Computer technology plays an increasingly important role in modern society. Computers —
electronic machines with a capacity to store and/or process data — are called ”hardware.“ The
development of hardware is astonishing: computers are more potent and computer technology
enters more areas of life, not only in technological environments and offices (their initial
stronghold), but also in more mundane surroundings such as household appliances, cars, watches
and similar products.
7.2 A computer cannot operate without instructions. These instructions (programs) may be embedded into the hardware (the computer itself), for example in ROMs (Read Only Memory, circuits from which digital information can be retrieved), but most often they are created, reproduced and distributed in media which are separate from the computer hardware. Typically, computer programs for personal computers are distributed on diskettes, or CD-ROMs. Usually, computer programs are created in a programming language which can be understood by people trained in that language. That form of appearance of the program, which can be on the computer screen or printed out on paper, is normally referred to as the ”source code.“ Another form of appearance is the so-called ”object code,“ where the program is transferred (”compiled“) into the digital values ”0“ and ”1.“ In this form the program is unintelligible for persons, but it is machine- readable, for example from a diskette, and in that form it can be used actually to control the operations of the computer.
7.3 Usually the computer hardware and the programs need to be supplemented by manuals and other support material, prepared by the producer of the program, which provide the necessary instructions and reference material for more advanced uses of the program. The program and such reference material and manuals (together with the more technical background material which rests with the producer) are referred to as computer software.
7.4 The investment needed for the creation of computer programs is often very heavy, and their protection against unauthorized copying and use is of crucial importance. Without such protection, producers of computer programs would not be able to recoup their investment, and so the creation and development of this decisive side of computer technology would be jeopardized. In countries which have not yet provided sufficient protection, it is frequently only possible to obtain foreign programs which are not adapted to the specific needs of those countries, because it is difficult to secure the financing of the necessary translations and local adaptations. Also, computer viruses tend to be much more widespread in countries with insufficient protection, because they are distributed with pirated software which is not subject to the same quality control as authorized products.
7.5 Therefore, it is vital for national legislation to ensure sufficient protection of computer programs. Even in cases where local translations or adaptations are not necessary, such protection improves access to the most advanced and the best suited software, since producers and distributors are only reluctantly releasing their valuable products in countries where rampant piracy can be expected.
7.2 A computer cannot operate without instructions. These instructions (programs) may be embedded into the hardware (the computer itself), for example in ROMs (Read Only Memory, circuits from which digital information can be retrieved), but most often they are created, reproduced and distributed in media which are separate from the computer hardware. Typically, computer programs for personal computers are distributed on diskettes, or CD-ROMs. Usually, computer programs are created in a programming language which can be understood by people trained in that language. That form of appearance of the program, which can be on the computer screen or printed out on paper, is normally referred to as the ”source code.“ Another form of appearance is the so-called ”object code,“ where the program is transferred (”compiled“) into the digital values ”0“ and ”1.“ In this form the program is unintelligible for persons, but it is machine- readable, for example from a diskette, and in that form it can be used actually to control the operations of the computer.
7.3 Usually the computer hardware and the programs need to be supplemented by manuals and other support material, prepared by the producer of the program, which provide the necessary instructions and reference material for more advanced uses of the program. The program and such reference material and manuals (together with the more technical background material which rests with the producer) are referred to as computer software.
7.4 The investment needed for the creation of computer programs is often very heavy, and their protection against unauthorized copying and use is of crucial importance. Without such protection, producers of computer programs would not be able to recoup their investment, and so the creation and development of this decisive side of computer technology would be jeopardized. In countries which have not yet provided sufficient protection, it is frequently only possible to obtain foreign programs which are not adapted to the specific needs of those countries, because it is difficult to secure the financing of the necessary translations and local adaptations. Also, computer viruses tend to be much more widespread in countries with insufficient protection, because they are distributed with pirated software which is not subject to the same quality control as authorized products.
7.5 Therefore, it is vital for national legislation to ensure sufficient protection of computer programs. Even in cases where local translations or adaptations are not necessary, such protection improves access to the most advanced and the best suited software, since producers and distributors are only reluctantly releasing their valuable products in countries where rampant piracy can be expected.
Brief History of the Protection of Computer Programs
7.6 During the 1970s and the first half of the 1980s, intensive international discussions regarding the protection of computer software took place, mainly aiming at resolving the question of whether such protection should be under copyright or patent law, or possibly under a sui generis system of protection.
7.7 A Committee of Experts convened jointly by WIPO and Unesco in February – March 1985 marked a decisive breakthrough in the choice of copyright as the appropriate form of protection of computer programs, which can be assimilated to literary works. A few months later, several countries passed legislation clarifying that computer programs were considered works, subject to copyright protection, and since then it has been generally accepted worldwide that copyright protection should be applied rather than a sui generis approach.
7.8 There are important reasons for choosing copyright protection. First of all, computer programs are basically writings and, under Article 2(1) of the Berne Convention, the purpose for which writings are created is irrelevant from the viewpoint of their qualifying as literary works, if they are original intellectual creations.
7.9 Although computer programs as literal expressions can be protected under copyright, if ideas behind the computer programs embrace technical features providing technical solutions, then the expression of those ideas could be patentable subject matter.
Protection of Computer Programs under Patents
7.10 Article 27.1 of the TRIPS Agreement requires that patents be available in all fields of technology, provided that they are new, involve an inventive step and are capable of industrial application, subject to certain limited exceptions. This broad requirement of patentability has prompted a discussion of the subject of where to draw the line between copyright and patent protection for computer programs.
7.11 In many countries, software-related inventions are patentable subject matter if they have a technical character or involve technical teaching, i.e., an instruction addressed to a person skilled in the art on how to solve a particular technical problem using particular technical means. In other words, software-related inventions should have a technical effect. Provided that the software produces a technical effect, it is then necessary to examine whether the conditions of patentability are fulfilled.
Protection of Computer Programs under Copyright
7.12 Computer programs in object code form share the copyright status of other literary and artistic works stored in computer systems in machine-readable form. While they are unintelligible in object code, they can be retrieved — ”decompiled” — into source code form where they are intelligible. It is generally recognized that all categories of works are protected against storage in digital form, because such storage is a reproduction, and in this respect it does not matter that, for
7.6 During the 1970s and the first half of the 1980s, intensive international discussions regarding the protection of computer software took place, mainly aiming at resolving the question of whether such protection should be under copyright or patent law, or possibly under a sui generis system of protection.
7.7 A Committee of Experts convened jointly by WIPO and Unesco in February – March 1985 marked a decisive breakthrough in the choice of copyright as the appropriate form of protection of computer programs, which can be assimilated to literary works. A few months later, several countries passed legislation clarifying that computer programs were considered works, subject to copyright protection, and since then it has been generally accepted worldwide that copyright protection should be applied rather than a sui generis approach.
7.8 There are important reasons for choosing copyright protection. First of all, computer programs are basically writings and, under Article 2(1) of the Berne Convention, the purpose for which writings are created is irrelevant from the viewpoint of their qualifying as literary works, if they are original intellectual creations.
7.9 Although computer programs as literal expressions can be protected under copyright, if ideas behind the computer programs embrace technical features providing technical solutions, then the expression of those ideas could be patentable subject matter.
Protection of Computer Programs under Patents
7.10 Article 27.1 of the TRIPS Agreement requires that patents be available in all fields of technology, provided that they are new, involve an inventive step and are capable of industrial application, subject to certain limited exceptions. This broad requirement of patentability has prompted a discussion of the subject of where to draw the line between copyright and patent protection for computer programs.
7.11 In many countries, software-related inventions are patentable subject matter if they have a technical character or involve technical teaching, i.e., an instruction addressed to a person skilled in the art on how to solve a particular technical problem using particular technical means. In other words, software-related inventions should have a technical effect. Provided that the software produces a technical effect, it is then necessary to examine whether the conditions of patentability are fulfilled.
Protection of Computer Programs under Copyright
7.12 Computer programs in object code form share the copyright status of other literary and artistic works stored in computer systems in machine-readable form. While they are unintelligible in object code, they can be retrieved — ”decompiled” — into source code form where they are intelligible. It is generally recognized that all categories of works are protected against storage in digital form, because such storage is a reproduction, and in this respect it does not matter that, for
example, a musical work cannot be perceived directly from a CD, but only after a ”decompilation”
has taken place in a CD-player.
7.13 The normal prerequisite for copyright protection, that a work must be original, is well suited to be applied to computer programs. Although most programs consist of sub-routine elements which often in themselves would hardly qualify as original works, the combination of such elements and the structuring of the programs — with the exception of a few very simple programs — make them sufficiently creative. Ideas and abstract methods for solving problems (the so-called “algorithms”) are not protected under copyright, which limits the protection to the expression of such ideas and algorithms, but this is actually a desirable consequence of copyright protection: an appropriate protection is offered without creating unreasonable obstacles to the independent creation of such programs.
7.14 It has been argued that the term of protection for literary works, that is, 50 years after the death of the author, under the Berne Convention, is too long in relation to computer programs, because such programs usually become outdated in a much shorter time. The same argument applies to several other categories of literary and artistic works. The reality is that if a work is obsolete, it will not be used and therefore, protection will also not be invoked. The term under the Berne Convention should be considered nothing other than an upper limit for those works which actually remain of interest to users.
International Norms Concerning Copyright Protection of Computer Programs
7.15 The international consensus regarding copyright protection of computer programs has been reflected in two international treaties, namely Article 10(1) of the TRIPS Agreement and Article 4 of the WIPO Copyright Treaty (WCT). While slightly different in wording, these two provisions both state that computer programs should be protected as literary works, and that the protection should be the same as that granted to such works under the Berne Convention. This does not exclude that national laws may categorize computer programs as a separate category of works, provided that the level of protection is not lower than that granted to literary works under the Convention. The TRIPS Agreement also clarifies that the protection applies to computer programs “whether in source or object code”, while the WCT expresses the same in a less technical form: “Such protection applies to computer programs, whatever may be the mode or form of their expression.”
National Legislation on Copyright Protection of Computer Programs
7.16 A number of important issues that should be addressed in modern copyright laws are analyzed below in the light of the prevailing international trends.
7.17 It is a clear trend today that national laws expressly include computer programs as protected works of a kind, more precisely as writings, and thus there is no doubt that copyright protection applies to such programs, provided that they are original. Not all national laws define computer programs, and some of the definitions differ in their wording, but a fairly generally applicable definition would be “a ‘computer program’ is a set of instructions expressed in words, codes, schemes or in any other form, which is capable, when incorporated in a machine-readable medium, of causing a computer — an electronic or similar device having information-processing capabilities — to perform or achieve a particular task or result.” This definition reflects all the essential elements of the notion of computer programs.
7.13 The normal prerequisite for copyright protection, that a work must be original, is well suited to be applied to computer programs. Although most programs consist of sub-routine elements which often in themselves would hardly qualify as original works, the combination of such elements and the structuring of the programs — with the exception of a few very simple programs — make them sufficiently creative. Ideas and abstract methods for solving problems (the so-called “algorithms”) are not protected under copyright, which limits the protection to the expression of such ideas and algorithms, but this is actually a desirable consequence of copyright protection: an appropriate protection is offered without creating unreasonable obstacles to the independent creation of such programs.
7.14 It has been argued that the term of protection for literary works, that is, 50 years after the death of the author, under the Berne Convention, is too long in relation to computer programs, because such programs usually become outdated in a much shorter time. The same argument applies to several other categories of literary and artistic works. The reality is that if a work is obsolete, it will not be used and therefore, protection will also not be invoked. The term under the Berne Convention should be considered nothing other than an upper limit for those works which actually remain of interest to users.
International Norms Concerning Copyright Protection of Computer Programs
7.15 The international consensus regarding copyright protection of computer programs has been reflected in two international treaties, namely Article 10(1) of the TRIPS Agreement and Article 4 of the WIPO Copyright Treaty (WCT). While slightly different in wording, these two provisions both state that computer programs should be protected as literary works, and that the protection should be the same as that granted to such works under the Berne Convention. This does not exclude that national laws may categorize computer programs as a separate category of works, provided that the level of protection is not lower than that granted to literary works under the Convention. The TRIPS Agreement also clarifies that the protection applies to computer programs “whether in source or object code”, while the WCT expresses the same in a less technical form: “Such protection applies to computer programs, whatever may be the mode or form of their expression.”
National Legislation on Copyright Protection of Computer Programs
7.16 A number of important issues that should be addressed in modern copyright laws are analyzed below in the light of the prevailing international trends.
7.17 It is a clear trend today that national laws expressly include computer programs as protected works of a kind, more precisely as writings, and thus there is no doubt that copyright protection applies to such programs, provided that they are original. Not all national laws define computer programs, and some of the definitions differ in their wording, but a fairly generally applicable definition would be “a ‘computer program’ is a set of instructions expressed in words, codes, schemes or in any other form, which is capable, when incorporated in a machine-readable medium, of causing a computer — an electronic or similar device having information-processing capabilities — to perform or achieve a particular task or result.” This definition reflects all the essential elements of the notion of computer programs.
7.18 The significance of this categorization of computer programs as literary works (writings),
depends on other relevant provisions of the respective laws and on the practice adopted in
subsequent court decisions. It should be kept in mind that this categorization of computer
programs indicates that the level of originality required as a prerequisite for protection should not
be different from that required for other writings. It is important, however, that commercially
valuable programs are not denied protection because of excessively high demands concerning
originality in the expression of the programs.
7.19 The protection of computer programs as writings entails, furthermore, that the rights pertaining to copyright protection also apply to such programs. In particular, the right of reproduction, the right of distribution of copies and the right of communication to the public should be applicable.
7.20 The most important issue concerning the right of reproduction in copyright laws is the question of in which cases it is justified to permit reproduction without the authorization of the right-owner. The international norm which is applicable is Article 9(2) of the Berne Convention. According to this provision, national laws may permit reproduction of literary and artistic works in certain special cases, provided that such reproduction does not conflict with a normal exploitation of the work and does not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the author. The views of professional circles concerning this provision, when applied to computer programs, are ambiguous, and governments having legislated or planning to legislate in this field do not always agree.
7.21 The question is: in which special cases does the free reproduction of computer programs not conflict with normal exploitation or unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of copyright owners, and in which special cases can it therefore be allowed?
7.22 Although differing views still exist, there seems to be growing agreement concerning free copying for private purposes, taking into account the purpose and value of computer programs — except for cases covered by the points below — should not be allowed; free copying by lawful owners, that is, persons who have acquired ownership of copies of (not of the copyright in) computer programs should be allowed in certain circumstances; free decompilation of computer programs (see discussion of this issue, below) may also be allowed under certain conditions. It should be added, however, that in the latter aspect, there is less than general agreement.
7.23 It is obvious that copying should be allowed if it is indispensable for the use of a program in conjunction with a machine for the purpose, and to the extent of use for which the program has been lawfully obtained. Furthermore, it also seems justified to allow making a “back-up copy” for archival purposes, as a security measure, for cases where the replacement of the program may become necessary. In addition to clarifying the extent to which a lawful owner of a computer program may make a copy, it also seems necessary to make it clear that the right of adaptation under Article 12 of the Berne Convention does not include the right to prevent an adaptation that is indispensable for using the computer program in conjunction with a machine for the purpose, and to the extent of use, for which the program has been lawfully obtained.
7.24 Decompilation of computer programs means reproduction and adaptation (“translation”) of computer programs into a form in which the coding and structure of the program can be examined and analyzed. According to certain views, such decompilation by lawful owners of computer programs should be allowed, since it would not conflict with any normal exploitation of the program and would not cause any unreasonable prejudice to the legitimate interests of copyright owners, in cases where decompilation is needed to obtain information necessary to achieve interoperability of independently created programs with the original programs concerned.
7.19 The protection of computer programs as writings entails, furthermore, that the rights pertaining to copyright protection also apply to such programs. In particular, the right of reproduction, the right of distribution of copies and the right of communication to the public should be applicable.
7.20 The most important issue concerning the right of reproduction in copyright laws is the question of in which cases it is justified to permit reproduction without the authorization of the right-owner. The international norm which is applicable is Article 9(2) of the Berne Convention. According to this provision, national laws may permit reproduction of literary and artistic works in certain special cases, provided that such reproduction does not conflict with a normal exploitation of the work and does not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the author. The views of professional circles concerning this provision, when applied to computer programs, are ambiguous, and governments having legislated or planning to legislate in this field do not always agree.
7.21 The question is: in which special cases does the free reproduction of computer programs not conflict with normal exploitation or unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of copyright owners, and in which special cases can it therefore be allowed?
7.22 Although differing views still exist, there seems to be growing agreement concerning free copying for private purposes, taking into account the purpose and value of computer programs — except for cases covered by the points below — should not be allowed; free copying by lawful owners, that is, persons who have acquired ownership of copies of (not of the copyright in) computer programs should be allowed in certain circumstances; free decompilation of computer programs (see discussion of this issue, below) may also be allowed under certain conditions. It should be added, however, that in the latter aspect, there is less than general agreement.
7.23 It is obvious that copying should be allowed if it is indispensable for the use of a program in conjunction with a machine for the purpose, and to the extent of use for which the program has been lawfully obtained. Furthermore, it also seems justified to allow making a “back-up copy” for archival purposes, as a security measure, for cases where the replacement of the program may become necessary. In addition to clarifying the extent to which a lawful owner of a computer program may make a copy, it also seems necessary to make it clear that the right of adaptation under Article 12 of the Berne Convention does not include the right to prevent an adaptation that is indispensable for using the computer program in conjunction with a machine for the purpose, and to the extent of use, for which the program has been lawfully obtained.
7.24 Decompilation of computer programs means reproduction and adaptation (“translation”) of computer programs into a form in which the coding and structure of the program can be examined and analyzed. According to certain views, such decompilation by lawful owners of computer programs should be allowed, since it would not conflict with any normal exploitation of the program and would not cause any unreasonable prejudice to the legitimate interests of copyright owners, in cases where decompilation is needed to obtain information necessary to achieve interoperability of independently created programs with the original programs concerned.
However, to avoid any conflict and prejudice referred to above, the information thus obtained
should not be used for the development, production or distribution of a program substantially
similar in its expression to the original program, or for any other act infringing copyright. It is a
difficult task to formulate legal provisions in respect of decompilation, because of the very strong
interests involved.
7.25 The Berne Convention contains few rules concerning the right of distribution, that is, the right to control not only the initial sale of copies of the work, but also subsequent distribution of such copies, for example through rental or lending. This right, however, has become increasingly important, not least as far as works embodied in digital media, including computer programs, are concerned. Such works can be copied without any deterioration of their technical quality. If they were made generally available free of charge or for a modest payment, even for a limited period of time, they would be subject to widespread copying by the general public. Realistically, it would not make much difference in this respect that such reproduction might not be permitted without the authorization of the owner of the rights. This means that it has become necessary for the right- owners to be able to prevent others from distributing copies of computer programs, for example, through rental or lending, because such distribution would disrupt the market for copies distributed through sale. There is a growing consensus that all such distribution should be subject to the authorization of the right-owners.
7.26 The right of communication to the public is also gaining importance in relation to computer programs. New communication techniques are being developed which will enable high-speed digital delivery of works from databanks to individual users. This will, of course, influence many different kinds of works and not only computer programs. However, such delivery systems are actually used for computer programs (also broadcasting of such programs has occurred in practice). These systems represent a substantial and very valuable use of such programs and as the development in this field is extremely rapid, modern legislation should ensure that exclusive rights of communication to the public, including broadcasting and the making available in interactive systems, should also apply to computer programs.
7.27 Among the other general rules of the Berne Convention that are important in relation to computer programs (as well as other works) the principle of protection without formalities (Article 5(2) of the Convention) should also be mentioned. Some national laws provide for registration systems, but normally registration is not a condition for the protection, but rather establishes rebuttable presumptions concerning authorship or ownership of rights, and, therefore, such provisions are not incompatible with the Berne Convention.
7.28 A general problem in a number of national laws is the term of protection. As there are no exceptions in the Berne Convention concerning computer programs, the term should be the general rule of 50 years after the end of the year in which the author died.
Creation and Use of Works by Means of Computers
7.29 The data processed by a computer, or the data that result from such processing, may well be protected literary and artistic works. This gives rise to some important questions in relation to the copyright protection of such works, such as:
- where the information processed by a computer is expressed in a work protected by copyright, is the use of that work by the computer under the control of the copyright- owner?
7.25 The Berne Convention contains few rules concerning the right of distribution, that is, the right to control not only the initial sale of copies of the work, but also subsequent distribution of such copies, for example through rental or lending. This right, however, has become increasingly important, not least as far as works embodied in digital media, including computer programs, are concerned. Such works can be copied without any deterioration of their technical quality. If they were made generally available free of charge or for a modest payment, even for a limited period of time, they would be subject to widespread copying by the general public. Realistically, it would not make much difference in this respect that such reproduction might not be permitted without the authorization of the owner of the rights. This means that it has become necessary for the right- owners to be able to prevent others from distributing copies of computer programs, for example, through rental or lending, because such distribution would disrupt the market for copies distributed through sale. There is a growing consensus that all such distribution should be subject to the authorization of the right-owners.
7.26 The right of communication to the public is also gaining importance in relation to computer programs. New communication techniques are being developed which will enable high-speed digital delivery of works from databanks to individual users. This will, of course, influence many different kinds of works and not only computer programs. However, such delivery systems are actually used for computer programs (also broadcasting of such programs has occurred in practice). These systems represent a substantial and very valuable use of such programs and as the development in this field is extremely rapid, modern legislation should ensure that exclusive rights of communication to the public, including broadcasting and the making available in interactive systems, should also apply to computer programs.
7.27 Among the other general rules of the Berne Convention that are important in relation to computer programs (as well as other works) the principle of protection without formalities (Article 5(2) of the Convention) should also be mentioned. Some national laws provide for registration systems, but normally registration is not a condition for the protection, but rather establishes rebuttable presumptions concerning authorship or ownership of rights, and, therefore, such provisions are not incompatible with the Berne Convention.
7.28 A general problem in a number of national laws is the term of protection. As there are no exceptions in the Berne Convention concerning computer programs, the term should be the general rule of 50 years after the end of the year in which the author died.
Creation and Use of Works by Means of Computers
7.29 The data processed by a computer, or the data that result from such processing, may well be protected literary and artistic works. This gives rise to some important questions in relation to the copyright protection of such works, such as:
- where the information processed by a computer is expressed in a work protected by copyright, is the use of that work by the computer under the control of the copyright- owner?
440
-
7.30
the answers, and the general consensus is recorded in the Report of the Second Committee of Governmental Experts on Copyright Problems Arising from the Use of Computers for Access to or the Creation of Works — convened by WIPO and Unesco in Paris in June 1982. The major conclusions recorded in the report and the recommendations may be summarized in the following way:
7.32 The general view which emerged from these studies is that no matter how sophisticated a computer may be, it is only a tool, and the author of a work produced by the aid of a computer is the person who conceived the product and who gave the programmer and the technician the instructions necessary to produce it. Neither the programmer who designed the program and needed to operate the computer for the purpose of producing that work, nor the technician who operated the computer when carrying out the task, would be regarded as the author or a joint author; however, where the work of the programmer amounted to collaboration with the originating creative person to such an extent that the programmer contributed creatively in settling the form of the final product, he might be regarded as a co-author.
-
7.30
the answers, and the general consensus is recorded in the Report of the Second Committee of Governmental Experts on Copyright Problems Arising from the Use of Computers for Access to or the Creation of Works — convened by WIPO and Unesco in Paris in June 1982. The major conclusions recorded in the report and the recommendations may be summarized in the following way:
-
- the input of a protected work into a computer system includes the reproduction of the
work on a machine-readable material support, and also the fixation of the work in the
memory of the computer system; both these acts (i.e. reproduction and fixation) are
governed by the international conventions (Article 9(1) of the Berne Convention); the
output of a protected work from a computer system should be protected under copyright
law, irrespective of the form of the output, for example, as a hardcopy printout, a fixation
in machine-readable form, a transmission from the database of one system into the
memory of another system (with or without an intermediary fixation), or by making the
work available to the public by audio or visual images presented on a screen;
-
- in amending or modifying national legislation to take account of computer use of
protected works, care should be taken to ensure that authors’ moral rights should
continue to be exercisable in relation to computer use, and that the exemption and
limitations on the copyright owner’s right of control, which computer technology might
render desirable, do not exceed the limits on such exemptions permitted by the
Conventions;
-
- non-voluntary licenses in relation to the computer use of protected works should only be
adopted when voluntary licensing is impracticable, and should, in any case, be in
accordance with the convention principles; and where a non-voluntary license is adopted
by a national law, its effect should be confined to the territory of the country of that law.
7.32 The general view which emerged from these studies is that no matter how sophisticated a computer may be, it is only a tool, and the author of a work produced by the aid of a computer is the person who conceived the product and who gave the programmer and the technician the instructions necessary to produce it. Neither the programmer who designed the program and needed to operate the computer for the purpose of producing that work, nor the technician who operated the computer when carrying out the task, would be regarded as the author or a joint author; however, where the work of the programmer amounted to collaboration with the originating creative person to such an extent that the programmer contributed creatively in settling the form of the final product, he might be regarded as a co-author.
Where a computer has been used to process information in such a way as to produce a
work of a kind normally protected by copyright — for example, the processing of statistics
so as to produce them in tabulated form designed to serve a particular purpose, or the use
of a computer to produce music — who is to be regarded as the “author”, and hence the
copyright-owner, of the resulting literary or musical work?
Both internationally and nationally, there has been a very large measure of agreement on
Databases
7.33 As mentioned above, the storage of protected works in computer memories is a
reproduction which falls within the right of reproduction. Another question is, whether databases
as such enjoy protection under copyright.
7.34 Article 2(5) of the Berne Convention provides as follows: “Collections of literary and artistic works such as encyclopaedias and anthologies which, by reason of the selection and arrangements of their contents, constitute intellectual creations shall be protected as such, without prejudice to the copyright in each of the works forming part of such collections.” The provision does not indicate any specific category of works to which the level of protection shall be assimilated. Accordingly, it should be assumed that the level of protection to be granted is that which, in general, is granted to literary and artistic works under the Berne Convention.
7.35 The said provision in Article 2(5) of the Berne Convention limits its scope to original collections of literary and artistic works. This does not mean, however, that there is no basis in the Berne Convention for the protection of original collections of other material, such as data.
7.36 A basis can be found in Article 2(1) of the Berne Convention, which states, inter alia, that “The expression ‘literary and artistic works’ shall cover every production in the literary, scientific and artistic domain, whatever may be the mode or form of its expression.” While the list of categories of works that follows the sentence just quoted does not include databases, it is clear that the list is not exhaustive, and a general consensus is emerging that every (original) production in the above- mentioned domain must be protected under the Convention.
7.37 An explicit provision on the protection of databases was included in Article 10(2) of the TRIPS Agreement. That provision states as follows: “Compilations of data or other material, whether in machine-readable or other form, which by reason of the selection or arrangement of their contents constitute intellectual creations shall be protected as such. Such protection, which shall not extend to the data or material itself, shall be without prejudice to any copyright subsisting in the data or material itself.”
7.38 The WCT contains in its Article 5 a provision on copyright protection of databases, which, under the title “compilations of Data (Databases)” provides as follows: “Compilations of data or other material, in any form, which by reason of the selection or arrangement of their contents constitute intellectual creations, are protected as such. This protection does not extend to the data or the material itself and is without prejudice to any copyright subsisting in the data or material contained in the compilation.” The Diplomatic Conference which adopted the WCT also adopted, by consensus, the following agreed statement: “The scope of protection for compilations of data (databases) under Article 5 of this Treaty, read with Article 2, is consistent with Article 2 of the Berne Convention and on a par with the relevant provisions of the TRIPS Agreement.” Article 2 of the WCT, to which the agreed statement refers, states, under the heading “Scope of Copyright Protection”: “copyright protection extends to expressions and not to ideas, procedures, methods of operation or mathematical concepts as such.”
7.39 The originality requirement, for example, as under the WCT, that the database “by reason of the selection or arrangement” of its contents, means that some databases are not protected, even if they are of a considerable size and have been expensive to prepare. Such is, for example, the case where a database is exhaustive, that is, it contains all the relevant data without any selection or omission, and the data is arranged according to basic, straightforward rules, such as alphabetically, or in numerical or chronological order. Such bases may, however, still represent
7.34 Article 2(5) of the Berne Convention provides as follows: “Collections of literary and artistic works such as encyclopaedias and anthologies which, by reason of the selection and arrangements of their contents, constitute intellectual creations shall be protected as such, without prejudice to the copyright in each of the works forming part of such collections.” The provision does not indicate any specific category of works to which the level of protection shall be assimilated. Accordingly, it should be assumed that the level of protection to be granted is that which, in general, is granted to literary and artistic works under the Berne Convention.
7.35 The said provision in Article 2(5) of the Berne Convention limits its scope to original collections of literary and artistic works. This does not mean, however, that there is no basis in the Berne Convention for the protection of original collections of other material, such as data.
7.36 A basis can be found in Article 2(1) of the Berne Convention, which states, inter alia, that “The expression ‘literary and artistic works’ shall cover every production in the literary, scientific and artistic domain, whatever may be the mode or form of its expression.” While the list of categories of works that follows the sentence just quoted does not include databases, it is clear that the list is not exhaustive, and a general consensus is emerging that every (original) production in the above- mentioned domain must be protected under the Convention.
7.37 An explicit provision on the protection of databases was included in Article 10(2) of the TRIPS Agreement. That provision states as follows: “Compilations of data or other material, whether in machine-readable or other form, which by reason of the selection or arrangement of their contents constitute intellectual creations shall be protected as such. Such protection, which shall not extend to the data or material itself, shall be without prejudice to any copyright subsisting in the data or material itself.”
7.38 The WCT contains in its Article 5 a provision on copyright protection of databases, which, under the title “compilations of Data (Databases)” provides as follows: “Compilations of data or other material, in any form, which by reason of the selection or arrangement of their contents constitute intellectual creations, are protected as such. This protection does not extend to the data or the material itself and is without prejudice to any copyright subsisting in the data or material contained in the compilation.” The Diplomatic Conference which adopted the WCT also adopted, by consensus, the following agreed statement: “The scope of protection for compilations of data (databases) under Article 5 of this Treaty, read with Article 2, is consistent with Article 2 of the Berne Convention and on a par with the relevant provisions of the TRIPS Agreement.” Article 2 of the WCT, to which the agreed statement refers, states, under the heading “Scope of Copyright Protection”: “copyright protection extends to expressions and not to ideas, procedures, methods of operation or mathematical concepts as such.”
7.39 The originality requirement, for example, as under the WCT, that the database “by reason of the selection or arrangement” of its contents, means that some databases are not protected, even if they are of a considerable size and have been expensive to prepare. Such is, for example, the case where a database is exhaustive, that is, it contains all the relevant data without any selection or omission, and the data is arranged according to basic, straightforward rules, such as alphabetically, or in numerical or chronological order. Such bases may, however, still represent
substantial investments, and when stored in machine-readable form, they may easily and
inexpensively be downloaded, copied and otherwise used.
7.40 It has been argued that such investments should also be protected, for example, by a sui generis right, covering copying, distribution and communication to the public, albeit for a shorter period than under copyright protection. The possibility of such sui generis protection is under discussion internationally.
7.133 The SCIT area of the WIPO Website, besides containing links to all meeting documentation,
also currently provides access to information relating to annual technical reports, industrial property
statistics, the Journal of Patent Associated Literature, WIPO standards and other documentation.
7.40 It has been argued that such investments should also be protected, for example, by a sui generis right, covering copying, distribution and communication to the public, albeit for a shorter period than under copyright protection. The possibility of such sui generis protection is under discussion internationally.
The Internet
7.111 The Internet is a global system of connected networks that operate together by virtue of the use of common protocols, established through an open standard-setting process. The Internet is founded on an open, non-proprietary protocol known as Transport Control Protocol/Internet Protocol (TCP/IP), and uses a standard coding system, hypertext markup language (HTML), for representing data in graphical form on the World Wide Web. The Internet has rapidly evolved from a scientific and academic network into a network whose most popular application, the World Wide Web, has enabled it to become widely adopted since the 1990s. It is the open nature of this network, along with its multifunctional character and increasingly low-cost access, which has galvanized the potential for electronic commerce. At the same time, however, the open network is providing access to a digital environment in which multiple perfect copies of text, images and sounds can be easily made and transmitted, and trademarks easily misused, posing new challenges for intellectual property owners.
Electronic Commerce
7.112 The “digital age,” in which the Internet has played a critical role, has seen dramatic and rapid communications, economic and social developments. The technological innovations that initiated these changes have also fuelled the new digital economy, reflected in new financial markets and trade flows, innovative models for business, as well as new opportunities for creators and consumers.
7.113 The remarkable scope of these developments has made electronic commerce a subject of significant economic, policy and social importance. Commerce conducted across electronic media is not new. However, the advent of the Internet, the “network of networks” using open standards, has given rise to a prodigious international expansion in the number of users and range of applications relevant to our daily lives. There are currently more than half a billion users, accessing more than 2 billion pages of information available via the World Wide Web. In many regions of the world, it has begun to change significantly the ways in which individuals, companies and governments organize their affairs, interact and conduct business.
7.114 The term “electronic commerce” has achieved widespread recognition, becoming a highly visible symbol in the contemporary language of information and communication technology that brought profound changes in the final years of the last millennium. The words are commonly used in the media, in business and in conversation to refer to activities associated with the use of a computer, or other network-accessible device, and the Internet to trade goods and services in a new, direct and electronic manner. There has been tremendous growth in the value of commercial transactions on the Internet; starting from zero in 1995, total electronic commerce is estimated to have grown to around 433 billion US dollars in 2000 and 1.9 trillion US dollars in 2002 and is expected to reach some 6 trillion by 2004.
7.111 The Internet is a global system of connected networks that operate together by virtue of the use of common protocols, established through an open standard-setting process. The Internet is founded on an open, non-proprietary protocol known as Transport Control Protocol/Internet Protocol (TCP/IP), and uses a standard coding system, hypertext markup language (HTML), for representing data in graphical form on the World Wide Web. The Internet has rapidly evolved from a scientific and academic network into a network whose most popular application, the World Wide Web, has enabled it to become widely adopted since the 1990s. It is the open nature of this network, along with its multifunctional character and increasingly low-cost access, which has galvanized the potential for electronic commerce. At the same time, however, the open network is providing access to a digital environment in which multiple perfect copies of text, images and sounds can be easily made and transmitted, and trademarks easily misused, posing new challenges for intellectual property owners.
Electronic Commerce
7.112 The “digital age,” in which the Internet has played a critical role, has seen dramatic and rapid communications, economic and social developments. The technological innovations that initiated these changes have also fuelled the new digital economy, reflected in new financial markets and trade flows, innovative models for business, as well as new opportunities for creators and consumers.
7.113 The remarkable scope of these developments has made electronic commerce a subject of significant economic, policy and social importance. Commerce conducted across electronic media is not new. However, the advent of the Internet, the “network of networks” using open standards, has given rise to a prodigious international expansion in the number of users and range of applications relevant to our daily lives. There are currently more than half a billion users, accessing more than 2 billion pages of information available via the World Wide Web. In many regions of the world, it has begun to change significantly the ways in which individuals, companies and governments organize their affairs, interact and conduct business.
7.114 The term “electronic commerce” has achieved widespread recognition, becoming a highly visible symbol in the contemporary language of information and communication technology that brought profound changes in the final years of the last millennium. The words are commonly used in the media, in business and in conversation to refer to activities associated with the use of a computer, or other network-accessible device, and the Internet to trade goods and services in a new, direct and electronic manner. There has been tremendous growth in the value of commercial transactions on the Internet; starting from zero in 1995, total electronic commerce is estimated to have grown to around 433 billion US dollars in 2000 and 1.9 trillion US dollars in 2002 and is expected to reach some 6 trillion by 2004.
7.115 While individuals do engage in transactions over the Internet (business-to-consumer,
or B2C), most of the growth in electronic commerce is driven by the less visible business-to-business
sector or B2B. Here the Internet is acting as a powerful means for improving the quality of
management and service, thereby enhancing existing or establishing new customer and supplier
relationships, while bringing new efficiency and transparency to operations. It is an excellent
mechanism for reducing costs all round, including those associated with production, inventories,
sales execution, distribution and procurement.
7.116 Two defining characteristics of electronic commerce can be noted. First, there is its international character. The electronic means described above have created a global medium without borders, so that any business offering goods or services on the Internet need not target a specific geographical market. Instead, the establishment of a commercial website can provide even a small business with access to markets and Internet users worldwide. The second characteristic is the interdisciplinary nature of electronic commerce, and the corresponding impact that this brings to the forces of convergence. Both large and small enterprises are finding that some of the traditional lines between business sectors — which have been founded on the different physical manifestations for the goods or services offered and the different physical means for their distribution, for example, books, films, CDs, television, radio and web broadcasts — are becoming less clear. This is generating new competitive pressures for restructuring within and across industries, confronting businesses with opportunities as well as challenges.
7.117 Within the commercial sphere, issues of intellectual property that have had such relevance in the physical (off-line) world, involving rights in respect of patents, trademarks and copyright, among others, also arise in relation to electronic commerce, but with different aspects to be addressed and, in many cases, shorter periods of time. Trademarks, for example, which provide consumers with an accessible symbol associated with the goodwill of an enterprise, are playing an important role in the electronic commercial environment where personal dealings are infrequent. With respect to patents, the creative business methods that are being developed to conduct commerce over the digital networks raise new questions of patentability. Further, the shorter life cycles of many of the products and services associated with the Internet and digital technologies call for the timely acquisition and enforcement of such intellectual property rights.
7.118 There is a further distinction of particular relevance to intellectual property, especially to copyright and related rights, in respect of commerce on digital networks: as noted, the Internet facilitates both commerce in physical products and commerce in intangible products. For commerce involving physical products, the Internet functions as a global system facilitating sales, in which the placing of an order and the making of payment can (but does not necessarily have to) take place on-line, while the goods themselves are delivered separately through a postal or other delivery service. For commerce involving intangible products, the Internet serves not only as a system to promote sales, but also as a system to effect the delivery of the intangible product itself, such as a piece of music or software, a film or a publication. This distribution can take place almost instantaneously, and the intangible product may travel virtually without restriction across national borders. Indeed, this aspect of electronic commerce may be its most compelling dimension: there is an inherent logic to using the Internet to buy and sell intangible products that need never be more than an integral part of the flow of communication by digital means. At the same time, however, there is a commensurate need for effective intellectual property protection that can address the international dimensions of this commerce.
7.119 Already, the largest segment of business-to-consumer electronic commerce involves intangible products that can be delivered directly over the network to the consumer’s computer, such as entertainment, travel, news, e-mail and financial services. While these intangible products, by their very nature, are difficult to measure, an increasing amount of the content that is being
7.116 Two defining characteristics of electronic commerce can be noted. First, there is its international character. The electronic means described above have created a global medium without borders, so that any business offering goods or services on the Internet need not target a specific geographical market. Instead, the establishment of a commercial website can provide even a small business with access to markets and Internet users worldwide. The second characteristic is the interdisciplinary nature of electronic commerce, and the corresponding impact that this brings to the forces of convergence. Both large and small enterprises are finding that some of the traditional lines between business sectors — which have been founded on the different physical manifestations for the goods or services offered and the different physical means for their distribution, for example, books, films, CDs, television, radio and web broadcasts — are becoming less clear. This is generating new competitive pressures for restructuring within and across industries, confronting businesses with opportunities as well as challenges.
7.117 Within the commercial sphere, issues of intellectual property that have had such relevance in the physical (off-line) world, involving rights in respect of patents, trademarks and copyright, among others, also arise in relation to electronic commerce, but with different aspects to be addressed and, in many cases, shorter periods of time. Trademarks, for example, which provide consumers with an accessible symbol associated with the goodwill of an enterprise, are playing an important role in the electronic commercial environment where personal dealings are infrequent. With respect to patents, the creative business methods that are being developed to conduct commerce over the digital networks raise new questions of patentability. Further, the shorter life cycles of many of the products and services associated with the Internet and digital technologies call for the timely acquisition and enforcement of such intellectual property rights.
7.118 There is a further distinction of particular relevance to intellectual property, especially to copyright and related rights, in respect of commerce on digital networks: as noted, the Internet facilitates both commerce in physical products and commerce in intangible products. For commerce involving physical products, the Internet functions as a global system facilitating sales, in which the placing of an order and the making of payment can (but does not necessarily have to) take place on-line, while the goods themselves are delivered separately through a postal or other delivery service. For commerce involving intangible products, the Internet serves not only as a system to promote sales, but also as a system to effect the delivery of the intangible product itself, such as a piece of music or software, a film or a publication. This distribution can take place almost instantaneously, and the intangible product may travel virtually without restriction across national borders. Indeed, this aspect of electronic commerce may be its most compelling dimension: there is an inherent logic to using the Internet to buy and sell intangible products that need never be more than an integral part of the flow of communication by digital means. At the same time, however, there is a commensurate need for effective intellectual property protection that can address the international dimensions of this commerce.
7.119 Already, the largest segment of business-to-consumer electronic commerce involves intangible products that can be delivered directly over the network to the consumer’s computer, such as entertainment, travel, news, e-mail and financial services. While these intangible products, by their very nature, are difficult to measure, an increasing amount of the content that is being
offered is subject to intellectual property rights. This commerce in intangible products raises a
number of issues for intellectual property, in addition to those that would arise in respect of physical
goods. For example, there is a growing role to be played by technological measures and digital
rights management systems in protecting the rights of intellectual property owners. In addition,
questions of the scope of rights and how existing law applies, jurisdiction, applicable law, validity of
contracts and enforcement become more complex when the products offered do not necessarily
have a physical manifestation.
A Complementary Approach to the Development of Intellectual Property Norms
7.120 Reference has been made in chapter 5 (under Progressive Development of International Intellectual Property Law) to the need for a new approach, in order to accelerate the pace of measures to meet intellectual property challenges. The traditional and more long-term approach of international treaties between States has been complemented by consultations and the establishment of various advisory bodies: the aim is that representatives of member States, of intergovernmental organizations and of non-governmental organizations should join together to help member States to establish priorities and coordinate activities in finding means to protect, administer and enforce intellectual property rights. In order that the concepts and practices of intellectual property find an environment where they can function optimally, WIPO has also undertaken activities to reach out to all levels of society, including the general public.
WIPO Internet Domain Name Processes
7.121 The two WIPO Internet Domain Name Processes provide examples of the innovative means by which international norms have been developed and implemented by WIPO. The WIPO Processes were initiated at the request of certain of WIPO’s Member States, to study and develop recommendations for the prevention and resolution of conflicts that involve intellectual property rights in the Internet Domain Name System (DNS). Domain names are the user-friendly forms of Internet protocol address that allow messages to be routed via the Internet and have gained increasing importance as business identifiers in online commerce.
7.122 The WIPO Processes were conducted through a combination of Internet-based and personal consultations throughout the various regions of the world, in a balanced and transparent manner. WIPO endeavored to obtain wide geographical and sectoral participation, and to reach the broadest possible consensus in its recommendations, so that the interests of all Internet stake-holders could be taken into account and practical workable solutions found to the real problems that had been identified.
7.123 The first WIPO Process commenced in June 1998, to address the relationship between domain names and trademark rights and to study means of preventing and resolving disputes arising from the abusive and bad-faith registration of domain names that include trademarks, a practice known as “cybersquatting.” The first WIPO Process resulted in a report, published in April 1999, setting out WIPO’s recommendations. These recommendations resulted in the implementation by the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) of a Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy and Rules (UDRP) to resolve domain name disputes involving trademarks, and in the development of a system of best practices for domain name registration
A Complementary Approach to the Development of Intellectual Property Norms
7.120 Reference has been made in chapter 5 (under Progressive Development of International Intellectual Property Law) to the need for a new approach, in order to accelerate the pace of measures to meet intellectual property challenges. The traditional and more long-term approach of international treaties between States has been complemented by consultations and the establishment of various advisory bodies: the aim is that representatives of member States, of intergovernmental organizations and of non-governmental organizations should join together to help member States to establish priorities and coordinate activities in finding means to protect, administer and enforce intellectual property rights. In order that the concepts and practices of intellectual property find an environment where they can function optimally, WIPO has also undertaken activities to reach out to all levels of society, including the general public.
WIPO Internet Domain Name Processes
7.121 The two WIPO Internet Domain Name Processes provide examples of the innovative means by which international norms have been developed and implemented by WIPO. The WIPO Processes were initiated at the request of certain of WIPO’s Member States, to study and develop recommendations for the prevention and resolution of conflicts that involve intellectual property rights in the Internet Domain Name System (DNS). Domain names are the user-friendly forms of Internet protocol address that allow messages to be routed via the Internet and have gained increasing importance as business identifiers in online commerce.
7.122 The WIPO Processes were conducted through a combination of Internet-based and personal consultations throughout the various regions of the world, in a balanced and transparent manner. WIPO endeavored to obtain wide geographical and sectoral participation, and to reach the broadest possible consensus in its recommendations, so that the interests of all Internet stake-holders could be taken into account and practical workable solutions found to the real problems that had been identified.
7.123 The first WIPO Process commenced in June 1998, to address the relationship between domain names and trademark rights and to study means of preventing and resolving disputes arising from the abusive and bad-faith registration of domain names that include trademarks, a practice known as “cybersquatting.” The first WIPO Process resulted in a report, published in April 1999, setting out WIPO’s recommendations. These recommendations resulted in the implementation by the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) of a Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy and Rules (UDRP) to resolve domain name disputes involving trademarks, and in the development of a system of best practices for domain name registration
authorities to avoid such conflicts. The WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center was accredited by
ICANN to provide dispute-resolution services under the UDRP.
7.124 A number of issues were identified in WIPO’s report that were considered outside the scope of the First WIPO Process and in need of further study. The Second WIPO Process, which began in July 2000, was initiated to address the issues that might arise in the event of the bad faith, abusive, misleading or unfair use of:
7.124 A number of issues were identified in WIPO’s report that were considered outside the scope of the First WIPO Process and in need of further study. The Second WIPO Process, which began in July 2000, was initiated to address the issues that might arise in the event of the bad faith, abusive, misleading or unfair use of:
-
- personal names;
-
- International Nonproprietary Names (INNs) for pharmaceutical substances;
-
- names of international intergovernmental organizations (IGOs), such as the United Nations;
-
- geographical identifiers, including geographical indications, indications of source and
geographical terms including country names;
-
- trade names.
-
- personal names: it was decided that no action should be taken in this area;
-
- International Nonproprietary Names for pharmaceutical substances (INNs): it was decided
that no particular form of protection should be implemented in the DNS at this stage, but
that WIPO together with WHO would continue to monitor the situation and that, where
necessary, it would bring any important developments to the notice of Member States;
-
- names of international intergovernmental organizations (IGOs): it was decided that the
Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy should be amended to allow complaints
to be filed by IGOs under certain circumstances, while taking into account the privileges
and immunities of such organizations under international law. This recommendation was
transmitted to ICANN, the body responsible for amending the UDRP, in February 2003;
-
- geographical indications, indications of source or geographical terms: it was decided that
the question of protection of geographical indications in the DNS should be entrusted to
the SCT. With respect to the protection of country names in particular, Member States
recommended that the UDRP should be amended to provide protection against the future
registration of such names as domain names, where such registration would be liable to
create confusion. This recommendation was also transmitted to ICANN in February 2003;
and
- - trade names: it was decided that the question of protection of trade names in the DNS should be kept under review and raised for further discussion as the situation demanded.
WIPO’s Global Network
7.126 Recognizing the vital importance of information technology to a worldwide strategy for intellectual property promotion and protection, WIPO launched in 1998 a major project, called WIPONET, with the aim of providing the necessary infrastructure and services for improved information exchange in the global intellectual property community. The network links the business processes of interdependent intellectual property offices worldwide and users of the Internet. The project promotes the:
7.130 The Standing Committee on the Law of Trademarks, Industrial Designs and Geographical Indications drafted a set of measures to simplify and harmonize procedures relating first to well- known marks, which were adopted as a Joint Recommendation by the WIPO General Assembly and the Assembly of the Paris Union in 1999, then to trademark licenses, which were adopted in 2000, and finally to the Protection of Marks, and Other Industrial Property Rights in Signs, on the Internet, which were adopted in 2001 (see chapter 5). This Standing Committee has initiated work with a view to revising the Trademark Law Treaty (TLT). In order to keep pace with technological
7.126 Recognizing the vital importance of information technology to a worldwide strategy for intellectual property promotion and protection, WIPO launched in 1998 a major project, called WIPONET, with the aim of providing the necessary infrastructure and services for improved information exchange in the global intellectual property community. The network links the business processes of interdependent intellectual property offices worldwide and users of the Internet. The project promotes the:
-
- digital development and exchange of intellectual property information;
-
- establishment of new services;
-
- streamlining and automation of the business functions of intellectual property offices;
-
- progressive development and application of global standards and guidelines in intellectual
property matters.
7.127 WIPONET already brings information benefits to all countries, but especially to developing countries, where it helps their integration into the international digital environment. To further achieve this aim, WIPO is progressively assisting the intellectual property offices of developing and certain other countries with Internet connectivity and basic equipment.
Standing Committees and Advisory Bodies
7.128 The complementary approach is increasingly pursued through Standing Committees and Advisory Bodies. WIPO has constituted three Standing Committees on legal matters. These are, respectively, the Standing Committees on the Law of Patents, on Copyright and Related Rights and on the Law of Trademarks, Industrial Designs and Geographical Indications. The deliberations of the Standing Committee on the Law of Patents (SCP) led to the convening of a Diplomatic Conference in May 2000 which adopted the Patent Law Treaty (see chapter 5), whilst those of the Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights led to the convening of a Diplomatic Conference on the Protection of Audiovisual Performances in December 2000 (see chapter 5).
7.130 The Standing Committee on the Law of Trademarks, Industrial Designs and Geographical Indications drafted a set of measures to simplify and harmonize procedures relating first to well- known marks, which were adopted as a Joint Recommendation by the WIPO General Assembly and the Assembly of the Paris Union in 1999, then to trademark licenses, which were adopted in 2000, and finally to the Protection of Marks, and Other Industrial Property Rights in Signs, on the Internet, which were adopted in 2001 (see chapter 5). This Standing Committee has initiated work with a view to revising the Trademark Law Treaty (TLT). In order to keep pace with technological
developments and the harmonization and simplification of certain administrative procedures
adopted within the framework of the Patent Law Treaty, the revision of the TLT involves provisions
on electronic filing of trademark applications and associated communications. The revised TLT will
also contain provisions on signature, which accommodate recent developments, such as the
increasing acceptance by Offices of electronic signatures or other types of identification.
7.131 An Advisory Committee on Enforcement of Industrial Property Rights was established in 2000, whose work is described in chapter 4.
7.132 The Standing Committee on Information Technologies (SCIT), which was created by WIPO Member States in 1998, serves as a forum to give policy guidance and technical advice on the overall information technology strategy of WIPO, including WIPO standards and the documentation aspects of intellectual property. Following the adoption of a new structure at its meeting in January 2001, the SCIT now has two subsidiary working groups, for Information Technology Projects and Standards and Documentation respectively. Its membership comprises all WIPO Member States and observers.
7.131 An Advisory Committee on Enforcement of Industrial Property Rights was established in 2000, whose work is described in chapter 4.
7.132 The Standing Committee on Information Technologies (SCIT), which was created by WIPO Member States in 1998, serves as a forum to give policy guidance and technical advice on the overall information technology strategy of WIPO, including WIPO standards and the documentation aspects of intellectual property. Following the adoption of a new structure at its meeting in January 2001, the SCIT now has two subsidiary working groups, for Information Technology Projects and Standards and Documentation respectively. Its membership comprises all WIPO Member States and observers.
This post was written by: Author Name
Your description comes here!
Get Free Email Updates to your Inbox!
Post a Comment