In the draft amendments of Part IV of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the responsibility of organizations engaged in collective management of rights about non-payment, the remuneration what is due to right holder is provided. It is necessary to pay attention to the fact that the absence of an indicated provision in Part IV of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation does not deprive right holders of the right to apply to court with a demand about punishment from organization a pecuniary sums what are due to the right holder, and to use another way of protection provided in acting legislation.

The Russian Federation complies with its liabilities in full regarding what it has taken on with entry to WTO. One such liability is building the system what protects copyright and related rights effectively. The Ministry of Culture, as the federal organ of executive authority which authorized to carry out regulatory legal regulation in the sphere of copyright and related rights, control and supervision in indicated sphere, realized corresponding revision of system of non-contract management of rights and next results of the institute of state accreditation are: • Payments of compensation to right holders about different kinds of use, rights are increased since the moment of introduction of the institute of state accreditation in comparison with period of realization the collective management of rights on basis of direct contracts from 1993 to 2008. • At this moment, annual stable progress in the activity of accreditation is observed as the number of contracts are concluded with international organizations of management of rights in dynamics of growth of dues and payments in compensation, etc. It affirms that the possibilities of using the system of state accreditation still has not been exhausted and does not need to change existing system. • In society, the understanding of compliance for users author's rights and other right holders with use the results of the intellectual activity is formed, what in future will exclude the Russian Federation from a list of countries which may not provide the effective protection of intellectual property. • An acting system allows not only to pay compensation to right holders but also to decide other social problems with the rise in creative activity and a citizen's legal consciousness, ministration to young musicians. • Introduction of the institute of state accreditation has provoked a process of the formation of a uniform judicial practice for consideration of disputes about performance of accredited organizations, a functions of dues, distribution and payment of the compensations. • All indicated allows to claim than cancel of non-contract management of rights and non monopolization of the institute of collective management of copyrights and related rights will lead to lowering of level of legal security of right holder's rights and legal interests. Considering that some foreign music in the territory of the Russian Federation is very big, the lowering of levels of legal security of right holders' rights and legal interests will affect foreign right holders, because it will be difficult to protect their rights on the territory of the Russian Federation as experience shows in the two previous decades. It is necessary to note that inside the Customs Union between members – the Republic of Kazakhstan, the Russian Federation, and the Republic of Belarus project of Agreement about unified order of management of copyright and related rights on collective basis, is developing now. Indicated projects will contain: maximally allowable size of retention on necessary costs about dues, distribution and payment of the compensations; organization's duty to public annual reports about their activity in their official websites; and also duty to carry out annual independent audit for check and confirmation of reliability implemented due, distribution and payment of the compensations.

In Article 1273 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation cases are provided of withdrawal and restriction of the right holders' exclusive right in the case of reproduction of the results of the intellectual activity by individual person for personal purposes. It is necessary to pay attention to the fact that, in Article 1273 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, positions correspond to the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works of 9th September 1886 (Berne Convention) of which the Russian Federation is a member since 1995 and of the TRIPS Agreement. Herewith, in point 2 of Article1273 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the results indicate - in the intellectual activity (phonograms and audiovisual works) about reproducing them for personal purposes - that right holders have the right to receive compensation, in accordance with Article 1245 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. System of dues, distribution and payment of compensation for free reproduction for personal purposes started to function in full from October 2010, since the moment of the adoption of the Decision of the Government of the Russian Federation, No. 829 on 14th October 2010, where it established the size of funds for payment of compensation and are governed order of due, distribution and payment of the compensations. In this connection, to pay attention to the fact that in this sphere of collective management activity, the compensation due may not realized in case if few organizations will lead it; now adoption of some steps that may change the concept of free reproduction for personal purposes is not provided.

The application of the monetary threshold for application of criminal procedures and penalties with regard to copyright piracy was explained in the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court No. 14 of 26 June 2007. The Resolution indicates that in process of identification of the scale of a crime (large or very large scale), the decision should be based on the retail value of the original (licensed) copies of works or phonograms at the time of the crime, based on the number of them, including copies of works or phonograms, belonging to different right holders. It is important to add that if the infringer commits the copyright crime twice or more, his crime will be considered as a criminal case without taking in consideration the monetary threshold.

The Russian Federation will be glad to organize bilateral consultations on this issue. The EU question needs more clarification. The Federal Law on the Protection of Selection Achievements of 6 August 1993 is not in force since 2008 when Part Four of Civil Code of the Russian Federation was introduced. It needs to be clarified what exactly EU partners consider the draft of law.

Article 18 of Federal Law FZ-61d. of 12.04.2010 has been complemented with section 7 of the following content: "It is prohibited to receive, disclose, commercially use and use for state registration any information on non-clinical research of medical products and clinical research of medical products, provided by the applicant for state registration of medical products without their permission for six years since the date of state registration of a medical product. Non-observance of the prohibition stated by the above-mentioned section entails amenability in compliance with laws of the Russian Federation. Turnover of medical products registered with violation of this section on the territory of the Russian Federation is illegal". The above-mentioned section has applied since 22 August 2012. To observe requirements of section 7 of Article 18 and prevent violations of exclusive rights of developers of medical products, the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation in its draft bill "on amendments to Federal law, "on turnover of medical products" and to Article 333.32.1 of part two of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation" made an amendment to the composition of the registration dossier (Article 18, section 3) by including documents that verify: "12) presence of intellectual rights 13) presence of consent of an applicant of an original medical product to use information about results of non-clinical and clinical researches of the original medical product in case less than six years has passed since the registration of the original medical product." Article 26 FZ-61 d.d.12.04.2010 "on turnover of medical products" applies only to urgent production of expert's evidence but not to urgent registration. Since rapid production of expert's evidence may be applied to reproduced medical products, provision of information obtained during non-clinical and clinical researches of the original medical product and published in specialized publications is possible during such procedures, if the original medical product is not covered by patent protection. At the moment, a series of amendments in the Law on Circulation of Medicines N61 is being considered by the Government. Different provisions related to Article 18 will be introduced to avoid any possible misunderstanding of the provision. At the same time, the Russian Federation, according to the Doha Declaration (on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health) of 2001, in which a concern about the impact of intellectual property rights on medical products prices was expressed and ultimately reserves the right to consider applying Article 8 of the TRIPS Agreement in terms of implementing the right to health, which states that during drafting or amending of national laws or regulations member states can take measures necessary in protecting population's health, as well as Article 30 of the TRIPS Agreement which contemplates some exclusions from exclusive rights granted by patents while barring unjustified limitations of rights of patent-holders and third parties. Particularly the right to "early usage" does not contradict this Article (the so-called Bolar provisions) which allows generic drugs producers to conduct all the procedures and trials necessary to registration of a generic drug before patent to the original drug expires (or exclusive research data regulations). As a result they are guaranteed the possibility of entering generic product to the market right after the stated period has expired. At the moment, a series of amendments in the Law on Circulation of Medicines N61 is being considered by the Government.

Article 18 of Federal Law FZ-61d. of 12.04.2010 has been complemented with section 7 of the following content: "It is prohibited to receive, disclose, commercially use and use for state registration any information on non-clinical research of medical products and clinical research of medical products, provided by the applicant for state registration of medical products without their permission for six years since the date of state registration of a medical product. Non-observance of the prohibition stated by the above-mentioned section entails amenability in compliance with laws of the Russian Federation. Turnover of medical products registered with violation of this section on the territory of the Russian Federation is illegal". The above-mentioned section has applied since 22 August 2012. To observe requirements of section 7 of Article 18 and prevent violations of exclusive rights of developers of medical products, the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation in its draft bill "on amendments to Federal law, "on turnover of medical products" and to Article 333.32.1 of part two of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation" made an amendment to the composition of the registration dossier (Article 18, section 3) by including documents that verify: "12) presence of intellectual rights 13) presence of consent of an applicant of an original medical product to use information about results of non-clinical and clinical researches of the original medical product in case less than six years has passed since the registration of the original medical product." Article 26 FZ-61 d.d.12.04.2010 "on turnover of medical products" applies only to urgent production of expert's evidence but not to urgent registration. Since rapid production of expert's evidence may be applied to reproduced medical products, provision of information obtained during non-clinical and clinical researches of the original medical product and published in specialized publications is possible during such procedures, if the original medical product is not covered by patent protection. At the moment, a series of amendments in the Law on Circulation of Medicines N61 is being considered by the Government. Different provisions related to Article 18 will be introduced to avoid any possible misunderstanding of the provision. At the same time, the Russian Federation, according to the Doha Declaration (on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health) of 2001, in which a concern about the impact of intellectual property rights on medical products prices was expressed and ultimately reserves the right to consider applying Article 8 of the TRIPS Agreement in terms of implementing the right to health, which states that during drafting or amending of national laws or regulations member states can take measures necessary in protecting population's health, as well as Article 30 of the TRIPS Agreement which contemplates some exclusions from exclusive rights granted by patents while barring unjustified limitations of rights of patent-holders and third parties. Particularly the right to "early usage" does not contradict this Article (the so-called Bolar provisions) which allows generic drugs producers to conduct all the procedures and trials necessary to registration of a generic drug before patent to the original drug expires (or exclusive research data regulations). As a result they are guaranteed the possibility of entering generic product to the market right after the stated period has expired. At the moment, a series of amendments in the Law on Circulation of Medicines N61 is being considered by the Government.

Article 18 of Federal Law FZ-61d. of 12.04.2010 has been complemented with section 7 of the following content: "It is prohibited to receive, disclose, commercially use and use for state registration any information on non-clinical research of medical products and clinical research of medical products, provided by the applicant for state registration of medical products without their permission for six years since the date of state registration of a medical product. Non-observance of the prohibition stated by the above-mentioned section entails amenability in compliance with laws of the Russian Federation. Turnover of medical products registered with violation of this section on the territory of the Russian Federation is illegal". The above-mentioned section has applied since 22 August 2012. To observe requirements of section 7 of Article 18 and prevent violations of exclusive rights of developers of medical products, the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation in its draft bill "on amendments to Federal law, "on turnover of medical products" and to Article 333.32.1 of part two of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation" made an amendment to the composition of the registration dossier (Article 18, section 3) by including documents that verify: "12) presence of intellectual rights 13) presence of consent of an applicant of an original medical product to use information about results of non-clinical and clinical researches of the original medical product in case less than six years has passed since the registration of the original medical product." Article 26 FZ-61 d.d.12.04.2010 "on turnover of medical products" applies only to urgent production of expert's evidence but not to urgent registration. Since rapid production of expert's evidence may be applied to reproduced medical products, provision of information obtained during non-clinical and clinical researches of the original medical product and published in specialized publications is possible during such procedures, if the original medical product is not covered by patent protection. At the moment, a series of amendments in the Law on Circulation of Medicines N61 is being considered by the Government. Different provisions related to Article 18 will be introduced to avoid any possible misunderstanding of the provision. At the same time, the Russian Federation, according to the Doha Declaration (on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health) of 2001, in which a concern about the impact of intellectual property rights on medical products prices was expressed and ultimately reserves the right to consider applying Article 8 of the TRIPS Agreement in terms of implementing the right to health, which states that during drafting or amending of national laws or regulations member states can take measures necessary in protecting population's health, as well as Article 30 of the TRIPS Agreement which contemplates some exclusions from exclusive rights granted by patents while barring unjustified limitations of rights of patent-holders and third parties. Particularly the right to "early usage" does not contradict this Article (the so-called Bolar provisions) which allows generic drugs producers to conduct all the procedures and trials necessary to registration of a generic drug before patent to the original drug expires (or exclusive research data regulations). As a result they are guaranteed the possibility of entering generic product to the market right after the stated period has expired. At the moment, a series of amendments in the Law on Circulation of Medicines N61 is being considered by the Government.

Article 18 of Federal Law FZ-61d. of 12.04.2010 has been complemented with section 7 of the following content: "It is prohibited to receive, disclose, commercially use and use for state registration any information on non-clinical research of medical products and clinical research of medical products, provided by the applicant for state registration of medical products without their permission for six years since the date of state registration of a medical product. Non-observance of the prohibition stated by the above-mentioned section entails amenability in compliance with laws of the Russian Federation. Turnover of medical products registered with violation of this section on the territory of the Russian Federation is illegal". The above-mentioned section has applied since 22 August 2012. To observe requirements of section 7 of Article 18 and prevent violations of exclusive rights of developers of medical products, the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation in its draft bill "on amendments to Federal law, "on turnover of medical products" and to Article 333.32.1 of part two of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation" made an amendment to the composition of the registration dossier (Article 18, section 3) by including documents that verify: "12) presence of intellectual rights 13) presence of consent of an applicant of an original medical product to use information about results of non-clinical and clinical researches of the original medical product in case less than six years has passed since the registration of the original medical product." Article 26 FZ-61 d.d.12.04.2010 "on turnover of medical products" applies only to urgent production of expert's evidence but not to urgent registration. Since rapid production of expert's evidence may be applied to reproduced medical products, provision of information obtained during non-clinical and clinical researches of the original medical product and published in specialized publications is possible during such procedures, if the original medical product is not covered by patent protection. At the moment, a series of amendments in the Law on Circulation of Medicines N61 is being considered by the Government. Different provisions related to Article 18 will be introduced to avoid any possible misunderstanding of the provision. At the same time, the Russian Federation, according to the Doha Declaration (on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health) of 2001, in which a concern about the impact of intellectual property rights on medical products prices was expressed and ultimately reserves the right to consider applying Article 8 of the TRIPS Agreement in terms of implementing the right to health, which states that during drafting or amending of national laws or regulations member states can take measures necessary in protecting population's health, as well as Article 30 of the TRIPS Agreement which contemplates some exclusions from exclusive rights granted by patents while barring unjustified limitations of rights of patent-holders and third parties. Particularly the right to "early usage" does not contradict this Article (the so-called Bolar provisions) which allows generic drugs producers to conduct all the procedures and trials necessary to registration of a generic drug before patent to the original drug expires (or exclusive research data regulations). As a result they are guaranteed the possibility of entering generic product to the market right after the stated period has expired. At the moment, a series of amendments in the Law on Circulation of Medicines N61 is being considered by the Government.

Upon accession of the Russian Federation to the WTO, questions about concordance of the Russian legislation in intellectual property with the provisions of the TRIPS Agreement is analyzed including by other Members of WTO. Within the framework of preparation for accession to the WTO, no discrepancies in legislation were discovered. The legislation of the Russian Federation about appellations of origin corresponds to the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property and the provisions of the Geographical indications (GIs) part of the TRIPS Agreement. It is necessary to mark that Section 3 "Geographical Indications" of Part 2 "Standards Concerning the Availability, Scope and Use of Intellectual Property Rights" of the TRIPS Agreement obliges the member countries to provide legal measures to secure legal protection of geographical indications on their territories. According to Article 1 "Nature and Scope of Obligations" of Part 1 "General Provisions and Basic Principles" of the TRIPS Agreement, countries are free to use the provisions of the TRIPS Agreement within the framework of their own legal systems. The legal system of the Russian Federation provides a registration of appellations of origin which are part of geographical indications. Moreover, legal protection of geographical indications may be realized not only because of registration of geographical indications as appellations of origin in established law order, but within the framework of antitrust legislation, legislation about advertisement, and consumer rights protection. As to the generic use of EU geographical indications in the draft Customs Union Technical Regulation on Safety of Alcoholic Products, it is important to note that in the August 2013 Draft of Customs Union Technical Regulation on Safety of Alcoholic Products there are no generic used of EU geographical indications.

Upon accession of the Russian Federation to the WTO, questions about concordance of the Russian legislation in intellectual property with the provisions of the TRIPS Agreement is analyzed including by other Members of WTO. Within the framework of preparation for accession to the WTO, no discrepancies in legislation were discovered. The legislation of the Russian Federation about appellations of origin corresponds to the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property and the provisions of the Geographical indications (GIs) part of the TRIPS Agreement. It is necessary to mark that Section 3 "Geographical Indications" of Part 2 "Standards Concerning the Availability, Scope and Use of Intellectual Property Rights" of the TRIPS Agreement obliges the member countries to provide legal measures to secure legal protection of geographical indications on their territories. According to Article 1 "Nature and Scope of Obligations" of Part 1 "General Provisions and Basic Principles" of the TRIPS Agreement, countries are free to use the provisions of the TRIPS Agreement within the framework of their own legal systems. The legal system of the Russian Federation provides a registration of appellations of origin which are part of geographical indications. Moreover, legal protection of geographical indications may be realized not only because of registration of geographical indications as appellations of origin in established law order, but within the framework of antitrust legislation, legislation about advertisement, and consumer rights protection. As to the generic use of EU geographical indications in the draft Customs Union Technical Regulation on Safety of Alcoholic Products, it is important to note that in the August 2013 Draft of Customs Union Technical Regulation on Safety of Alcoholic Products there are no generic used of EU geographical indications.

Montenegro provides protection for new plant varieties under the UPOV system of special protection (sui generis) which it has chosen in accordance with the options of the World Trade Organisation and the provisions of the TRIPS Agreement (Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights) under which it is required that all Member States of the WTO must provide the protection of plant varieties through patents or sui generis system (such as UPOV), or a combination thereof. During the process of accession to the WTO and EU, Montenegro has adopted the Law on Protection of Plant Varieties ("Official Gazette of the Republic of Montenegro", No. 48/07 and "Official Gazette of Montenegro", No. 48/08), which for the first time regulates the area of protection of intellectual property rights of breeders, creators of plant varieties, regulates the terms and procedures for the protection of plant varieties as well as rights and obligations of the holders of plant breeders’ rights. State authority in charge of direct implementation and activities in this area is Phytosanitary Administration of Montenegro, Department for Seeds and Planting Material, Protection of Plant Varieties and GMO, and is in charge of administrative activities, development of legislation and international relations in this area.

The Customs Administration is dealing with the goods under suspicion of infringing the intellectual property right in accordance with the provisions of the Article 67, Paragraph 3 of the Customs Law ("Official Gazette of the Republic of Montenegro", No. 07/02, 38/02, 72/02, 21/03, 31/03, 29/05, 66/06 and "Official Gazette of Montenegro", No. 21/08) and Regulation on measures of customs authority with the goods under suspicion of infringing the intellectual property rights ("Official Gazette of Montenegro", No. 33/11). Regulation on measures of customs authority with the goods under suspicion of infringing the intellectual property rights ("Official Gazette of Montenegro", No. 33/11) is harmonised with the basic principles of the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights of the World Trade Organisation (TRIPS). The Regulation on measures of customs authority with the goods under suspicion of infringing the intellectual property rights stipulates the conditions for undertaking actions with goods suspicious of infringing an intellectual property right, procedure for undertaking such actions, as well as measures for protection of intellectual property rights undertaken by the customs authority in cases when the goods are found to infringe the intellectual property rights. In accordance with the Regulation customs authority may suspend customs procedure and detained the goods based on application for action of right holder and ex-officio.The customs authority may, in accordance with the Regulation, undertake the actions when goods suspicious of infringing an intellectual property right is: declared for release for free circulation, export or re export, found during the control of goods entering or leaving the customs territory of Montenegro, placed under a suspensive customs procedure or placed in free zone or free warehouse. The Regulation on measures of customs authority with the goods under suspicion of infringing the intellectual property rights covers the protection of trademark, copyright or related right, industrial design, patent, supplementary protection certificate, plant variety, designation of origin or geographical indication and topography of semi-conductors. Regarding the data related to the lodged applications for action for protection of intellectual property rights, please note that 44 applications for action for protection of intellectual property rights were lodged to the Customs Administration in 2011. 39 applications were adopted and five applications were rejected due to formal irregularities. In 2012, 42 applications were lodged to the Customs Administration, out of which 41 applications for action for protection of Intellectual Property Rights were adopted by the Customs Administration and 1 was rejected due to formal irregularites. In 2013, up to 31st of October, 52 applications were lodged to the Customs Administration, out of which 46 applications were adopted, three applications were rejected due to formal irregularities, while three applications are being processed. 3. Article 52 of the TRIPS Agreement provides that a right holder initiating the procedures of TRIPS Article 51 shall be required to provide adequate evidence to satisfy authorities there is a prima facie an infringement. Could information be provided as to what Montenegro requests, such as any application fee, what is the length of time for which an accepted application is valid, and whether applications are filed at a central office or at ports of entry? The provisions of Articles 4, 5 and 6 of the The Regulation on measures of customs authority with the goods under suspicion of infringing the intellectual property rights stipulate the proofs submitted by the right holder to this Administration when addressing with the application for action for protection of intellectual property rights. Namely, the right holder who wishes to protect an intellectual property right shall submit to the Customs Administration the application for action for protection of intellectual property rights,to the address of its headquarters at Oktobarske revolucije No. 128 Podgorica. The application is lodged in two copies in the form found in the annex to the Regulation (Annex 1) and it is filled in accordance with the Instructions for filling in the form and submission of the application for action for protection of an intellectual property right, which is also an integral part of the Regulation. Application and Instructions can be downloaded from the web site of Customs Administration http://www.upravacarina.gov.me/ (in Montenegrin and English). The application must contain information that enables the customs authority to easily recognise the goods related to the application, specifically: correct and detailed technical description of the goods, all information in possession of the right holder related to the type or manner of infringement of the intellectual property right, name and address of contact persons for administrative and technical issues. The applicant can also provide other available data on: value of original goods; location of the goods or destination of the goods; details based on which the shipment or packaging of the goods can be identified; expected date of arrival or forwarding of the goods; type of transport; importer, exporter or holder of the goods; country or countries where the goods are produced, as well as transport routes; technical and other differences, if known, between the original goods and the goods suspected of infringing intellectual property rights. The right holder shall be obliged to accompany the application with the proof that its right has been registered and valid in Montenegro. Excerpt from the relevant register shall also be considered to be a proof. If the application is lodged by authorised user of the right, it shall also be obliged to lodge document that proves the acquisition of right of usage. If the application is lodged by the representative of the right holder, it shall be obliged to lodge the authorisation for representation, i.e. the power of attorney by which the right holder is explicitly authorising the agent to represent it at the customs authority of Montenegro in matters of protection of an intellectual property right. Applications for action shall be accompanied by a declaration from the right-holder, in accordance with the Article 6 of the Regulation, accepting liability regarding the damages that might occur with the procedure if the initiated procedure is terminated due to an act or omission by the right-holder or in the event that the goods in question are subsequently found not to infringe an intellectual property right. With such declaration, the right holder is obligated to bear expenses related to the storing and keeping the goods withheld under the customs control. Declaration should be made on special form found in Annex 2, making the integral part of the Regulation. No fee is paid for lodging of the application for action for protection of intellectual property rights. Customs Administration, within 30 working days following the lodging of the application, is making the decision on undertaking actions for protection of intellectual property rights and submits it to the applicant in written form. When the circumstances order for urgent undertaking of actions and when the application contains sufficient data related to the shipments, suspicious of containing goods infringing the intellectual property rights, the customs administration is adopting the decision within three working days following the day of lodging of application at the latest. Actions for protection of intellectual property rights are approved for a period not exceeding one year following the adoption of the decision. Approved period can be extended for one year, following the written request of the right-holder, which was submitted prior the expiry of approved period, and if all previous expenses, charged to the right holder have been paid. 4. Article 61 of the TRIPS Agreement provides for criminal procedures and penalties, sufficient to act as a deterrent, for willful trademark counterfeiting or copyright piracy on a commercial scale. Could information be provided on the disposition of criminal cases involving trademark counterfeiting or copyright piracy and the criminal penalties and jail time ordered in those cases? For the requested criminal offenses against intellectual property, in the period from 2009 to 2013, criminal proceedings were conducted before Montenegrin courts only for the criminal offense of Unauthorised Use of Copyrighted Work or an Object of a Related Right under Article 234 of the Criminal Code of Montenegro ("Official Gazette of the Republic of Montenegro", No. 70/03, 13/04, 47/06 and "Official Gazette of Montenegro", No. 40/08, 25/10, 32/11 and 40/13). We note that the Criminal Code does not stipulate the criminal offense of trademark counterfeiting for which the information is requested, as well as that using another's trademark is an act of execution of criminal offense of Abuse of Trade Name under Article 271 of the Criminal Code, but not the criminal offense itself. In relation to criminal proceedings in respect of the criminal offense under Article 234 of the Criminal Code, please note the following: In 2011, the Basic Court in Niksic pronounced one guilty verdict by which the accused was found guilty and sentenced to three months in prison, two years on probation. In 2012, the Basic Court in Niksic pronounced one guilty verdict by which the accused was found guilty and sentenced to three months in prison, one year on probation. In 2013, the Basic Court in Herceg Novi pronounced one guilty verdict by which the accused was found guilty and sentenced to three months in prison, two years on probation. All three verdicts are final.

The provisions of Articles 4, 5 and 6 of the The Regulation on measures of customs authority with the goods under suspicion of infringing the intellectual property rights stipulate the proofs submitted by the right holder to this Administration when addressing with the application for action for protection of intellectual property rights. Namely, the right holder who wishes to protect an intellectual property right shall submit to the Customs Administration the application for action for protection of intellectual property rights,to the address of its headquarters at Oktobarske revolucije No. 128 Podgorica. The application is lodged in two copies in the form found in the annex to the Regulation (Annex 1) and it is filled in accordance with the Instructions for filling in the form and submission of the application for action for protection of an intellectual property right, which is also an integral part of the Regulation. Application and Instructions can be downloaded from the web site of Customs Administration http://www.upravacarina.gov.me/ (in Montenegrin and English). The application must contain information that enables the customs authority to easily recognise the goods related to the application, specifically: correct and detailed technical description of the goods, all information in possession of the right holder related to the type or manner of infringement of the intellectual property right, name and address of contact persons for administrative and technical issues. The applicant can also provide other available data on: value of original goods; location of the goods or destination of the goods; details based on which the shipment or packaging of the goods can be identified; expected date of arrival or forwarding of the goods; type of transport; importer, exporter or holder of the goods; country or countries where the goods are produced, as well as transport routes; technical and other differences, if known, between the original goods and the goods suspected of infringing intellectual property rights. The right holder shall be obliged to accompany the application with the proof that its right has been registered and valid in Montenegro. Excerpt from the relevant register shall also be considered to be a proof. If the application is lodged by authorised user of the right, it shall also be obliged to lodge document that proves the acquisition of right of usage. If the application is lodged by the representative of the right holder, it shall be obliged to lodge the authorisation for representation, i.e. the power of attorney by which the right holder is explicitly authorising the agent to represent it at the customs authority of Montenegro in matters of protection of an intellectual property right. Applications for action shall be accompanied by a declaration from the right-holder, in accordance with the Article 6 of the Regulation, accepting liability regarding the damages that might occur with the procedure if the initiated procedure is terminated due to an act or omission by the right-holder or in the event that the goods in question are subsequently found not to infringe an intellectual property right. With such declaration, the right holder is obligated to bear expenses related to the storing and keeping the goods withheld under the customs control. Declaration should be made on special form found in Annex 2, making the integral part of the Regulation. No fee is paid for lodging of the application for action for protection of intellectual property rights. Customs Administration, within 30 working days following the lodging of the application, is making the decision on undertaking actions for protection of intellectual property rights and submits it to the applicant in written form. When the circumstances order for urgent undertaking of actions and when the application contains sufficient data related to the shipments, suspicious of containing goods infringing the intellectual property rights, the customs administration is adopting the decision within three working days following the day of lodging of application at the latest. Actions for protection of intellectual property rights are approved for a period not exceeding one year following the adoption of the decision. Approved period can be extended for one year, following the written request of the right-holder, which was submitted prior the expiry of approved period, and if all previous expenses, charged to the right holder have been paid.

For the requested criminal offenses against intellectual property, in the period from 2009 to 2013, criminal proceedings were conducted before Montenegrin courts only for the criminal offense of Unauthorised Use of Copyrighted Work or an Object of a Related Right under Article 234 of the Criminal Code of Montenegro ("Official Gazette of the Republic of Montenegro", No. 70/03, 13/04, 47/06 and "Official Gazette of Montenegro", No. 40/08, 25/10, 32/11 and 40/13). We note that the Criminal Code does not stipulate the criminal offense of trademark counterfeiting for which the information is requested, as well as that using another's trademark is an act of execution of criminal offense of Abuse of Trade Name under Article 271 of the Criminal Code, but not the criminal offense itself. In relation to criminal proceedings in respect of the criminal offense under Article 234 of the Criminal Code, please note the following: In 2011, the Basic Court in Niksic pronounced one guilty verdict by which the accused was found guilty and sentenced to three months in prison, two years on probation. In 2012, the Basic Court in Niksic pronounced one guilty verdict by which the accused was found guilty and sentenced to three months in prison, one year on probation. In 2013, the Basic Court in Herceg Novi pronounced one guilty verdict by which the accused was found guilty and sentenced to three months in prison, two years on probation. All three verdicts are final.

There is no formal requirement that authors are required either to register their rights or provide a sealed self-addressed envelope. The reasons for both Articles 7(a) and 8(c) are that in the absence of strong laws on evidence, and other supportive laws, as well as a general understanding of intellectual property rights by members of the judiciary, the Maldivian stakeholders were concerned that even if the Copyright Act recognized automatic protection, they would struggle defending their rights at a Maldivian court of law. Articles 7(a) and 8(c) are by no means mandatory – the purpose of those Articles are to encourage the courts to consider certain types of evidence. Both provisions were put forward by the stakeholders, and the Ministry of Economic development had authorized the inclusion of these provisions. The protection of IP rights would be effective in a country which has all the necessary laws in place. By simply allowing the Maldivian courts to recognize registration or self-addressed envelopes under the Copyright Act does not mean that such means guarantee protection at the courts. If there is compelling evidence against a piece of work albeit registration, that piece of work should not be recognized as the original work.

Yes, it is a right of making available. We further recognize that the use of the word "publicizing" is inconsistent with the local language [Dhivehi] wording used in the Copyright Act during translation. We will make the appropriate changes to the submitted text.

We recognize that the wording in Article 12(b)(5) of the unofficial English translation of the Copyright Act is inconsistent with Dhivehi wording of the Copyright Act which complies with the TRIPS Agreement. We will make the appropriate changes to the submitted text.

Yes, there is a typo in the statement. The statement should read as "shall be paid by the producer to the performer or performers". We will make the appropriate changes to the submitted text.

We will take due consideration of the expressed opinion.