996
IP/Q/FRA/1 Francia Estados Unidos de América 3. Please explain whether and how France protects against both the direct and indirect reproduction of phonograms as required by TRIPS Article 14.2, including by digital transmission in the context of subscription or interactive services.
Article L-213.1 of the Intellectual Property Code protects producers of phonograms by granting them the right to authorize reproduction of fixations and thus complies with the provisions of the Rome Convention (Article 7), ratified on 3 July 1987, Directive No. 92-100 of 1 November 1992 (Article 7) and Article 14.2 of the TRIPS Agreement. Reproduction covers any physical fixation and direct or indirect reproduction. All phonograms whose protection has not expired are protected with respect to reproduction carried out subsequently to the entry into force of the Law of 3 July 1985 (1 January 1986). In 1996, any phonogram published after or in the course of the month of January 1946 is protected.
22/10/1996
IP/Q/FRA/1 Francia Estados Unidos de América 4. Please explain whether and how France provides full retroactive protection to works, phonograms and performances from other WTO Members, as required by Berne Article 18, as incorporated through Article 9.1 of TRIPS, and TRIPS Article 14.6, and give the date back to which protection extends as to each of these categories of subject matter.
Article 18 of the Berne Convention is incorporated into French law as a result of the ratification of the Convention and of the Universal Convention of 1952. Consequently, a work protected by copyright in its country of origin may claim protection. Hence, only works that have fallen into the public domain are not protected. All phonograms whose protection has not expired in the country of origin are protected with respect to uses made subsequently to the entry into force of the French Law of 3 July 1985 (1 January 1986).
22/10/1996
IP/Q/CZE/1 República Checa Estados Unidos de América 1. Please explain whether and how the law of the Czech Republic provides protection for works, phonograms and performances from other WTO Members, and whether and how it does so on the basis of national treatment, as required by TRIPS Article 3 (generally, with respect to all copyrights and neighbouring rights) and Article 9.1 (incorporating Berne Article 5(1)). In particular, please explain how national treatment is afforded with respect to the distribution of levies for private copying under the relevant provisions of the law of the Czech Republic.
The Czech legislation provides protection for works and performances from other WTO Members on the basis of national treatment according to Article 50 paragraphs 2, 4 and 5. Relevant provisions of the Copyright Act read as follows: (2) To works of foreign nationals the provisions of this Act shall apply pursuant to international treaties, and if no such treaties exist, their reciprocity shall be guaranteed. (4) Copyright relating to the works of foreign nationals may not last longer than that in the country of origin of the work. (5) Above mentioned provisions shall apply per analogiam also to performing artists and their performances. The international treaty mentioned in paragraph 2 is inter alia the TRIPS Agreement. We would like to stress that the Czech Copyright Act provides protection for work of foreign authors and for performers on the level of national treatment and to the extent provided by international agreements to which the Czech Republic is a contracting party. The rights of producers of phonograms and broadcasting organizations are protected on the basis of international agreements or if the reciprocity is granted. The Copyright Act involves the provisions regarding private copying in Article 13 paragraphs 2 and 3. The remuneration for private copying is granted to authors, performers, producers of phonograms and broadcasting organizations. Broadcasters shall not enjoy such a right in the case that they transmit broadcasting of other broadcasters. The remuneration is subject to the collective administration and for blank tapes two collective organizations operating in this field. The remuneration is provided on the basis of blank tapes' sales price's percentage. Collective societies distribute the remuneration to authors, performers and producers of phonogram's broadcasters and also to foreign collective societies on the basis of their agreement.
04/10/1996
IP/Q/CZE/1 República Checa Estados Unidos de América 2. Does the Czech Republic apply the "rule of the shorter term" to phonograms and performances from other WTO Members? If so, please explain how you justify such action under TRIPS Article 4?
The Czech Republic does not apply the "rule of the shorter term" to phonograms and performances from other WTO Members. The term of protection of performers is fifty years starting from the end of the year in which a recording of performance was made. The same period is adopted for producers of phonograms and it starts at the end of the year when such recording was made.
04/10/1996
IP/Q/CZE/1 República Checa Estados Unidos de América 3. Please explain whether and how the Czech Republic protects against both the direct and indirect reproduction of phonograms as required by TRIPS Article 14.2, including by digital transmission in the context of interactive services.
According to Article 46 of the Czech Copyright Act, in which rights of phonograms producers are stipulated, the permission of the phonogram's producer is required for broadcasting of sound recordings and phonograms by radio or television, for production of reproduction of phonograms for other than own personal use, for public performance of sound recording and for lending and rental. Reproduction of phonograms by digital transmission in the context of interactive services is not expressis verbis in our Copyright Act but as we have a very broad provision regarding publication of the work, it can be used also for the digital transmission providing that the exclusive permission of authors, performers and producers is available.
04/10/1996
IP/Q/CZE/1 República Checa Estados Unidos de América 4. Please explain whether and how the Czech Republic provides full retroactive protection to works, phonograms and performances from other WTO Members, as required by TRIPS Articles 9.1, 14.6 and 70.2, each of which incorporate by reference or rely upon Berne Article 18. Please give the date back to which such protection extends with respect to each category of subject matter.
The Czech Republic provides full protection to works, phonograms and performances from other WTO Members as required by TRIPS Articles 9.1, 14.6 and 70.2. Author's works are protected fifty years after their death, it means since 1946. The right of phonogram producers is protected fifty years since the end of the year in which the sound recording was made, it means since 1946 as well. The right of performers is protected fifty years starting at the end of the year in which recording of performance was made.
04/10/1996

Página 674 de 677   |   Número de documentos : 13533

 
Restablecer