RESTRICTED
WORLD TRADE IP/Q/GBR/1
24October 1996
ORGANIZATION(96-4456)
Original: English Council forTrade-Related Aspects
ofIntellectual Property Rights
REVIEW OFLEGISLATION ONCOPYRIGHT AND RELATED RIGHTS
United Kingdom1
Thepresent document reproduces thequestions putthedelegation oftheUnited Kingdom and
theresponses given inthereview oflegislation oncopyright andrelated rights attheCouncil 'smeeting
of22to25July19962.
_______________
REPLIES TOQUESTIONS POSED BYTHE UNITED STATES
1. Please explain whether andhowtheUnited Kingdom 'slawprovides protection forworks,
phonograms andperformances fromother WTO Members, andwhether andhowitdoessoonthebasis
ofnational treatment, asrequired byTRIPS Article 3(generally, withrespect toallcopyrights and
neighbouring rights) andArticle 9.1(incorporating Berne Article 5(1)). Inparticular, please indicate
hownational treatment isafforded withrespect tothedistribution oflevies forprivate copying under
Article 44oftheCopyright Act.
Inrespect ofcopyright andthose related rights provided forinSection 1ofPartIIoftheTRIPS
Agreement, copyright works (andinUKlawphonograms aretreated asacategory ofcopyright work)
fromothercountries andforeign performances aregiven thesameprotection asworks andperformances
ofUKorigin thussatisfying thenational treatment requirements ofArticles 3and9.1.UKcopyright
lawisappliedtoworksfromothercountriesbyordersmadeunderSection159oftheCopyright,Designs
andPatents Act1988; performers from countries designated inorders made under Section 208of
thatActenjoy protection inrespect oftheirperformances. TheCopyright (Application toOther
Countries) (Amendment) Order 1995(SI1995No.2987) andthePerformances (Reciprocal Protection)
(Convention Countries) Order 1995(SI1995 No.2990) made under these Sections respectively gave
effect totheUK'sobligation toother WTO countries from 1January 1996 where these obligations
werenotalready metbyexisting Orders implementing theUK'sobligations under other international
copyright conventions orotherwise.
UKcopyright lawhasnoprovisions relating tothedistribution oflevies forprivate copying.
1United Kingdom 'snotification oflawsandregulations intheareaofcopyright andrelated rights under
Article 63.2 oftheAgreement hasbeen circulated indocuments IP/N/1/GBR/1 andIP/N/1/GBR/C/1 and2.
2Theminutes ofthemeeting have been circulated indocument IP/C/M/8.IP/Q/GBR/1
Page2
[Follow-up question]
Please explain whether andhowanyrevenues generated fromtheimposition ofprivate copying
orblank tapelevies intheUnited Kingdom aredistributed onthebasis ofnational treatment to
rightholders onthebasis ofnational treatment torightholders fromallWTO Members, regardless of
thetypeofrightholder.
TheUKhasnoblank tape, equipment oranyother levyforprivate copying, which iswhy
itanswered thatthere arenoprovisions relating tothedistribution oflevies.
2. DoestheUnited Kingdom apply the"ruleoftheshorter term" tophonograms andperformances
fromother WTO Members? Ifso,please explain howyoujustify suchaction under TRIPS Article 4.
TheUKterm ofprotection forproducers ofsound recordings andperformers is50years from
theendofthecalendar yearinwhich therecording ismade (i.e.fixation) ortheperformance takes
place respectively, thatistheminimum termsetoutinArticle 14.5ofTRIPS. Ifduring thisperiod
therecording, orarecording oftheperformance, isreleased, thetermexpires 50years fromtheend
ofthecalendar yearinwhich itisreleased. USproducers andperformers willonlyreceive aterm
longer than50years, which canapply where arecording isnotreleased intheyearitismade orthe
yearoftheperformance, ifthetermisnotlonger thanthatapplying intheUS.
3. PleaseexplainwhetherandhowtheUnitedKingdomprotectsagainstboththedirectandindirect
reproduction ofphonograms asrequired byTRIPS Article 14.2, including bydigital transmission in
thecontext ofsubscription orinteractive services.
Under UKlaw,copyright inasound recording gives theowner ofcopyright theexclusive right
tocopythework(seeSection 16(1)(a) ofthe1988Act)andaction ispossible forcopyright infringement
where unauthorised copying ofthesound recording occurs. Moreover, Section 16(3)(b) specifically
states thatthisrestricted Actapplies whether donedirectly orindirectly andregardless ofwhether any
intervening Actsinfringe copyright. Thiswillcover copying ofasound recording from adigital
transmission.
[Follow-up question]
Does thereproduction rightforphonograms under United Kingdom lawinclude initsscope
reproductions made frombroadcasts?
TheUKhasalready saidinitsoriginal answer thatthereproduction right foranowner of
copyright inasound recording willcover copying ofasound recording from adigital transmission.
Copying ofasound recording from abroadcast, whether digital orotherwise, willalsobecovered
bythereproduction rightforthesame reasons assetoutintheoriginal answer.
4. Please explain whether andhowtheUnited Kingdom provides fullretroactive protection to
works, phonograms andperformances fromother WTO Members, asrequired byTRIPS Articles 9.1,
14.6and70.2, eachofwhich incorporate byreference orrelyupon Berne Article 18.Please give
thedateback towhich suchprotection extends withrespect toeach category ofsubject matter.
Additionally, please describe thewayinwhich Article 7oftheUnited Kingdom ’sCopyright Orders
willapply tothosewhorelied onthepublic domain status ofaworkaftercopyright protection isrestored,
orisprovided toawork thatisstillprotected initscountry oforigin andhasnothadafulltermof
protection intheUnited Kingdom. Inparticular, weareinterested inlearning ifthereareanylimitations
ontheactivities ofthese reliance parties either inscope orduration.IP/Q/GBR/1
Page3
Copyright works, including phonograms (which aretreated assuch-seeanswer toquestion 1),
andperformers from other countries areprotected asexplained inanswer toQuestion 1.
There isnosingle datetowhich theprotection extends backsince protection isalways future
protection butisgiven inrespect ofanexisting copyright workorrecording ofaparticular performance
afterithasqualified forprotection inrespect ofanyperiod which continues tosubsist calculated from
thedatepriortoqualification onwhich theworkorrecording ofthatperformance wasmade, asrequired
byTRIPS. Whether protection exists therefore depends upon whether theterm, which would have
applied toaparticular work orrecording ofaperformance haditalways beenprotected, hasexpired.
Existing sound recordings made fromatleastaslongagoas1946maybeprotected intheUK.
TheCopyright, Designs andPatents Act1988(which hasbeenamended bytheDuration ofCopyright
andRights inPerformances Regulations 1995) inparagraph 12ofSchedule 1confirms thetermof
protection intheCopyright Act1956 forsound recordings made before 1June1957 (i.e.thedateof
commencement ofthe1956Act). The1956Actinparagraph 11ofSchedule 7gives atermof50years
from making forsound recordings made before commencement oftheAct. The1995 Regulations
mayresult insound recordings made before 1946 being protected.
Forliterary, dramatic, musical andartistic works, under the1995Regulations mentioned above,
protection mayapply toexisting works where theauthor died70years ago,i.e.in1926. The1988
Act,whichthe1995Regulationsamend,confirmedtheprotectionforworksmadebeforecommencement
ofthatActinparagraph 12ofSchedule 1byreference toSections 2and3ofthe1956 Act,which
should bereadinthelightofthetransitional provisions inSchedule 7ofthe1956 Actwithregard
toworks existing before commencement ofthe1956 Act.
TheCopyright (Application toOther Countries) Order 1993 asamended bythe1995 Order
mentioned above gives effect toretroactive protection, subject, ofcourse, tothetermofprotection
having notalready ceased, forallcopyright works from allWTO countries. The1995 Order does
notrestore anycopyright because Article 18ofBerne doesnotrequire works thathavealready fallen
intothepublic domain through expiry ofcopyright protection tobeprotected. Article 7ofthe1993
Order (amended bythe1995 Order) gives some protection tothose whohaveormaybeabout touse
awork newly protected bycopyright. Article 7allows thecontinued doing ofcertain actsunless the
copyright owner payscompensation assettled byarbitration intheabsence ofagreement. Howlong
theActcanbecontinued would depend onwhether theActfellwithin thescope oftheArticle. It
would ultimately beforthecourts todecide whether thisisthecaseinanyparticular circumstances.
Asfarasperformers rights areconcerned, the1995 Order mentioned above inreply to
Question 1grants reciprocal protection, i.e.thesame asthatapplying under PartIIoftheCopyright,
Designs andPatents Act1988toUKperformers (except where therearelimitations onthisreciprocity
asisindicated intherelevant Order). TRIPS Article 14.6requires Article 18ofBerne toextend only
tothose rights ofperformers insound recordings granted byTRIPS. Bydefinition, theonlyright
relevant hereistherighttoauthorise thereproduction ofafixation ofaperformance. Section 180(3)
inPartIIofthe1988Actensures thatinsofar asrights inrecordings areconcerned, those rights apply
afterqualification torecordings ofperformances made priortoqualification except thatnoactcarried
outinrelation tosucharecording either prior toqualification, orafterqualification butinpursuance
ofarrangements made before qualification, canbeaninfringement ofrights arising afterqualification.
Aswithcopyright, theextent towhich existing performances areprotected depends onwhether the
termofprotection, hadtheperformance always beenprotected, hasalready expired.IP/Q/GBR/1
Page4
5. Please explain thecriminal andcivilremedies available forcopyright infringement andthe
extent towhich theyfullyimplement theobligations inTRIPS Articles 41,45,50and61. Inthe
response, please specify, interalia,whether these remedies mayinclude theseizure, forfeiture and
destruction ofinfringing articles andequipment usedtomake theinfringing articles, asrequired by
Article 46and61,andthemanner inwhich thegrant ofcivilprovisional relief isprovided inaccordance
withTRIPS Article 50.Please alsoexplain howcivildamages aremeasured inthecaseofcomputer
program infringement andwhen andhowattorney ’sfeesandcourt costs areawarded.
ItistheUK'sunderstanding thatquestions relating totheenforcement ofintellectual property
rights aretobeconsidered laterinthescrutiny process. Nevertheless, wewould referyoutotheUK's
response tothechecklist onenforcement which willbecirculated shortly fordetails ontheenforcement
ofintellectual property rights intheUK. Should yourequire anyfurther clarification orifyouhave
anyfollow-up questions thenwewould bepleased todiscuss them onabilateral basis orlaterinthe
scrutiny process when issues relating toenforcement areaddressed.