RESTRICTED
WORLD TRADE IP/Q/NLD/1
24October 1996
ORGANIZATION(96-4455)
Original: English Council forTrade-Related Aspects
ofIntellectual Property Rights
REVIEW OFLEGISLATION ONCOPYRIGHT AND RELATED RIGHTS
Netherlands1
Thepresent document reproduces thequestions puttoNetherlands andtheresponses given
inthereview oflegislation oncopyright andrelated rights attheCouncil 'smeeting of
22to25July19962.
_______________
REPLIES TOQUESTIONS POSED BYTHE UNITED STATES
1. Please explain whether andhowDutch lawprovides protection forworks, phonograms and
performances fromother WTO Members, andwhether andhowitdoessoonthebasis ofnational
treatment, asrequired byTRIPS Article 3(generally, withrespect toallcopyrights andneighbouring
rights) andArticle 9.1(incorporating Berne Article 5(1)). WenotethatArticle 47oftheNetherlands ’s
Copyright Lawgrants protection onlytoDutch nationals andtothose works originally fixedinthe
Netherlands. Additionally, howisnational treatment afforded withrespect tothedistribution ofblank
tapelevies under theDutch Copyright Law.
Following Article 93oftheDutch Constitution, aprovision inaninternational treaty towhich
theNetherlands hasbecome aparty canberelied uponincourt byindividuals provided suchprovision
isinitscontents addressed tosuchindividuals andsufficiently clear; thatis,nofurther measures by
thenational legislative authorities arewarranted.
Article 47oftheCopyright Actisrelevant onlyincases where theauthor isneither anational
ofaUnion (andnow: WTO) country norhaspublished forthefirsttimeinsuchcountry.
Blanktapeleviesarecollectedbytheindependentnon-profit"HomeCopyFoundation"(Stichting
DeThuiskopie). Forpractical reasons, theHome Copy Foundation distributes thelevies nottoeach
individual rightholder, butamong representative organizations. These organizations intheirturnpay
outthemonies received among therightholders theyrepresent.
1Netherlands'notificationoflawsandregulationsintheareaofcopyrightandrelatedrightsunderArticle63.2
oftheAgreement hasbeen circulated indocuments IP/N/1/NLD/1 andIP/N/1/NLD/C/1 and2.
2Theminutes ofthemeeting have been circulated indocument IP/C/M/8.IP/Q/NLD/1
Page2
[Follow-up questions]
Please provide anycaselaworother authority holding thattheTRIPS Agreement isatreaty
theprovisions ofwhich canberelied uponincourt byindividuals, asdescribed inthefirstparagraph
oftheanswer tothisquestion.
Because theTRIPS Agreement onlyentered intoforce inJanuary 1996, there isnocaselaw
yet.However, thepossibility ofdirect applicability ofprovisions oftheBerne Convention wasalready
accepted inaSupreme Court Decision in1936 (Decision NJ443of13February 1936).
Please confirm thatallrevenues generated from theimposition ofblank tapelevies inthe
Netherlands aredistributed onthebasis ofnational treatment torightholders fromallWTO Members,
regardless ofthetypeofrightholder.
UndertheDutchsystem,differenttypesofrightholdersarerepresentedbyseparateorganizations,
sopayments arenotmade irrespective ofthetypeofrightholder. Thesystem provided forinthe
Netherlands isasfollows. TheHome Copy Foundation distributes themonies according toaschedule
which hasbeenapproved bytheMinistry ofJustice. Theschedule distinguishes between audio and
video tapes. Three organizations receive audio revenues; fourothers areentitled tothevideo revenues.
These private organizations inturndistribute amongst (organizations of)rightholders. Themain
organization, Stemra, hasinformed usthatitdoessobothto(organizations of)Dutch andforeign
rightholders. Stemra 'sownregulation provides fordistribution onthebasisof"rights andentitlements
byforce oflaw,treaty orregulation wherever intheworld". They liaise withtheircounterparts in
other countries.
2. Does theNetherlands apply the"rule oftheshorter term" tophonograms andperformances
fromother WTO Members? Ifso,please explain howyoujustify suchaction under TRIPS Article 4.
No.Thetermofprotection under theActonNeighbouring Rights is50years.
3. Please explain whether andhowtheNetherlands protects against boththedirect andindirect
reproduction ofphonograms asrequired byTRIPS Article 14.2, including bydigital transmission in
thecontext ofsubscription orinteractive services.
Astothefirstpartofthequestion, weconfirm thattherelevant partsofArticle 6oftheAct
onNeighbouring Rights readasfollows:
Article 6(1):
"The producer ofphonograms hastheexclusive righttogivepermission for:
"(c) thebroadcastingorre-broadcastingorotherwisemakingpublicthephonogramproduced
byhimorareproduction thereof."
Thespecific issue astowhether theright ofreproduction alsoincludes digital temporary
reproduction isstillopenandunder discussion atanational andinternational level.
[Follow-up question]
Doesthereproduction rightforphonograms under current Netherlands lawinclude initsscope
reproductionsmadefrombroadcasts,aswellasthedigitaltransmissionofbothtemporaryandpermanent
reproductions?IP/Q/NLD/1
Page3
Astothefirstpartofthequestion weconfirm thattherelevant parts ofArticle 6oftheAct
onNeighbouring Rights readasfollows:
Article 6(1):
"The producer ofphonograms hastheexclusive righttogivepermission for:
"(...)
"(c)thebroadcasting orre-broadcasting orotherwise making public thephonogram produced
byhimorareproduction thereof."
Thespecific issue astowhether theright ofreproduction alsoincludes digital temporary
reproduction isstillopenandunder discussion atanational andinternational level.
4. Please explain whether andhowtheNetherlands provides fullretroactive protection toworks,
phonograms andperformances fromother WTO Members, asrequired byTRIPS Articles 9.1,14.6
and70.2, eachofwhich incorporate byreference orrelyuponBerne Article 18.Please givethedate
backtowhich suchprotection extends withrespect toeachcategory ofsubject matter.
Theprovisions ofBerne including itsArticle 18havebeenapplicable intheNetherlands since
itsaccession on1November 1912. Asfrom1January 1996thetermofprotection under theCopyright
Actis70years. Neighbouring rightholders areprotected bytheActonneighbouring rights of1993.
Thetermofprotection under theActonneighbouring rights is50years. Theprotection extends to
performances which tookplace before theActentered intoforce. Thesame applies tophonograms
which weremade before thatdate. Thewording oftherelevant provision intheActisquitegeneral,
which means thattheprotection could extend tofiftyyears before theActwentintoforce.
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
Articles 46and61,andthemanner inwhich thegrant ofcivilprovisional reliefisprovided inaccordance
withTRIPS Article 50.Intheresponse, please alsospecify howcivildamages aremeasured andwhen
andhowattorney ’sfeesandcourt costs areawarded.
Further toitsdecision of21November 1995, theTRIPS Council haspresented allMember
States withachecklist ofissues onenforcement (Doc. No.IP/C/5 of30November 1995) which fully
covers yourquestion 5.Alllistswillbereviewed in1997.
6. Please explain howdatabases areprotected under Dutch law,inviewofTRIPS Article 10which
requires thatdatabases based onfactual information thatconstitute intellectual creations byreason
oftheselection orarrangement oftheircontents beprotected.
Databases thatconstitute works inthesense oftheCopyright Actareprotected ascollective
works under Article 5oftheCopyright Act. Adatabase willconstitute awork inthesense ofthe
Copyright Act,ifitisanintellectual creation byreason oftheselection orarrangement ofitscontents.
7. Article 10oftheDutch Copyright Lawliststheworks thatareprotected asliterary andartistic
works under thelaw. Computer programs, however, arenotincluded within thislist.AsArticle 10
ofTRIPSrequiresthatcomputerprogramsbeprotected“asliteraryworks”,pleaseexplainhowcomputer
programs areprotected under Dutch law.IP/Q/NLD/1
Page4
TheCopyright Actwasamended byActof7July1994 (Stb. 521). Computer programmes
were thenincluded within thelistofArticle 10.Alsospecial provisions oncomputer programmes
were laiddown intheArticles 45hto45n.
8. Please explain howtheNetherlands ’slawcomplies withTRIPS Articles 11and14,which require
thattherightholders ofcomputer programs andphonograms begranted therighttocontrol therental
oftheirwork. Itdoesnotappear thattheNetherlands ’scopyright andneighbouring rights lawsgrant
arental right inthese works.
TheCopyright ActandtheActonNeighbouring Rights were amended byActof
21December 1995(Stb. 653)andbyActof21December 1995(Stb. 641). Rental rights in,interalia,
computer programmes andphonograms, were thengranted. TheArticles 12,12a,15cto15g,35d
and45doftheCopyright ActandtheArticles 2a,6,7a,8,11,15a-15d,17,19,20,27aand32
oftheActonNeighbouring Rights provide forthese rights.
9. Please explain howArticles 16,16b,17and17aofDutch lawwhich provide forpotentially
broad exceptions totheexclusive rights granted tothecopyright owner comply withBerne Article 9(2)
andTRIPS Article 13,which require limitations andexceptions toexclusive rights tobelimited tocertain
special cases which donotconflict withanormal exploitation ofthework anddonotunreasonably
prejudice thelegitimate interests oftherightholder.
(a) Article 16oftheCopyright Actprovides fortheuseofworks forteaching purposes.
Itisbased onArticle 10(2) ofthe(Paris Actofthe)Berne Convention. Article 10(2)
oftheBerne Convention provides thattheuseofworks forteaching purposes isamatter
fornational legislation provided theuseiscompatible withfairpractice. Article 16
oftheCopyright Actiswithin thelimits setbyArticle 10(2) oftheBerne Convention
andwithinthosesetbyArticle13TRIPS.Alsoitdoesnotdifferwidelyfromprovisions
inother national lawsonthissubject.
(b) Articles 16bandfollowing, and17oftheCopyright Actprovide fortheright of
reproduction ofwritten works andfortheexception forprivate use. Theexception
forprivate usefallswithin thescope ofArticle 9(2)oftheBerne Convention, which
provides thatexceptions totherightofreproduction are,again, amatter fornational
legislation, provided thereproduction doesnotconflict withthenormal exploitation
ofthework anddoes notunreasonably prejudice thelegitimate interests ofthe
rightholder. Theexceptions forprivate usewhich aregranted inArticles 16band17
oftheCopyright Actarenotbroader thanthose granted inother legislations. They
arewithin thelimits which aresetbyArticle 9(2)oftheBerne Convention and
Article 13TRIPS.
(c) Article 17aoftheCopyright Actprovides that,inthegeneral interest, alegallicence
maybegranted withrespect tothepublication ofaworkbymeans ofradio ortelevision
broadcasting orthedistribution bywireorotherwise andwithrespect totheproduction
ofphonograms. Article 17aisbased onArticles 11bis(2)and13oftheBerne
Convention, which leave thismatter tonational legislation. Article 17adoesnotdiffer
fromsimilar provisions inother laws. Article 17adates backtill1931, when itwas
included onbehalf ofradio broadcasting andthedistribution bywire. Theprovision
hasnever beenapplied.IP/Q/NLD/1
Page5
[Follow-up question]
Please explain whether andhowtheliteral textsoftheexceptions inArticles 16,16band17
oftheNetherlands Copyright Lawhavebeenlimited inapplication oroperation.
Asstated intheoriginal answer, thelimitations mentioned inArticles 16,16band17ofthe
NetherlandsCopyrightActarewithinthelimitsetbytheArticles10(2)and9(2)oftheBerneConvention
andconsequently comply withArticle 13TRIPS. Thementioned articles oftheNetherlands Copyright
Acthaveseldom beenapplied (seeforexample: Supreme Court Decision of22June1990, published
inNJ1991, 268; District Court ofAmsterdam, Decision of31January 1980, published in
Autersrecht 1980/2; District Court ofAlphen aandeRhijn Decision of16April 1985, published in
ANI,1987/2; Superior Court ofAmsterdam, Decision of20November 1980, published in
Autersrecht 1981/3).