RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONIP/C/W/159
19 October 1999
(99-4473)
Council for Trade-Related Aspects
of Intellectual Property RightsOriginal:  English
REVIEW OF LEGISLATION
LATVIA
By means of a communication from the Permanent Mission of the Republic of Latvia, dated
13 October 1999, the Secretariat has received a copy  of the following answers to questions posed by
Japan and the United States.
_______________
I. REPLIES FROM LATVIA TO QUESTIONS POSED BY JAPAN1
A. LAW ON COPYRIGHT AND NEIGHBOURING RIGHTS
1. Please explain how protection is provided for works, phonograms, performances and
broadcasts of other WTO Members under the Law on Copyright and Neighbouring Rights of
Latvia (hereinafter referred to as the "Copyright and Neighbouring Rights Law").
Please also describe the provisions of the Copyright and Neighbouring Rights Law
which provide for national treatment and mo st-favoured-nation treatment as required by
Articles 3 and 4 of the TRIPS Agreement and by Article 9.1 of the TRIPS Agreement, which
incorporates Article 5(1) of the Berne Convention.
Concerning the protection of works, phonograms, performances and broadcasts of other WTO
Members, paragraph 4 of Article 49 of the Copy right and Neighbouring Rights Law states that:
"The rights specified in this Section are recognised as to foreign natural and legal persons
who have made the first perfomance, production, fixation of sounds broadcast, transmission
by wire outside the territory of the Republic of Latvia in accordance with the international
agreements of the Republic of Latvia."
With respect to provisions of the Copyright and Neighbouring Rights Law regarding national
treatment and most-favoured-nation treatment, see the answer to question 2 below.
                                                     
1 Document IP/C/W/150.IP/C/W/159
Page 2
2. Please explain exceptions to or exemptions from national treatment and most-favoured-
nation treatment under the Copyright and Neighbouring Rights Law, if any, as permitted in
Articles 3 and 4 of the TRIPS Agreement.
The Copyright and Neighbouring Rights Law does not contain any special provisions with
respect to exceptions or exemptions from national treatment and most-favoured-nation treatment .
However Article 58 states that:
"If an international agreement which has been entered into by the Republic of Latvia includes
provisions which are different from the norms in this Law, the provisions of the international
agreement prevail."
3. With regard to Article 4.1 of the Copyright and Neighbouring Rights Law, which
stipulates the protection of "computer program s", please explain whether such protection
covers computer programs in both source code and object code, as required by Article 10.1 of
the TRIPS Agreement.
Yes, the protection for computer programs set out in Article 4.1 of the Copyright and
Neighbouring Rights Law covers computer programs in both source code and object code, as required
by Article 10.1 of the Agreement.
4. Please explain whether "databases and other compilations" under Article 5 of the
Copyright and Neighbouring Rights Law include compilations of data in machine-readable
form.  Please also explain how the Copyright and Neighbouring Rights Law complies with
Article 10.2 of the TRIPS Agreement in this respect.
Yes, "databases and other compilations" under Article 5 of the Copyright and Neighbouring
Rights Law include compilations of data in machine readable form .  In this respect, new amendments
have been prepared in the text of the Law in order to make these provisions clearer in relation to
Article 10.2 of the TRIPS  Agreement.
B. LAW ON TRADEMARKS
5. Article 23.2 of the TRIPS Agreement prohibits the "registration of a trademark for
wines which contains or consists of a geographi cal indication identifying wines or for spirits
which contains or consists of a geographical indication identifying spirits."  Please explain how
the Law on Trademarks of Latvia (hereinaft er referred to as the "Trademark Law") complies
with Article 23.2 of the TRIPS Agreement, since we have not been able to find any provisions of
the Trademark Law that correspond to that Article.
Otherwise, should we understand that such prohibition is secured by Article 22 of the
Trademark Law, which stipulates that "If an international agreement, to which the Republic of
Latvia is a party, provides for provisions which differ from those in this Law, the provisions of
the international agreement shall apply"?
The provisions of Article 23.2 of the TRIPS Agreement to their full extent are incorporated in
the new Law on Trademarks and Indications of Ge ographical Origin, which entered into force on
15 July 1999 .  Paragraph 1 and subparagraph 10 of Article 6 of the said law provide that:
''The following signs shall not be registered as trademarks (if they have been registered, these
registrations may be declared invalid pursuant to the provisions of this Law):IP/C/W/159
Page 3
with respect to wines - those which contain or consist of an indication of geographical origin
identifying wines of particular origin, or - with respect to spirits - which contain or consist of
an indication of geographical origin identifying spirits of particular origin, if such is not the
genuine place of origin of the wines or spirits for which the trademark registration has been
applied for''.
It must be noted, that the term ''indication of  geographical origin'' under Article 1 of the Law
on Trademarks and Indications of Geographical Origin is defined as:
''a geographic name or other indication or sign used to indicate, directly or indirectly, the
geographical origin of goods or services, including indications of the characteristics or features
thereof, which are attributable to this origin''.
Thus the term ''indication of geographical origin'' covers the term ''geographical indication''
used for the purposes of the TRIPS Agreement.   
Under the Law on Trademarks of 1993, the provisions of Article 23.2 of the TRIPS Agreement
to a great extent are covered by the provisions of Article 2, paragraph 2 which stipulate that:
''[...]Any sign which can be considered as a geographical indication, may only be included in a
mark with the stipulation that it will not mislead the public and that its use does not contradict
the law and local legal acts''.
According to the provisions of Article 7, paragraph 1 and Article 10, paragraph 1, if the
trademark falls under the provisions of Article 2, paragraph 2, that constitutes the ground for refusal or
invalidation.
In addition, the provisions of Article 23.2 of the TRIPS Agreement may be ensured by virtue
of Article 22 of the Law on Trademarks of 1993, as well.
C. PATENT LAW
6. Article 3(4) of the Patent Law of Latvia (hereinafter referred to as the "Patent Law")
provides that plant and animal varieties are unpatentable subject-matter.  Please explain how
Latvia provides protection for plant and animal varieties.
The protection of plant varieties is provided in the Republic of Latvia by the Law on the
Protection of Plant Varieties, which entered into force on 3 June 1993 .  In accordance with the
provisions of Article 9, paragraph 3 of the said law, the Latvian State Plant Variety Testing Center is
responsible for the registration of plant varieties.
The protection of animal varieties is not provided for in the Republic of  Latvia at this time.
7. Article 31(4) of the Patent Law stipulates that "Exclusive rights come into force to their
full extent as of the date a patent is granted and expire no later than 20 years from the filingdate of the application."  On the other hand, Article 33 of the TRIPS Agreement provides that
"The term of protection available shall not end before the expiration of a period of twenty years
counted from the filing date."  Please expl ain the compatibility of these two provisions.
The term of protection of rights in Latvia shall be 20 years from the filing date of the patent
application .  It is necessary to take into consideration the beginning of Article 3, paragraph 4, in
conjunction with Article 31, paragraphs 6, 7, 8 and Article 45, paragraph 3 .  Thus the wording of
Article 31, paragraph 4, ''...to their full extent...''  means that only from the date of the grant of theIP/C/W/159
Page 4
patent the owner has rights to submit a claim to the court in case of a patent infringement and has the
possibility after this date to receive a reasonable compensation from the user of the invention.
II. REPLIES FROM LATVIA TO QUESTIONS POSED BY THE UNITED STATES2
1. With respect to each form of intellectual property right covered by Part II of the TRIPS
Agreement and with respect to enforcement, please describe the manner in which the Republic
of Latvia has assured that nationals of other WTO Members receive treatment no less
favourable than Latvian nationals with regard to  matters affecting the availability, acquisition,
scope, maintenance and enforcement of such rights.
With regard to matters affecting the availability, acquisition, scope, maintenance and
enforcement of intellectual property rights, nationals of other WTO Members receive treatment noless favourable than Latvian nationals .  Such treatment of nationals of other WTO Members is
ensured in Latvia on the basis of international agreements which Latvia has concluded or to which it
has adhered (e.g .  the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property, the Berne Convention
for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Work s and the WTO/TRIPS Agreement), as according to
Latvia's principles of law the provisions of intern ational agreements have direct effect in Latvia.
These principles are reflected in many laws of Latvia.  For example, Article 50 "Priority of
international agreements" of the Patent Law says th at "if an international agreement signed by the
Republic of Latvia contains provisions other than those laid down by this Law, the provisions of the
international agreement shall be applicable." The like provisions are included in other Latvian laws onintellectual property rights.
The practice of Latvia's courts testifies as well that the rule of Article 50 is interpreted by
courts also as follows: "if this Law does not contain provisions laid down by an international
agreement signed by the Republic of Latvia, the provisions of the international agreement shall beapplicable."
The nationals of other WTO Members receive treatment no less favourable than Latvian
nationals with regard to matters affecting the availability, acquisition, scope, maintenance and
enforcement of such rights according to the Crim inal Procedure Code, which determines that "in
criminal cases justice is administered based on person’s equality before the law and court irrespectiveof their origin, social and material status, race and nationality, sex, education, language, religion,
profession, place of residence and other circumstances" as well as the Civil Procedure Law, which
determines that "every private person or legal entity has the rights to protection in the court of its own
infringed or disputed civil right or interests protected by the Law" as well as providing equal
procedural rights for parties.
2. Please describe in detail the manner in which the Republic of Latvia has implemented
its obligation to restore protection for copyrights and sound recordings that are still under
protection in their country of origin and have no t had a full term of protection in the territory
of the Republic of Latvia.
The terms of protection for copyrights and sound recordings are determined under the Law on
Copyright and Neighbouring Rights (Articles 28-32, 48) .  The term of protection for copyrights and
sound recordings for international bodies are dete rmined under international agreements (Law on
Copyright and Neighbouring Rights Article 58).
                                                     
2 Document IP/C/W/151.IP/C/W/159
Page 5
3. Are computer programmes protected as literary works under the copyright law of the
Republic of Latvia?
Yes, under the copyright law of the Republic of  Latvia computer programs are protected as
literary works.
4. Article 8 of Latvia's trademark law provides for the rejection of applications for
trademark registrations and for cancellation of registered trademarks that are identical with or
similar to a well-known trademark.  Please describe in detail the manner in which well-known
trademarks are protected in the Republic of Latvia against use by unauthorized parties.
Article 4 - "Rights to a Trademark and the Holders of these Rights" - of  Latvia's Trademark
Law and in particular Article 4(7) includes the following provisions concerning the protection of well-
known marks:
"(6) The person in whose name the trademark has been registered is entitled to prohibit
other persons from using in the course of trade the following signs:
1) any sign which is identical to the trademark in relation to goods or services
which are identical to those for which the trademark is registered;
2) any sign where, because of its identity to, or similarity to, the trademark and
the identity or similarity of the goods or services for which the trademark is registered
and the sign is used, there exists a likelihood of confusion on behalf of the relevantconsumers, which includes the likelihood of association between the sign and the
trademark.
(7) Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph 6 of this Article, the owner of a
trademark, that is well-known  (within the meaning of Article 8) in Latvia, is entitled to
prevent the use, in the course of trade, of any sign which constitutes a reproduction, an
imitation, a translation or a transliteration, likely to create confusion, of the well-known
trademark, in relation to goods or services, that are identical or similar to those covered by the
well-known trademark.  The owner of a trademark, that is well-known in Latvia, is entitled to
prevent the use, in the course of trade, of a sign which constitutes a reproduction, an
imitation, a translation or a transliteration of the well-known trademark, also in relation to
goods or services, that are not similar to those covered by the well-known trademark,provided that consumers may perceive the use of such a sign as indicating a connection
between these goods or services and the owne r of the well-known trademark, and that such
use may be detrimental to the interests of the owner of the well-known trademark.
(8) In accordance with the provisions of paragraphs 6 and 7 of this Article the following
actions may also be prohibited:
1) use (affixing, attachment) of the said signs on the goods or on the packaging
thereof;
2) offering the goods for sale, or putting them on the market or stocking them
for these purposes under the said signs;
3) providing services or offering them under the said signs;
4) importing or exporting the goods under the said signs;
5) using the said signs on business documents and in advertising.
(9) In the application, mutatis mutandis , of the provisions of paragraphs 6, 7 and 8 of this
Article, the owner of the trademark is also entitled to prohibit other persons from using signs
that are intended for purposes other than distinguishing goods or services (marking of goods,
indication of the origin of goods or services), if it is proven that the use of such a sign in the
absence of appropriate justification gives the impression of connection with this trademark, orIP/C/W/159
Page 6
takes unfair advantage of, or is detrimental to, the distinctive character or the reputation of the
trademark."
The procedure under which the owner of a well-k nown trademark may protect his rights is set
forth by the general rules of Article 27 - "Unlawful Use of a Trademark (Trademark Infringement)" -and Article 28 - "Liability for Unlawful Use of a Trademark"  - of the Law, that refer to the protection
of well-known trademarks as well.
Article 27 provides, inter alia, that:
"(1) Unlawful use of a trademark shall be construed as an infringement of the exclusive
rights of the trademark owner, namely, the use, in  the course of trade, of the signs referred to
in Article 4, paragraph 6, sub-paragraph 1 or 2 of this Law, or in Article 4, paragraph 7,
without the consent of the owner of the trademark, including use of such signs in the waysspecified in Article 4, Paragraph 8."
Article 28  provides, inter alia, that:"(1) Liability for unlawful use of a trademark pursuant to the provisions of Article 27 of
this Law shall arise, where the fact of trademark infringement is proved.  The burden of proof
of the fact of infringement lies with the aggrieved party (the owner of the trademark or the
licensee).
(2) The owner of a trademark (or their suc cessor in title) may bring an action in the
Regional Court of Riga for unlawful use of the trademark.  The licensee is entitled to bring a
separate action for unlawful use of the tradem ark only with the consent of the owner of the
trademark.  The consent of the owner of the trademark is not necessary if the licensing
agreement provides for the right of the licensee to bring a separate action, or in cases, where
the owner of the trademark does not bring such an action even though the licensee has invited
the owner to do so in writing.  Any of the licensees of the respective trademark are entitled to
intervene in the action and seek damages that have resulted from unlawful use of the licensedtrademark.
(4) If the fact of infringement is proven, and depending upon the degree of fault, the
aggrieved party may request the court to make a judgement including one or more of the
following measures (sanctions):
1) cessation of the unlawful use of the trademark;
2) payment of damages arising from the unlawful use of the trademark,
including lost profits;
3) recovery of court costs, including also the litigation expenses as prescribed by
law, and the fees paid to the representative.
(5) The court may, in its judgement, provide for measures to prevent further infringement
of the trademark, including imposing the obligation to destroy the goods with the unlawful
marking, or to convey those goods at cost price to the owner of the trademark (successor in
title) or the licensee if they so agree, or to donate those goods for use for charitable purposes.The court may, upon the request of the owner of th e trademark (their successor in title) or the
licensee, apply the measures prescribed by la w for enforcement of the claim also in those
cases when the claim is not of a material character (damages are not claimed).
(6) When determining liability for unlawful use of a trademark, for the purposes of
determining the degree of the infringer's fault,  the fact of receipt of the warning notice
referred to in Article 24, paragraph 3 of this Law may be used as evidence.IP/C/W/159
Page 7
(7) In cases where trademark infringement has been done deliberately or with intent to
defraud, the persons responsible shall also be called to administrative or criminal liability.
(8) Notwithstanding the provisions of Article 27 and this Article, claims for infringement
of registered and unregistered trademarks, including the cases provided for in Article 4,
paragraph 9 of this Law, may be based upon the provisions of the laws or other statutory
enactments of Latvia pertaining to unfair competition.
(9) A claim for the infringement of a trademark may be brought within three years from
the date when the aggrieved party became aware, or should have become aware, of the
occurrence of infringement of the mark.
5. Please describe what is envisioned by the limited exception to exclusive patent rights
contained in Article 32(1) of Latvia's Patent Law allowing others to use an invention for "non-
commercial" (non-profit) purposes and provide specific examples.
Taking into consideration that Latvia's courts have not yet examined any case involving a
dispute over the use of an invention for non-comm ercial (non-profit) purposes and, respectively, have
not devised their understanding of the provision of Article 32(1) of Latvia's Patent Law, it may be
presumed that this provision mainly refers to a private non-commercial use of a patented product .  For
example, it may refer to educational purposes, an experimental use by a person  who is not a scientific
organisation (Article 32(2)), but an individual .  The provision may refer as well to a person -
individual - who legally obtains a patented product (i.e .  the product that has already been put on the
market by the owner of the patent for invention, or with his authorisation) and who, thus, has the right
to repair it or have it repaired (Article 32(3)) .
6. Please describe in detail the manner in which a court in the Republic of Latvia mightgrant a patent compulsory licence under Article 39 of Latvia's Patent Law, indicating how each
of the required circumstances under Article 31 of the TRIPS Agreement is established.
It should be mentioned, first of all, that a patent compulsory license may be granted by court
under Article 39 of Latvia's Patent Law only in exceptional cases which are mentioned in the Law,
namely, in the cases if a patented product, or an invention, is of vital importance to the welfare of the
residents of Latvia or for the interests of the economy or national security of Latvia.
The provisions above are to be considered additional restrictive limitations of "the other use"
which are not mentioned in the TRIPS Agreement.
Besides, the Law allows the grant of a patent compulsory licence in the case where a patented
invention is of great economic significance  while the TRIPS Agreement refers to " an important
technical advance of considerable economic significance " (Article 31 (l)(i)).
Article 31 of the TRIPS Agreement provides that the other use "(b) ...  may only be permitted
if, prior to such use, the proposed user has made e fforts to obtain authorization from the right holder on
reasonable commercial terms and conditions and that such efforts have not been successful within a
reasonable period of time."
According to the relevant Article 39(1) of Latvia's  Patent Law:  "If within four years time from
the date a patent is granted [...], the patented invention has not been used or has been insufficiently
used in the territory of the Republic of Latvia, any person may appeal to court with a request that the
court grant a licence (compulsory licence) to use the patented invention in accordance with the termsIP/C/W/159
Page 8
set by court .  This provision does not apply in cases when the patent owner is able to substantiate the
non-use or inadequate use of the invention."
When regarding a claim for a patent compulsory licence, Latvia's court, besides provisions of
the national Patent Law, should take into consideration factors (required circumstances) underArticle 31 of the TRIPS Agreement
.  Such an approach follows from the principles of Latvia’s law
mentioned in the answer to question 1 under II above .  
Since Latvia's courts had no practice in regarding claims under Article 39 of the Patent Law, it
may be presumed that in establishing circumstances required under Article 31 of the TRIPS
Agreement the courts may, at least,  take evidence of the person claiming the grant of a patent
compulsory licence and the patent holder, evaluate the opinions of competent authorities (e.g .
governmental bodies, research centres and the like).
7. Article 39.3 of the TRIPS Agreement requires that WTO Members protect data
submitted to obtain marketing approval for agricultural chemicals and pharmaceutical
products against unfair commercial use and against disclosure.  Please explain in detail themanner in which the Republic of Latvia provides such protection.
In general, paragraph 1 of Article 7 of the Information Publicity Law states that:
"Information shall be qualified as secret of enterpreneurship, if an institution betraying this
information can prejudice to competitiveness of the person submitting it."
In specifics, Article 36 of the Regulations of the Cabinet of Ministers No. 341 of October 5,
1999, the Order of Registration of Plant Protection Chemicals states that:
"The State Service for Plant Protection and the Registration Commission is not allowed to use
information on plant protection chemicals, the active substances of plant protection
chemicals, and information on plant protection chemicals which contain parasitic and fierce
organisms for the benefit of other applicant to registration in the absence of written agreement
between the person who initially submitted the information and the that other applicant."
Article 37 of the same Regulations also states that the State Service for Plant Protection and
the Registration Commission secure limited availability to the information at their disposal if so
requested by the applicant for the registration.
With respect to pharmaceutical products, Article 4 of the Order of the Ministry of Welfare,
No.155, the Order of Registration of Pharmaceutical Products states that:
"The State Drug Agency shall secure the confidentiality of the information submitted by the
applicant to registration, if the applicant has indicated this fact when submitting the
registration application."
8. Article 41.3 of the TRIPS Agreement requires that decisions on the merits of a case
preferably be in writing the better to determin e the reasoning on which the decision is based.
Please state, in regard to each court or admini strative body with jurisdiction over intellectual
property disputes, whether judges or administrative officials must render their decisions in
writing and cite the legal authorities requiring such written opinions.
According to Latvia's laws, all decisions of courts or administrative bodies with jurisdiction
over intellectual property disputes must be prepared in written form
.  The legal authorities that require
such written opinions are Latvia's Law on Civil Procedure, Article 193 ("The form and contents of theIP/C/W/159
Page 9
decision") and Regulations of the Board of Appeals of the Latvian Patent Office approved by the
Minister of Justice, Section 7.9.
9. Under Article 42, parties are to be entitled  to substantiate their claims and present
relevant evidence.  Please describe any limitatio ns under the law of the Republic of Latvia on a
party's ability to substantiate a claim or present relevant evidence and cite the legal authority
providing such limitation.
Under Section 15 of the Civil Procedure Law:
- each party shall prove the facts it makes reference to as substantiation of its own
claim and objection. Claimant shall prove it’s claim.  Defendant shall prove validityof its objections.  If the parties to the case have no possibility to receive necessary
evidence, the court shall require it on its own after receiving request from the parties.
- the court accepts only evidence with significance for the case.
- the court estimates evidence according to its own conviction, which is substantiated
with completely, generally and appropriately proved evidence in assize to be guidedby juridical sense which is based on logic, science recognition and observations
acquired in life.
- the court admits only means of proof stated in law.
- no evidence has previously stated force that commits the court.
Under Section 5 of the Criminal Procedure Code:
- evidence in criminal case is established by testimonies of witnesses, victim, marked
man, defendant, expert’s adjudgement, bodies of evidence, protocols of investigationand court and other documents.
- investigator (depositor of reference), public prosecutor, judge and court according to
the procedure stated in this Code can in cases being at their disposal invite any person
to cross-examine or require expert adjudg ement from it; can require from enterprises,
institutions, organisations, officials and other private persons to present material
evidence and documents from which the necessary evidence for the case can be
acquired; require enterprise, institutions and organisations to make documentaryaudits.
- marked man, defendant, victim, civil claimant, civil defendant and their
representatives as well as any person, enterprise, institution and organisation can also
present evidence at their own initiative.
- estimation of evidence is made according to the same principles as in civil process.
10. Article 43.2 provides that, in the event a party refuses to provide information ordered
by the judicial or administrative officials, thos e officials may be authorized to make preliminary
and final determinations adverse to that party.  Please describe what sanctions may be imposed
on a party that refused to provide ordered information and under what circumstances those
sanctions are imposed, citing the legal authority for those sanctions.
Section 14(d) of the Administrative Offence Code  constitutes administrative offences which
find expressions as contempt against the court, in particular, in respect to not rendering information,
Article 41 is referable which provides that "public authority which does not consider judge’s sidedecision or application of judge or do not take measures in order to prevent law offences mentioned in
the above documents as well as do not provide answer in time to the side decision or application shall
be fined up to 100Ls" (appr. 170 USD).IP/C/W/159
Page 10
Article 272 of the Criminal Law provides cr iminal liability for not providing requested
information and for providing untruthful information to a State institution which is authorised by the
Law to require such information.
11. Article 44.2 authorizes WTO Members to excep t from the authority of courts to enjoin
infringements of intellectual property for government use and for third parties' use on behalf of
governments, limiting the remedy for infringement to payment of adequate remuneration.
Please describe any such limitations on remedies under the laws of the Republic of Latvia and
cite the legal authorities pr oviding for those limitations.
The Latvian laws do not contain such special exceptions.
12. Please provide statistical information related  to civil copyright, trademark, geographical
indication, industrial design, patent, inte grated circuit layout-design and trade secret
enforcement for 1998, including the number of ca ses filed;  injunctions issued;  infringing
products seized;  infringing equipment seized;  cases resolved (including settlement);  and the
amount of damages awarded.
Statistical information on cases related to the intellectual property:
(In accordance with the report on civil cases in the first instance in 1998)
Incoming cases 14
Finished cases 10
Resolved cases by judgement   5
Dismissed cases   4
Not resolved cases before 1998 11
Not resolved cases after 1998 15
In 1998 the courts examined eight appeals against decisions of the Board of Appeals of the
Latvian Patent Office relating to oppositions to trademark registrations:
Number of cases
examinedTrademarks
cancelled
Riga District Court 5 3
Supreme Court 1 2
Supreme Court'sCassation Department22
Total 8 5
13. Please provide statistical information relat ed to criminal enforcement in the area of
copyright piracy and trademark infringeme nt for 1998, including the number of raids,
prosecutions, convictions and the amount of fines and/or jail terms (including whether the fines
were paid and whether the jail term was actually served or was suspended)  and any other
information establishing that your criminal system operates effectively to deter copyright piracy
and trademark counterfeiting.
There is no such collected information available in the Republic of Latvia.
__________