WORLD TRADE IP/N/6/FRA/1
6October 1997
ORGANIZATION(97-4198)
Original: French Council forTrade-Related Aspects
ofIntellectual Property Rights
CHECKLIST ONISSUES ONENFORCEMENT1
Replies from France
I. INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY RIGHTS
Theorder followed inthisdescription ofmeasures foreachtypeofintellectual property right
generally corresponds tothemodel fixed bytheTRIPS Council forthenotification oflawsand
regulations under Article 63.2(document IP/C/4). There areonlyaverylimited number ofprovisions
onlayout designs forsemi-conductors intheFrench Intellectual Property Code (CPI); where thereply
tothequestionnaire doesnotcontain anyspecific information onlayout designs, thegeneral rulesof
lawapply.
Civil andadministrative procedures andremedies
(a) Civil judicial procedures andremedies
1. Specify thecourts which have jurisdiction overIPRinfringement cases.
Jurisdiction ratione materiae inthefirstinstance:
With regard tomarks, Article L.716.3 oftheCPIprovides that"Civil proceedings relating
tomarks shallbeheard bytheFirstInstance Courts asalsoanyproceedings involving bothamatter
ofmarks andarelated matter ofindustrial designs orunfair competition."
Asfarasgeographical indications anddesignations oforigin areconcerned, Article L.115-10
oftheConsumer Code states thefollowing: "Legal action shallbebrought before theFirstInstance
Court intheplace oforigin ofthedesignation contested ...". Article L.115-9 oftheaforementioned
Code specifies that"The court hearing acasebrought pursuant toArticle L.115-8 maytakeaction
toprohibit theuseofanyindication thatmight create confusion regarding theorigin oftheproduct
onanyproducts notentitled tothedesignation oforigin orontheirpackaging andlabels".
Theprovisions oftheConsumer Code oncivilproceedings donotapply toagricultural products
orfoodstuffs thathavebeengiven exclusive useofaregistered designation oforigin. (Article L.115-5
oftheConsumer Code). Criminal courts havejurisdiction.
There arenospecial provisions onjurisdiction forindustrial designs andthegeneral ruleson
assignment ofcases apply. Usually, FirstInstance Courts havejurisdiction; Article R.321-1 ofthe
Code ofOrganization ofJustice, however, provides that"Incivilproceedings, aCourt ofFirstInstance
hasjurisdiction overallaction toenforce arightinpersonam oraction related tomoveable assets up
1Document IP/C/5.IP/N/6/FRA/1
Page2
totheamount ofF13,000 andonappeal uptotheamount ofF30,000". Commercial courts may
alsohavejurisdiction ifthetwoparties aretraders.
Regarding patents, Article L.615-17 oftheCPIstates that"Alllitigation under thisTitleshall
fallwithin thejurisdiction oftheFirstInstance Courts andoftherelevant Court ofAppeal ...".Article
R.631-1 oftheCPIrefers backtoArticle R.312-2 oftheCode ofOrganization ofJustice andestablishes
thelistofFirstInstance Courts thathavejurisdiction (numbering 10).Inaddition, Article L.615-19
oftheCPIprovides that: "Proceedings forinfringement ofpatents shallbeheard exclusively bythe
FirstInstance Court." Itthenstates that"Allproceedings involving infringement ofapatent anda
related actofunfair competition shallbeheard exclusively bytheFirstInstance Court".
With regard tonewplant variety certificates, thefirstparagraph ofArticle L.623-31 ofthe
CPIstates thatlitigation concerning theprotection ofrights granted bythecertificate shallbeheard
bytheFirstInstance Courts andthecorresponding Courts ofAppeal.
Forlayout designs, Article L.622-7 oftheCPIrefers toArticle L.615-17 onpatents.
Regarding trade secrets, theinjured party maybring anaction forunfair competition before
theFirstInstance Courts inmost cases, andbefore thecommercial courts when thetwoparties are
traders. Ifthedisclosure hasbeenmade byaperson previously orcurrently employed bythecompany
suffering theinjury, thecasemaybebrought before anindustrial tribunal (Article L.152-7 ofthe
Labour Code, repeated inArticle L.621-1 oftheCPI).
2. Which persons have standing toassert IPRs?
Theowners2ofintellectual property rights havestanding toassert theirrights before thecourts.
Theword "owner" includes successors intitle(i.e., heirs orassignees) oftheauthors orapplicants
forIPrights.
Inrelation tomarks, Article L.716-5 oftheCPIprovides that"Civil infringement proceedings
shall beinstituted bytheowner ofthemark. However, thebeneficiary ofanexclusive right of
exploitation mayinstitute infringement proceedings, unless otherwise laiddown inthecontract, if,
afterformal notice, theowner doesnotexercise suchright".
Inthecaseofgeographical indications anddesignations oforigin, Article L.115-8 ofthe
Consumer Code refers to"anyperson whoclaims thatuseofadesignation oforigin isdirectly or
indirectly prejudicial tohimandviolates hisrights ...Thesame action maybebrought bytradeunions
orassociations thathavebeenregularly constituted foratleastsixmonths, inrelation torights itis
theirdutytodefend ...".Article L.115-12 oftheCode states that"any person, trade union or
association meeting theduration andinterest requirements setoutinArticle L.115-8 mayjoininthe
proceedings".
Article L.421-1 oftheConsumer Code states that"Legally established associations whose
specific statutory objective istoprotect theinterests ofconsumers may, iftheyareapproved forthis
purpose, exercise therecognized rights ofthecivilparty inrespect ofactsthatdirectly orindirectly
prejudice thecollective interests ofconsumers ...".Pursuant toArticle L.421-7 oftheCode "The
associations referred toinArticle L.421-1 mayparticipate inproceedings before thecivilcourts ...
2InFrench, theword "titulaire" (owner) ofaright isusedinpreference to"détenteur" (holder) asusedin
theTRIPS Agreement. Thefootnote toArticle 42oftheTRIPS Agreement states that"For thepurpose ofthis
Part, theterm‘right holder ’includes federations andassociations having legal standing toassert suchrights."IP/N/6/FRA/1
Page3
where thepurpose oftheinitial demand istocompensate forprejudice suffered byoneormore
consumers duetoactsthatdonotconstitute acriminal offence".
Theowner oftherightistheonlyperson entitled toassert industrial design rights before the
courts. Anexclusive licensee isnotentitled todoso.
Withregard topatents, Article L.615-2 ofCPIprovides that"Infringement proceedings shall
beinstituted bytheowner ofthepatent. However, thebeneficiary ofanexclusive rightofworking
may, except asotherwise stipulated inthelicensing contract, institute infringement proceedings if,
afternotice, theowner ofthepatent doesnotinstitute suchproceedings." Thesame applies toowners
oflicences, compulsory licences orexofficio licences.
Forbothmarks andpatents, theexclusive licence must havebeenregistered intheNational
Register ofMarks, ortheNational Patent Register.
Inthecaseofnewplant variety certificates, Article L.623-25 oftheCPIgives theowner of
acertificate therighttoinstitute civilliability proceedings andgives thesamerighttothebeneficiaries
ofexclusive rights ofexploitation orholders ofexofficio licences if,afterformal notification, the
owner ofthecertificate failstoexercise thisright. "The owner ofthecertificate shallbeentitled to
takepartinproceedings brought byhislicensee" andviceversa. Forthispurpose, theexclusive licence
must havebeenregistered intheNational Register ofNewPlant Variety Certificates.
There isnospecial provision oncivilorcriminal action related tolayout designs. Under general
law,thecreators andtheirsuccessors intitleareentitled toassert theirrights, whereas licensees may
notdoso.
With regard totrade secrets, anaction forunfair competition (based intort: Articles 1382
and1383 oftheCivil Code) maybebrought bytheprofessional suffering injury. Iftheactsinjure
anumber oftraders orindustrialists oraparticular profession, professional associations maybring
proceedings tocompensate thematerial ormoral injury suffered bytheirmembers (Versailles Appeal
Court, 13thChamber, 4November 1993).
How maytheyberepresented?
They must necessarily berepresented byanattorney (avocat )ifthedispute comes before a
FirstInstance Court (pursuant toArticle 751oftheNewCode ofCivil Procedure), sothisapplies
toalllitigation concerning marks, geographical indications anddesignations oforigin, patents, new
plantvarieties andlayout designs. Ontheother hand, ifadispute concerning industrial designs comes
before alower court (although inpractice thisisextremely rare)oracommercial court, anattorney
isnotrequired. Thisalsoapplies tolitigation concerning thedisclosure oftradesecrets brought before
commercial courts orindustrial tribunals.
Arethere requirements formandatory personal appearances before thecourt bytheright
holder?
Thegeneral rulesoflawinthisrespect aregoverned byChapter IIIoftheNewCode ofCivil
Procedure (NCPC). Article 184thereof provides that"Thejudge may,inallmatters, order theparties
oroneofthem, toappear inperson". Thefollowing Articles (uptoArticle 198)complete thisprovision.IP/N/6/FRA/1
Page4
3. What authority dothejudicial authorities have toorder, attherequest ofanopposing
party, aparty toaproceeding toproduce evidence which lieswithin itscontrol?
Therelevant general rules oflawapply. Article 11oftheNCPC (which appears inBook I:
provisions common toallcourts) states that: "Theparties arebound tocooperate intheinvestigation,
leaving tothejudge todraw anyconclusions intheevent ofanabstention orrefusal.
Ifoneparty withholds anitemofevidence, thejudge may, attherequest oftheother party,
require himtoproduce itunder penalty ofafine,ifneedbe.Hemay, attherequest ofoneofthe
parties, demand ororder, under thesame penalty, theproduction ofalldocuments inthepossession
ofthirdparties where there isnolawful impediment."
Thefirstsubtitle under TitleVII(thejudicial administration ofthemeans ofproof) intheNCPC
concerns theevidence (exchange ofdocuments between theparties andobtaining documents heldby
athirdparty). Article 132oftheNCPC states that"The party whorelies onadocument mustmake
itavailable toevery other party totheproceedings. Themaking available ofthedocuments mustbe
spontaneous." Articles 133to142givefurther details onthisaspect. Forexample, thejudge may
order aparty tocommunicate thedocuments onpainofafine.
Article 143oftheNCPC states that"The factsuponwhich theresolution ofthesuitdepends,
may, attherequest oftheparties orsuasponte ,bethesubject ofanyorder ofinvestigation legally
admissible.". Pursuant tothesubsequent Article, aninvestigation order mayberendered whenever
thejudge lacks sufficient basis tomake aruling. Lastly, Article 145provides that: "Ifthere isa
legitimate reason topreserve ortoestablish, before anyproceedings, themeans ofproving factsupon
which theresolution ofasuitmight depend, orders ofinvestigation legally permissable mayberendered
attherequest ofanyinterested party, bypetition orbyaninterim order."
Inrelation togeographical indications anddesignations oforigin, Article L.421-8 ofthe
Consumer Code provides that"Notwithstanding legislative provisions tothecontrary, theprosecuting
authorities maypresent tothecourt hearing thecaseanyrecords orreports ofaninquiry intheir
possession whose communication would helptoresolve thedispute".
Moreover, forintellectual property thereisaspecial procedure foradministration ofthemeans
ofproof, namely, infringement seizure. ThePresident oftheFirstInstance Court authorizes sucha
procedure through anexparte order, which maybeissued inaudita altera parte,inaccordance with
Article 493oftheNCPC, which defines thenature ofanexparte order: seereply toquestion 11.
Seizure oftheinfringing goods consists either ofactual seizure ofcopies (only inrelation to
copyright andrelated rights: Articles L.332-1 andL.332-3 oftheCPI), ordescriptive seizure (in
thecaseofsoftware: Article L.332-4 oftheCPI; industrial designs: Article L.521-1 oftheCPI;
marks: Article L.716-7 oftheCPI;patents: Article L.615-5 oftheCPI;andnewplant varieties:
Article L.623-27 oftheCPI), oracombination ofthetwo(theaforementioned Articles forsoftware,
industrial designs, marks, patents, andnewplant variety certificates respectively).
Forindustrial designs, descriptive seizure becomes nullandvoidifnoproceedings areinstituted
orasummons issued within 2weeks oftheseizure. Nullity because offailure toinstitute proceedings
within 2weeks doesnotapply todescriptive seizure related tomarks orpatents.
Forindustrial designs, marks andpatents, actual seizure becomes nullandvoidifnoproceedings
areinstituted within 2weeks.IP/N/6/FRA/1
Page5
ThePresidentoftheFirstInstanceCourtmayauthorizeseizuresubjecttopriordepositofsecurity
bytheplaintiff andunfounded seizure maygiverisetodamages infavour ofthedefendant.
4. What means exist toidentify andprotect confidential information brought forward as
evidence?
Frenchlawdoesnotcontainanyspecialprovisionsonprotectingtheconfidentialityofinformation
provided injudicial proceedings concerning IPRs. TheNCPC 'sgeneral provisions allow either the
judge inchambers orthejudge directing thepreparation ofthetrial(whose powers arebroader and
whoactswhen investigation isrequired before sending thecasetotrial)totakethemeasures requested
bytheparties inthisrespect.
Article 435oftheNCPC allows ajudge todecide that,under certain circumstances, thehearings
should beheldorshould continue inchambers.
Ifapatent isworked bytheStateoroneofitsco-contractors forthepurposes ofnational defence,
civilproceedings takeplace inthechambers oftheFirstInstance Court (Article L.615-10 oftheCPI),
i.e.,thehearings arenotpublic (Article 22oftheNCPC states that"Hearings arepublic, except where
thelawrequires orpermits them totakeplace inchambers.").
5. Describetheremediesthatmaybeorderedbythejudicialauthoritiesandcriteria,legislative
orjurisprudential, fortheir use:
- Injunctions
Thepurpose ofremedies orcivilpenalties istoendtheinfringement andcompensate forthe
prejudice caused. Thejudge mustfirstofallprohibit anycontinuance oftheinfringing acts.Prohibition,
which isnotincluded inthelistofremedies inthequestionnaire, isnevertheless thefirstpossible penalty.
Judges mayaddinjunctions totheprohibition measures inorder toensure thattheirdecisions arecarried
out.
Fines, which areaspecial formofinjunction, aremuch more commonly usedasaprovisional
measure2orforthepurpose ofterminating actsofunfair competition.
There arenospecial provisions onIPRs. Consequently, thegeneral rulesoflawoninjunctions
apply (Chapter IofTitleIVoftheNCPC deals withinjunction procedures, inparticular, mandatory
injunctions inArticles 1425-1 to1425-9). Article 1425-4, inparticular, states that: "Where thejudge
considers that,onthebasis ofthedocuments produced, there aregrounds forthedemand, heissues
anorder ofmandatory injunction thatisnotsubject toappeal. Hedefines thepurpose oftheobligation
andthetime-limit andconditions within which itmustbecarried out.Moreover, theorder specifies
theplace, dateandtimeofthehearing atwhich thecasewillbeconsidered, unless theplaintiff states
thattheinjunction order hasbeencarried out."
According toArticle 1425-7 oftheNCPC "Where theenjoinment order hasbeencarried out
within thetime-limit fixed, theplaintiff informs theclerk ofthecourt accordingly. Thecaseisthen
withdrawn. Intheabsence ofsuchinformation andiftheplaintiff isnotpresent atthehearing without
justifying hisabsence, thecourt declares themandatory injunction tobenullandvoid...".
2Cf.Article 491oftheNCPC: "The judge sitting inchambers maypronounce theimposition offines.
Hemayfixtheamount thereof ...".IP/N/6/FRA/1
Page6
Asfarasgeographical indications anddesignations oforigin areconcerned, Article 421-3 of
theConsumer Code allows acriminal court hearing acasebrought byaconsumers 'association, after
having declared thedefendant guilty "topostpone sentencing andtocallontheperson convicted, on
painofafineifneedbe,tocomply withtheterms established bythecourt forthepurpose ofterminating
theunlawful action, within thetime-limit fixed ...".
- Damages, including recovery ofprofits, andexpenses, including attorney 'sfees
There isnoprovision specific toIPRs. Compensation fortheprejudice caused byinfringing
IPRsisdealtwithaccording totherulesoncivilliability laiddown inArticles 1382 and1383 ofthe
Civil Code.
Thephilosophy andcaselawbothconfirm thattheindemnity mustcompensate fortheprejudice
suffered, butonlytheprejudice suffered andnotprofits unlawfully earned. Aslegalprecedents show,
evaluating theindemnity comprises twoelements: determination ofthevolume ofinfringement, and
anestimate oftheinjury caused. Thejudge weighing themerits ofthecaseissolely responsible for
making thisassessment.
TitleXVIII oftheNCPC (Articles 695to725-1) concerns costs. Ingeneral, thelosing party
must paycosts, unless thejudge decides otherwise. Intheabsence ofanyspecial regulation tothe
contrary, payment oflegalofficials (lawyers, bailiffs ...)isnotincluded inthecosts. According to
Article 700oftheNCPC, however, "When itappears inequitable toleave ononeparty theburden
ofthe‘sums spent bythelatter’andnotincluded inthecosts, thejudge mayorder theother party
topaythefirstoneasumwhich thejudge determines." Hemay, evenexofficio, forreasons based
onthesame considerations, decide thatthissentence isnotwarranted.
- Destruction orother disposal ofinfringing goods andmaterials/implements for
their production
CaselawintheCourt ofCassation (First Civil Chamber, 3November 1988, No.86-16.538)
reaffirms thataconfiscation measure "canonlybeordered inthecases prescribed bythelaw".
Withregard topatents, Article L.615-7 oftheCPI,included insection 1oncivilproceedings,
statesthat"Attherequestoftheinjuredparty,andwheresuchmeasureisnecessarytopreventcontinuing
infringement, theCourt mayorder confiscation, infavour ofthepetitioner, ofthearticles recognized
asconstituting aninfringement, which aretheproperty oftheinfringer, onthedateofentry intoforce
oftheprohibition and,where appropriate, ofthedevices ormeans specifically intended forcommitting
theinfringement. Thevalue ofthearticles confiscated shallbetaken intoaccount when computing
thecompensation tobeawarded tothebeneficiary ofthedecision."
Inrelation tonewplant variety certificates, Article L.623-28 oftheCPIprovides that"At
therequest oftheinjured party, theCourt mayorder confiscation onbehalf oftheinjured party of
anyplants orparts ofplants orofanyelements ofreproduction orvegetative propagation obtained
inviolation oftherights oftheowner ofanewplant variety certificate and,where appropriate, of
theinstruments specifically intended foruseinthereproductive cycle".
Forindustrial designs (Articles L.521-3 andL.521-3-1 oftheCPI) andmarks
(Articles L.716-8-1 andL.716-14 oftheCPI), thesemeasures constitute criminal penalties. Itwould
appear, however, thatCivil Courts aresometimes allowed toorder suchmeasures when theyrelate
toindustrial designs inparticular.IP/N/6/FRA/1
Page7
- Anyother remedies
Publication ofsentences maybeordered according toordinary procedural rules.
Thedecision ispublished inanewspaper withbroad circulation orintheprofessional press.
Publication costs areborne bytheinfringer.
Inthecaseofgeographical indications anddesignations oforigin, Article L.421-9 ofthe
Consumer Code states that"The competent court mayorder thattheverdict pronounced should be
disseminated tothepublic byallappropriate means ....Thecostofdissemination shallbeborne by
thelosing party, theparty convicted ortheassociation thatinstituted thecivilaction iftheproceedings
theyinstituted havebeendismissed."
6. Inwhat circumstances, ifany,dojudicial authorities have theauthority toorder the
infringer toinform theright holder oftheidentity ofthird persons involved intheproduction
anddistribution ofthegoods orservices found tobeinfringing andoftheirchannels ofdistribution?
Such ameasure, taken intheform ofaninjunction, would becontrary totheprinciple of
presumption ofinnocence andtherighttoremain silent, which arerecognized incriminal lawinFrance.
AttheEuropean level, twodecisions, onebytheEuropean Court ofHuman Rights (Funcke vs.
France, 25February 1993), andtheother bytheCourt ofJustice oftheEuropean Communities (Orkem
case, 18October 1989) confirm thataninvestigation measure cannot require self-incrimination byan
accused person inrelation tofactsthatstillhavetobeproved.
7. Describe provisions relating totheindemnification ofdefendants wrongfully enjoined.
Asfarasindustrial designs, newplant variety certificates orlayout designs areconcerned,
there arenospecial provisions. Thegeneral rules oflawapply (seereply toquestion 5).Itis
nevertheless provided thatthePresident oftheCourt ofFirstInstance whoorders theinfringement
seizure may"order theperson requesting seizure toprovide adequate security" (Article L.332-1 of
theCPI) or"require from thepetitioner security ...".(Article L.521-1 oftheCPI) inorder to
compensate adefendant wrongfully enjoined. Fornewplant variety certificates, thelastparagraph
ofArticle L.623-27 oftheCPIprovides forthepayment of"anydamages which maybeclaimed".
With regard tomarks andpatents, thelastparagraphs ofArticles L.716-6 andL.615-3 of
theCPIcontain similar provisions totheeffect that"The judge maycondition theinjunction onthe
furnishing bytheplaintiff ofaguarantee tocover possible indemnification ofdamages suffered by
thedefendant iftheinfringement proceedings aresubsequently judged tobeunfounded."
Ingeneral, theNCPC makes dilatory orabusive action intheCourt ofFirstInstance oron
appeal punishable byacivilfineofF100toF10,000, without prejudice toanydamages thatmay
beclaimed (Articles 32-1and559oftheNCPC).
- Towhat extent arepublic authorities and/or officials liable insuchasituation and
what "remedial measures" areapplicable tothem?
Inthecaseofindustrial designs, Article L.521-1 oftheCPIstates that"...anybailiff carry[ing]
outadetailed description, withorwithout seizure, oftheincriminated articles orinstruments, under
anorder issued bythePresident oftheFirstInstance Court" shallgiveacopybothoftheorder and
oftheinstrument recording deposit totheholders ofthearticles described onpainofnullity anddamagesIP/N/6/FRA/1
Page8
awarded against thebailiff. Theinjured petitioner mayclaim these damages ifthebailiff doesnot
respect theprocedural rules.
Regarding patents, thesecond paragraph ofArticle L.615-10 oftheCPIstates that"Where
thePresident oftheCourt orders anexpert opinion oradescription withorwithout effective seizure,
asprovided forinArticle L.615-5, theappointed lawofficer shallrefrain fromproceeding withseizure,
description andanyinvestigation intothearchives anddocuments ofthebusiness ifthecontract for
research ormanufacture comprises adefence security classification." Asimilar provision in
Article L.623-30 oftheCPIapplies tonewplant varieties (except thattheword "manufacture" is
replaced bythewords "reproduction orpropagation").
These examples donotrelate directly tothequestion (they concern descriptive seizure and
notinjunctions), buttheyshow thatpublic officials maybeheldliable.
There arenospecial remedial measures applicable topublic officials incaseswhere infringement
proceedings aredismissed. Public officials actuponorders issued bythecompetent courts andifthey
arecollecting evidence theycould probably onlybeheldliable inexceptional casesofmisconduct (either
personally orwhen carrying outtheirtasks, according towell-established administrative precedents).
Thejudicial authorities cannot beliable unless theyrefuse togrant justice orcommit serious
misconduct. Where thesubstance ofadecision taken iscontested, theauthority ofresjudicata nullifies
anyliability (butopens thedoortoappeals).
8. Describe provisions governing thelength andcostofproceedings. Provide anyavailable
dataontheactual duration ofproceedings andtheir cost.
There arenospecial provisions onthecostandduration ofproceedings.
Theduration depends onthecomplexity ofthecase, theefforts oftheparties andthecourt's
workload. Thechannels ofappeal usedbytheparties (appeal, cassation) alsohaveasignificant impact
ontheoverall length ofproceedings.
Thecostofproceedings includes legalcosts, mainly allowances paidtowitnesses, payment
oftechnicians, salaries ofprosecuting officials andattorneys 'fees.
Thecosttherefore varies greatly according towhether ornottechnical expertise isrequired
andtheamount ofthefeepaidbytheclient tohisattorney. Thecourt mayorder thelosing party
topaytheattorney 'sfeeuptotheamount itfixes.
Consequently, itisnotpossible togivedetails concerning theeffective duration andcostof
proceedings inthisarea.
(b) Administrative procedures andremedies
9. Reply totheabove questions inrelation toanyadministrative procedures onthemerits
andremedies thatmayresult from these procedures.
Theadministrative authorities donothaveanyroletoplayinrelation toinfringement ofIPRs.
ThetaskoftheNational Institute ofIndustrial Property istoissue industrial property titles, butitis
notcompetent toensure respect forIPRs.IP/N/6/FRA/1
Page9
Administrative procedure related togeographical indications anddesignations oforigin (covered
byArticles L.115-2 to4oftheConsumer Code) onlyconcern thegranting ofrights andnottheir
protection.
PROVISIONAL MEASURES
(a) Judicial measures
10. Describe thetypes ofprovisional measures thatjudicial authorities mayorder, andthe
legal basis forsuchauthority.
ThePresident ofaCourt ofFirst Instance, sitting inchambers, mayadopt twotypes of
provisional measures: injunction andseizure (infringement seizure isdifferent, seereplytoquestion 3).
Thesituation differs according tothecategory ofintellectual property rights concerned.
Marks: Bothprohibition andseizure maybeordered. Regarding theformer, Article L.716-6
oftheCPIisbased onArticle L.615-3 (seebelow); Article L.716-8-1 provides forseizure after
theinfringement caused bytheinfringing goods andanymaterial andequipment usedtomanufacture
them havebeenrecorded.
Industrial designs, geographical indications anddesignations oforigin, layout designs, new
plantvariety certificates: There isnospecial prohibition measure. Nevertheless, thegeneral competence
(broader, seereply toquestion 12)ofthejudge inchambers totakeinjunction measures applies.
Patents: Noseizure measure exists intheareaofpatents. Article L.615-3 oftheCPIprovides
fortheprovisional enjoinment, under penalty ofadailyfine,orthefurnishing ofsecurity toindemnify
thepatent owner.
Disclosure oftrade secrets: Ajudge sitting inchambers maynottakeanymeasures inthis
area(although hemaybeabletodosoinother types ofunfair competition proceedings where the
offence consists ofproducing objects).
11. Inwhat circumstances maysuchmeasures beordered inaudita altera parte?
Proceedings inchambers (where theCourt ofFirstInstance iscompetent todecide onthemerits
ofacaseandthePresidentdecidestotakeanemergencyprovisionaldecision)alwaysrequirethepresence
oftheparties. Thisisaconstitutionally protected principle. Article 484oftheNCPC provides that
"The ordonnance duréféré (order given inchambers) isaprovisional order given attherequest of
oneparty, theother party present orhaving beensummoned, incases where thelawconfers upon
ajudge whohasnotbeenempowered tohearthemain issue thepower tomake thenecessary order
immediately." Article 486oftheNCPC states that:"Thejudge ensures thatsufficient timehaselapsed
between theservice ofthecomplaint andthehearing fortheparty summoned tohavebeenableto
prepare hiscase."
Regarding fraud ortheforgery ofproducts, Article L.215-9 oftheConsumer Code states
that"Alltheexpert examinations required [inconnection withimplementation ofemergency measures
liable toleadtocriminal proceedings, initiated byprosecuting authorities -seereply toquestion 14]
shalltakeplace inthepresence oftheparties andtheprice ofsamples recognized asauthentic shall
bereimbursed according totheirvalue onthedaytheywere removed".
Moreover, inFrance itisnotpossible toadopt injunction measures exparte ifthere areno
adversarial proceedings. Notwithstanding thisexception, theprinciple isthat"Anexparte order isIP/N/6/FRA/1
Page10
aprovisional order rendered inaudita altere parte incases where thepetitioner isjustified innot
summoning theopposing party." (Article 493oftheNCPC).
Thisrulealsoapplies toinfringement seizure proceedings, authorized byanexparte order
issued bythePresident oftheCourt ofFirstInstance uponapplication, butthisprocedure goesbeyond
provisional measures stricto sensu (itconcerns means ofproof: seereply toquestion 3).
Nevertheless, thePresident ofaCourt ofFirst Instance hasthepower totakeprovisional
measures without adversarial proceedings inconnection with infringement seizure ofsoftware
(O.J. Parliamentary Debates -National Assembly, 31October 1994, written question No.18617 of
3October 1994 interpreting Article L.332-4 oftheCPI).
12. Describe themain procedures fortheinitiation, ordering andmaintenance inforce of
provisional measures, inparticular relevant time-limits andsafeguards toprotect thelegitimate
interests ofthedefendant.
Industrial designs, geographical indications anddesignations oforigin, layout designs, and
newplant variety certificates:
- Procedure forinitiating action andtime-limit formaintaining themeasure inforce:
Thegeneral rules oflawrelating todecisions inchambers apply. Article 485ofthe
NCPC provides that"The demand isbrought bymeans ofacomplaint atahearing
heldforthatpurpose attheusual timeanddayforréférés [cases heard inchambers]."
- Safeguarding theinterests ofthedefendant: According toArticles 489and517to522
oftheNCPC, "Référé orders [orders rendered inchambers] areprovisionally executory
without security unless thejudge hasordered ittobefurnished." (Article 489ofthe
NCPC) "[security] sufficient tocover allrestitutions ordamages" (Article 517ofthe
NCPC). Thethirdparagraph ofArticle 771oftheNCPC gives thesame powers to
thejudge directing preparation ofthecase.
Marks andpatents:
- Procedure forinitiating action andterms formaintaining themeasure inforce: Action
concerning themerits ofthecasemustbeadmissible andhavebeeninitiated within
ashort period fromthedateonwhich theowner oftherights or,butonlyinthecase
ofmarks, thebeneficiary ofanexclusive rightofexploitation, became aware ofthe
factsthatconstitute thegrounds fortheproceedings.
- Safeguarding theinterests ofthedefendant: ThePresident oftheCourt ofFirstInstance
mayrequire theplaintiff tofurnish security toprovide compensation foranyprejudice
suffered bythedefendant (Articles L.716-6 andL.615-3 oftheCPI).
Inanyevent, thegeneral rulesoflawapply. With regard tosafeguarding theinterests ofthe
defendant, Article 32-1oftheNCPC provides that"Aperson instituting dilatory orabusive proceedings
maybesentenced toacivilfineofF100toF10,000 without prejudice toanydamages thatmaybe
claimed". Likewise, ifthematter isbrought before thejudge responsible forpreparing thecase(see
reply toquestion 4),thefirstparagraph 1ofArticle 771oftheNCPC empowers himtodecide upon
dilatory pleas.
Furthermore, ifthelosing party issentenced topaycosts-inorder toestablish aparallel with
question 5-thelastparagraph ofArticle 491oftheNCPC states thatthejudge inchambers shallruleIP/N/6/FRA/1
Page11
upon costs. Ifthecaseisbrought before thejudge responsible forpreparing thecase, Article 772
oftheNCPC gives himthesame powers inthisrespect.
13. Describe provisions governing thelength andcostofproceedings. Provide anyavailable
dataontheactual duration ofproceedings andtheir cost.
Seereply toquestion 8.
(b) Administrative measures
14. Reply totheabove questions inrelation toanyadministrative provisional measures.
Firstly, itisnecessary toexplain thepowers granted forprovisional measures stricto sensu
(injunction, seizure) inconnection with marks, under Article 9ofLaw No. 89-1008 of
31December 1989, toofficials oftheDirection Générale delaConcurrence, delaConsommation
etdelaRépression desFraudes (DGCCRF) (Directorate-General ofCompetition, Consumer Protection
andtheRepression ofFraud), which isunder theauthority oftheMinistry oftheEconomy andFinance.
Theaforementioned lawallows officials oftheDGCCRF toremove evidence fromtheplace
ofsaleinorder toexamine products which theysuspect mayunlawfully bearamark, either ontheir
initiative orfollowing awritten complaint bytheowner oftherights addressed totheDepartmental
Directorate ofCompetition, Consumer Protection andtheRepression ofFraud. Theofficials may
alsopenalize falseindications oforigin orcomposition ofaproduct, which areoften associated with
theoffence ofinfringement.
They arealsoempowered torequest thePresident oftheCourt ofFirstInstance toissue an
exparte order authorizing theimpoundment ofthegoods. ThePresident oftheCourt ofFirstInstance
mayrequire thefurnishing ofsecurity withaviewtocompensating theowner ofthegoods forany
damage. Thegoods canbeimpounded for2weeks, which canbeextended forafurther 2weeks
following aneworder bythePresident oftheCourt ofFirstInstance.
Ifexamination oftheproducts removed orimpounded leads toapresumption ofinfringement
ofthemark, theofficials oftheDGCCRF transmit areport ontheoffence tothepublic prosecutor.
Where theservices oftheDGCCRF actontheirowninitiative, theprosecuting authority dealing with
thecasecontacts theowner oftherights inthemark forthepurposes ofthesubsequent criminal
proceedings (seedescription inthereply toquestions 20to24).
Inaddition, incases offalsification orfraud concerning thenature, composition ororigin of
aproduct, Article L.215-1 oftheConsumer Code empowers officials oftheDGCCRF andtheDGDDI,
police officers, andState officials approved andauthorized bytheMinistry ofAgriculture tocarry
outinvestigations andreport ontheoffences.
Article L.215-3 oftheConsumer Code authorizes these officials tocarry outaninvestigation
either onthespotoronthebasis ofdocumentation regarding theplace ofmanufacture, processing
andstorage, andthevehicles usedtotransport thegoods, aswellastoseize"documents ofanytype,
whosoever possesses them, liable tofacilitate theperformance oftheirtask".
Article L.215-5 oftheConsumer Code authorizes these officials toseizegoods inthestreet,
intheabsence ofajudicial authorization, ifthereisaflagrant caseoffalsification orwhere themeasures
concern interaliaproducts recognized asforged, adulterated ortoxic, products recognized asbeing
unfitforconsumption, orproducts, objects orequipment usedtoforge thegoods. Thesubsequent
Article states: "...ifproducts arerecognized tobeadulterated ortoxic, seizure shallbeobligatory.IP/N/6/FRA/1
Page12
Theofficial maythendestroy theproducts, sterilize them ordenature them. Such operations shall
berecorded inthereport andthereasons given".
Article L.215.8 oftheConsumer Code provides forlegalimpoundment ofgoods, authorized
bythePresident oftheCourt ofFirstInstance within whose jurisdiction thedisputed goods arebeing
held"where leaving them onthemarket would leadtoserious andimmediate injury totheinterests
ofconsumers". ThePresident actsfollowing arequest andtakes adecision within 24hours. Hemust
ensure thatthere aregrounds fortherequest forimpoundment submitted tohim. Theimpoundment
measure maynotexceed aduration of2weeks, which canbeextended foronefurther period of2
weeks upon areasoned order from thePresident oftheCourt ofFirstInstance.
"The President oftheCourt ofFirstInstance mayorder thelifting oftheimpoundment atany
time. Release shallbeautomatic incases where thecompetent authorities haveascertained thatthe
goods impounded areauthentic orhavebeenmade authentic following acommitment bytheperson
whofirstmarketed themorbytheperson possessing them" (Article L.215-8 oftheConsumer Code).
Lastly, administrative impoundment measures canalsobeadopted while awaiting thefindings
oftheverification tobecarried out. According toArticle L.215-7 oftheConsumer Code "The
competent authorities shalldraw upareport mentioning theproducts which havebeenimpounded.
Thisreport shallbetransmitted tothepublic prosecutor within 24hours. Theimpoundment measure
maynotexceed 2weeks unless otherwise authorized bythepublic prosecutor. Itmaybelifted atany
timebythecompetent authorities orbythepublic prosecutor".
Articles L.215-9 toL.215-17 oftheConsumer Code provide further details concerning the
manner ofcarrying outexpert examinations related toimplementation ofthese measures.
Theonlyother administrative measures areborder measures ormeasures related tomovement
within customs territory, which arereferred tointhefollowing questions.
Special requirements related toborder measures
15. Indicate forwhich goods itispossible toapply forthesuspension bythecustoms authorities
oftherelease intofreecirculation, inparticular whether these procedures areavailable alsoin
respect ofgoods which involve infringements ofintellectual property rights other thancounterfeit
trademark orpirated copyright goods asdefined intheTRIPS Agreement (footnote toArticle 51).
Specify, together with relevant criteria, anyimports excluded from theapplication ofsuch
procedures (such asgoods from another member ofacustoms union, goods intransit ordeminimis
imports). Dotheprocedures apply toimports ofgoods putonthemarket inanother country
byorwiththeconsent oftheright holder andtogoods destined forexportation?
Pursuant toArticles L.521-7 andL.716-8 oftheCPI,thecustoms administration may, at
thewritten request oftheowner ofadeposited industrial design ortheowner ofaregistered mark,
orthebeneficiary ofanexclusive rightofexploitation, withhold inthecourse ofitsinspections goods
alleged byhimtobeinfringing thesaidindustrial design ormark forwhich theyhave obtained
registration orwithregard towhich theyenjoy anexclusive rightofuse.
Patents areclearly excluded from thistypeofmeasure andthere isnosuchprovision either
fornewplant variety certificates orlayout designs forsemi-conductors.
Inaddition, LawNo.94-102 of5February 1994(partly repeated intheCPIinArticles L.716-8
to12)establishes atotal banonimports orexports ofgoods bearing aninfringing mark.
Article L.716-9(b) oftheCPIestablishes thisban,Article 428oftheCustoms Code defines thecriteriaIP/N/6/FRA/1
Page13
foraccusations ofcustoms offences (under thisArticle, anyviolation oftheprovisions onprohibited
imports under allcustoms regimes isdeemed tobeimport orexport ofbanned goods) andArticle 414
oftheaforementioned Code establishes thepenalty forthisoffence.
Article 215(applicable togoods from third countries) andArticles 38-4and215bisofthe
Customs Code (concerning Community goods) allow inspections tobecarried outthroughout France
andtheseizure ofinfringing goods iftheperson inpossession ofthemisunable toproduce animport
document oracommercial document proving thattheyareauthentic.
French legislation doesnotexclude anycustoms regime fromthisprovision, noteveninfringing
goods imported intravellers 'luggage. Persons inpossession ofgoods ofFrench, Community orthird
country origin presumed tobeinfringing goods must prove thattheyareauthentic.
Theexhaustion ofrights within theEuropean Union invalidates theapplication ofmeasures
tosuspend marketing provided thatthegoods forwhich suchanapplication hasbeenmade arenot
infringing goods orhavebeenputupforsaleontheCommunity market withtheconsent oftheowner
oftherights.
16. Provide adescription ofthemain elements oftheprocedures relating tothesuspension
oftherelease ofgoods bycustoms authorities, inparticular thecompetent authorities (Article 51),
therequirements foranapplication (Article 52)andvarious requirements related totheduration
ofsuspension (Article 55). How have Articles 53(security orequivalent assurance), 56
(indemnification oftheimporter andoftheowner ofthegoods) and57(right ofinspection and
information) been implemented?
- Competent authorities: thecustoms administration andtheDirection Nationale du
Renseignement etdesEnquêtes Douanières (DRNED) (National Directorate ofCustoms
Information andEnquiries) withregard tothefiling andinvestigation ofwritten
applications towithhold goods made byowners oftheright.
- Requirements foranapplication: Written application bytheowner ofadeposited
industrialdesignindicatingtheplaintiff'sstatuswithregardtotherightsclaimedtogether
with"theobject andnational number oftheindustrial design concerned, together with
anidentity certificate issued bytheNational Institute ofIndustrial Property anda
description ofthegoods alleged tobeinfringing thedesign" (Articles L.521-7 and
R.521-1 oftheCPI).
Application bytheowner ofaregistered mark orofthebeneficiary ofanexclusive
right ofexploitation indicating thestatus oftheplaintiff withregard totherights
claimed, together with"thedesignation andregistration number ofthemarkconcerned
andadescription ofthegoods alleged tobeinfringing themark" (Articles L.716-8
andR.716-1 oftheCPI).
Theapplication maybemade priortotheimport intoFrance oftheallegedly infringing
goods, inwhich caseitisvalid foroneyearandmaybeextended.
- Requirements relating totheduration ofsuspension: Articles L.521-7 andL.716-8
oftheCPIconcerning industrial designs andmarks respectively provide foraperiod
oftenworking days. ThePresident oftheFirstInstance Court hassolecompetence
totakethepreventive measures referred to.IP/N/6/FRA/1
Page14
- Securityorequivalentguarantee:PursuanttotheaforementionedArticles,iftheplaintiff
hashadaninfringement seizure carried out,thePresident oftheFirstInstance Court
maymake themeasure subject tofurnishing ofsecurity (security isalways required
forindustrial designs when theplaintiff isaforeigner: Article L.521-1 oftheCPI).
Domestic legislation doesnotcurrently provide foranydeposit ofsecurity bytheowner
ofarightwhen making awritten application forthewithholding ofgoods incasehis
application iswithout grounds. Ontheother hand, Article 3.6oftheRegulation of
22December 1994allows member States torequire owners ofrights tofurnish security
when filing anapplication forintervention orwithholding ofgoods based onthis
Regulation inorder tocover theirliability iftherequest isgroundless and/or toensure
payment ofthecosts incurred during thewithholding procedure.
- Compensation fortheimporter andtheowner ofthegoods: Seetheexplanations
concerning Article 700oftheNCPC inthereply toquestion 5.
- Right ofinspection andinformation: Inthecaseofindustrial designs andmarks, the
lastparagraphs ofArticles L.521-7 andL.716-8 oftheCPIprovide that: "Forthe
purpose oftheinstitution ofthelegalproceedings referred tointheforegoing paragraph,
theplaintiff mayrequire thecustoms administration tocommunicate thenames and
addresses ofthesender, theimporter andtheconsignee ofthegoods withheld orof
theholder thereof, andalsothequantity thereof, notwithstanding theprovisions of
Article 59bisoftheCustoms Code concerning theprofessional secrecy towhich all
officials ofthecustoms administration arebound."
17. Describe provisions governing thelength andcostofproceedings. Provide anyavailable
dataontheactual duration ofproceedings andtheir cost. How longisthevalidity ofdecisions
bythecompetent authorities forthesuspension oftherelease ofgoods intofreecirculation?
Inconnection withthecostoftheprocedure forwithholding infringing goods, nocharges or
deposit ofsecurity tocover thecostofwithholding goods isrequired fromowners ofrights whoapply
tothecustoms administration inwriting requesting thewithholding ofgoods.
Forthecustoms authority, applying awithholding measure implies payment ofstorage and
maintenance costsfortheinfringing goods, which varyaccording tothetypeandvolume ofthegoods
concerned. Asthere arenoprovisions atthenational levelrequiring thedeposit ofsecurity bythe
owner oftheright inorder tocover these charges, theyusually have tobemetbythecustoms
administration.
With regard totheduration ofsuspension oftherelease ofallegedly infringing goods, the
indications given inthereply toquestion 16"provisions concerning theduration ofsuspension" apply.
Within tenworking daysfromthedateofwithholding oftheinfringing goods, incases where
theowner oftherighthasrequested infringement seizure, thegoods arehanded overtothejudicial
authorities.
Thecustoms service terminates thewithholding when ithasbeeninformed oftheseizure order.
Inthisparticular case,iftheorder designates thecustoms administration asthecustodian ofthegoods,
theyarehanded overtoitandnotreleased.IP/N/6/FRA/1
Page15
18. Arecompetent authorities required toactupon their owninitiative and,ifso,inwhat
circumstances? Arethere anyspecial provisions applicable toexofficio action?
Inthecaseofinfringing marks, ifacustoms banhasbeenimposed, thecustoms administration
mayestablish thatthere hasbeenaviolation ofcustoms regulations without receiving aprior request
fromtheowner oftheright, either inthecontext ofcustoms controls within France orwhen verifying
goods subject torestrictions oncirculation within theEuropean Community (Article 38.4oftheCustoms
Code).
Partial lifting oftheprofessional secrecy towhich customs officials arebound, withreference
tothelastsentence ofthereply toquestion 16,doesnotapply when thecustoms administration acts
onitsowninitiative. Inthiscase, theowner ofthemark isonlyinformed ofthetotalvolume ofeach
article seized fromtravellers (Circular of21March 1995, No.CRIM-95-9 fromtheMinister ofJustice
concerning theprevention ofinfringement ofmarks).
19. Describe theremedies thatthecompetent authorities havetheauthority toorder andany
criteria regulating their use.
Thecustoms service seizes allthegoods itsuspects ofinfringing marks. Itthendraws upa
report ontheseizure. Ifcustoms regulations havebeenviolated, thecustoms administration mayinitiate
proceedings withaviewtotheapplication ofcustoms penalties. Itmaytherefore enterintonegotiations
withtheviolators ifnoaction hasbeenbrought bytheprosecuting authorities ortheowner oftheright
oritmaybring thematter before thecourts.
Thecustoms offence ofinfringement isusually coupled withanordinary lawviolation. The
public prosecutor istherefore informed through thetransmission ofthereport onthecustoms seizure.
Inanyevent, heisempowered todecide whether ornottoinitiate proceedings.
Ifthepublic prosecutor decides toinitiate proceedings fortheordinary lawoffence, thecustoms
administration usually combines itsaction withtheordinary lawaction sothatthejudge canconsider
allaspects ofthecase.
Criminalproceedingsarethuslinkedtocustomsproceedings.Thecustomsoffenceispunishable
bythepenalties laiddown inArticle 414oftheCustoms Code, namely amaximum termofthreeyears'
imprisonment,afineofbetweenoneandtwotimesthevalueoftheinfringingobject,anditsconfiscation.
CRIMINAL PROCEDURES
20. Specify thecourts which have jurisdiction overcriminal actsofinfringement ofIPRs.
Forbothindustrial designs andmarks, Articles L.521-1, L.521-7 andL.716-8 oftheCPI
givetheplaintiff inanaction forinfringement thechoice ofinstituting proceedings bycivilaction or
criminal action. Forgeographical indications anddesignations oforigin, criminal courts have
jurisdiction. Inthecaseofpatents andlayout designs, proceedings areinitially brought before theFirst
Instance Court andthereafter bytheCourts ofAppeal (Article L.615-19 oftheCPI). Criminal action
concerning newplant variety certificates isheard bycriminal courts, which "may nottakeadecision
untiltheCivilCourt hasconfirmed theexistence oftheoffence inthefinaldecision" (Articles L.623-29
andL.623-33 oftheCPI). Inrelation tothedisclosure oftrade secrets, iftheplaintiff considers that
anoffence hasbeencommitted, hemaybring thematter before theinvestigating magistrate, thepublic
prosecutor, orthecriminal court.IP/N/6/FRA/1
Page16
Ingeneral, First Instance Courts havejurisdiction forproceedings, investigation and,ifan
offence hasbeen committed, judging violations oftheIntellectual Property Code, pursuant to
Article 704.5 oftheCode ofCriminal Procedure.
21. Inrespect ofwhich infringements ofwhich intellectual property rights arecriminal
procedures andpenalties available?
Criminal procedures andpenalties areavailable foranyactofinfringement ofanyintellectual
property right.
- Industrial designs
Therelevant provisions areArticles L.521-2 toL.521-6 oftheCPI.
Theoffence ofinfringement isnotdefined. Ontheother hand, itisstipulated thatitmust
consist ofevents subsequent tofiling. Events following filing butpriortopublication areonlyactionable
iftheplaintiff establishes thedefendant 'sbadfaith. Inprinciple, noproceedings maybeinstituted
untilthefiling hasbeenmade public. After publication, thepersons having committed potentially
infringing actsmayplead good faithoncondition thattheyfurnish proof thereof.
- Marks
Therelevant provisions areArticles L.716-8-1 toL.716-14 oftheCPI.
According toArticle L.716-9 oftheCPI, theoffence ofinfringement isdefined asthe
reproduction, imitation, use,affixing, removal oralteration ofamark, acollective mark oracollective
certification mark. Article L.716-10 provides thatanyperson whowithout lawful reason holds goods
heknows tobearaninfringing mark orhasknowingly sold, offered forsale,furnished oroffered to
furnish goods orservices under suchamark, orhasknowingly delivered aproduct orfurnished aservice
other thanthatrequested ofhimunder aregistered mark shallbeliable tothepenalties laiddown in
Article L.716-9.
Therearespecialprovisionsoninfringementofcollectivemarksorcollectivecertificationmarks:
useinamanner other thanthatlaiddown intheregulations accompanying theregistration orcarrying
outoneoftheaforementioned actswithin aperiod oftenyears asfromthedateoftermination ofthe
protection granted byacollective certification mark.
- Geographical indications anddesignations oforigin
Therelevant provisions areArticles L.115-16 andL.115-18, together withArticles L.213-1
toL.213-5 andL.217-6 toL.217-8 oftheConsumer Code.
Misuse ofanincorrect designation oforigin, ontheonehand, oraffixing itorcausing itto
appear byremoval, addition oralteration, onnatural ormanufactured products offered forsaleorto
beoffered forsale,ontheother, allconstitute offences. Thesale,offerforsaleorcirculation ofsuch
products isliable tothesame penalties (Articles L.115-16 andL.115-18).
Moreover, ingeneral, geographical indications anddesignations oforigin aresubject tothe
general requirement ofconformity laiddown inArticles L.212-1 etseq.oftheConsumer Code. For
example, fraud concerning thenature, composition ororigin ofaproduct (Article L.217-6 ofthe
Consumer Code), aswellasadulteration offoodstuffs, beverages, agricultural ornatural products to
besold, aswellasthepossession, display, offer forsaleorsaleofsuchproducts arepunishable.IP/N/6/FRA/1
Page17
- Patents
Therelevant provisions areArticles L.615-12 toL.615-20 oftheCPI,aswellasArticles 410-1
and411-6 to8ofthenewCriminal Code.
Article L.615-12 oftheCPIimposes penalties onanyperson whoimproperly claims tobe
theowner ofapatent orapatent application. Article L.615-14 oftheCPIdefines theoffence of
infringement. Thisoffence mayalsobecombined withviolation ofState security according to
Articles L.615-13, L.615-15 andL.615-16 oftheCPIiftheinfringement relates toapatent orpatent
application ofinterest fornational defence (under theconditions stipulated inArticles L.612-8 to
L.612-10 oftheCPI).
Article410-1ofthenewCriminalCodespecifiesthattheessentialelementsofFrance'sscientific
andeconomic potential areamong itsfundamental interests. Violating these interests bygiving
information, processes, objects, documents ...toaforeign power gives risetothecriminal penalties
laiddown inArticles 411-6 to8ofthenewCriminal Code asdescribed inthereply toquestion 24.
These Articles apply tothecommunication ofinformation onpatent applications keptsecret
intheinterests ofnational defence.
- Newplant variety certificates
Article L.623-25 oftheCPIstates that"Any violation oftherights ofanowner ofanewplant
variety certificate asdefined inArticle L.623-43shallconstitute aninfringement incurring thecivil
liability oftheperson committing theact."
"Subject toArticle L.623-4, useofaprotected variety asasource ofinitial variation with
aview toobtaining anewvariety shallnotconstitute violation oftherights oftheowner ofanew
plant variety certificate."
Thesecond paragraph facilitates interpretation ofthescope ofArticle L.623-32 oftheCPI,
which defines theoffence liable tocriminal action as"Any intentional violation oftherights ofthe
owner ofanewplant variety certificate, asdefined inArticle L.623-4 ...".
Article L.623-26 oftheCPIprovides that"Acts committed prior topublication oftheissue
ofthecertificate shallnotbeheldtoviolate therights deriving from thecertificate. However, acts
committed afteratruecopyoftheapplication foracertificate hasbeennotified toaperson presumed
liable maybeascertained andprosecuted."
Lastly, criminal liability canonlyapply inthisareawhen theinterests ofnational defence are
atstake.
- Layout designs
Article L.622-5 oftheCPIprohibits anythirdperson from:
3Article L.623-4 oftheCPI: "Any newplant variety maybethesubject ofatitleknown asa‘newplant
variety certificate ’,which shall afford toitsowner anexclusive right toproduce, introduce ontotheterritory
towhich thisChapter applies, selloroffer forsaleallorpartoftheplant oranyelement forthereproduction
orvegetative propagation ofthevariety orofvarieties derived from itbyhybridization where theirreproduction
requires therepeated useoftheoriginal variety."IP/N/6/FRA/1
Page18
- Reproduction ofaprotected topography, unless reproduction isforthepurpose of
evaluation, analysis orteaching andthisanalysis orevaluation leads tothecreation
ofadifferent topography eligible forprotection.
- Commercial exploitation orimportation tothatendofsuchareproduction orofany
semi-conductorproductincorporatingit,unlesstheacquirerofasemi-conductorproduct
canprove hisgood faith(butheisstillliable forappropriate indemnification ifhe
intends toengage incommercial exploitation oftheproducts soacquired).
Action prohibited bythisArticle mayleadtocivilproceedings; theIntellectual Property Code
doesnot,ontheother hand, provide foranyspecific criminal penalty.
- Trade secrets
Disclosing orattempting todisclose trade secrets andactsofunfair competition constitute
offences.
Proceedings forunfair competition arebased onArticles 1382 and1383 oftheCivil Code.
Theformer requires aperson causing aninjury torepair itandthelatter states thataperson isliable
fortheinjury hehascaused byhisaction, butalsobyhisnegligence orcarelessness.
Legal precedents define amanufacturing secret asanymanufacturing process ofpractical or
commercial interest exploited byanindustrialist andkeptfrom hiscompetitors (Court ofCassation,
Criminal Chamber, 29March 1935, 29June1960, 12June1974).
Thedisclosureofamanufacturingsecretmaynotonlyinjuretheenterprisepossessingthesecret,
butalsotheinterests oftheeconomy ornational defence. Theaforementioned provisions ofthenew
Criminal Code (Article 410-1, 411-6 to8)areapplicable insuchcases.
22. Which public authorities areresponsible forinitiating criminal proceedings? Arethey
required todothisontheir owninitiative and/or inresponse tocomplaints?
TheonlyadministrativeauthoritiesempoweredtoinitiatecriminalproceedingsaretheDGCCRF
andtheDGDDI mentioned above (inconnection withtheprocedure explained inreply toquestion 14
andonthebasis ofArticle 343-2 oftheCustoms Code). Under certain circumstances, butonlyin
connection withmarks, theymaydosoontheirowninitiative. Thepublic prosecutor initiates criminal
proceedings ifheconsiders them tobewarranted.
Criminalproceedingsconcerningdesignationsoforiginorgeographicalindicationsareregularly
initiated bytheNational Institute ofDesignations ofOrigin, which isapublic institution ofan
administrative nature responsible forcontrolling, promoting andprotecting designations oforigin, the
wine market andtheeconomic regime governing alcohol, under thesupervision oftheMinistry of
Agriculture.4
23. Doprivate persons have standing toinitiate criminal proceedings and,ifso,who?
Private persons mayinitiate criminal proceedings provided thattheyhaveaninterest therein.
4Pursuant toArticle 23oftheDecree Lawof30July1935 onProtection oftheWine Market andtheEconomic
Regime Governing Alcohol, published intheOJof31July1935.IP/N/6/FRA/1
Page19
The"injured party", forindustrial designs (Articles L.521-1, L.521-3 andL.521-6 ofthe
CPI), owners ofpatents orpatent applications (Article L.615-12 oftheCPI)ortheirexclusive licensees
(subject totheconditions explained inthereply toquestion 2),owners ofmarks orofexclusive rights
ofexploitation mayallinitiate criminal proceedings. Forgeographical indications anddesignations
oforigin, private individuals, producers 'groups andprofessional associations regularly constituted
foroversixmonths (Articles L.115-8 andL.115-17 oftheConsumer Code areentitled toinitiate
proceedings). Consumers 'associations arealsoauthorized toactpursuant toArticles L.421-1 to3
oftheConsumer Code. Regarding newplant variety certificates andtrade secrets, seereply to
question 2.
24. Specify, bycategory ofIPRandtypeofinfringement where necessary, thepenalties and
other remedies thatmaybeimposed:
- Imprisonment
- Industrial designs andmarks
Articles L.521-4, L.521-6 oftheCPIforindustrial designs, andArticles L.716-9 toL.716-11
andL.716-12 oftheCPIformarks, provide foratwo-year prison term, which isdoubled ifthe
infringement isrepeated oriftheoffender isorhasbeencontractually bound totheinjured party.
- Geographical indications anddesignations oforigin
TheoffencesdescribedinArticlesL.115-16andL.115-18oftheConsumerCodearepunishable
byatermofimprisonment ofbetween three months andoneyear. Where thispenalty isimposed,
itiscombined withafine.
Fraud concerning thenature, origin orcomposition ofproducts ortheforgery offood,
agricultural ornatural products, orthedisplay, offerforsaleorselling offorged products arepunishable
byatermofimprisonmentofthreemonthstotwoyears,togetherwithafine(ArticlesL.213-1,L.213-3
andL.217-6 oftheConsumer Code). Thispenalty maybedoubled when thefraud makes utilization
ofthegood dangerous forhuman oranimal health (Article L.213-2).
Thepossession offorged goods ispunishable byatermofimprisonment ofsixdaystothree
months, which maybecombined withafine(Article L.213-4).
Allthese penalties areincreased iftheoffence isrepeated (Article L.213-5 oftheConsumer
Code).
- Patents
Infringement ispunishable byaprison termoftwoyears pursuant toArticle L.615-14 ofthe
CPI.Intheevent ofrepetition, oriftheoffender isorhasbeencontractually bound totheinjured
party, thepenalties aredoubled (Article L.615-14-1 oftheCPI).
Ifapatent application hasbeenmade public before theMinistry ofDefence hasauthorized
itorbefore theexpiry oftheperiod offivemonths from thedateoffiling theapplication andifthis
violation ofprocedure hasprejudiced national defence, imprisonment offiveyears maybeordered
(Article L.615-13 oftheCPI). Violation oftheprocedure inrelation tointernational patent applications
orapplications forEuropean patents issubject tothesame penalty (Articles L.615-15 andL.615-16
oftheCPI).IP/N/6/FRA/1
Page20
Ifdisclosure wasforthebenefit ofaforeign power, imprisonment oftenyears maybeordered,
depending onwhether thepurpose oftheoffender 'sactivity wastoobtain orfurnish information,
processes, documents ...,orwhether hecollected orcompiled information, processes, documents ...
inorder tohandthemovertoaforeign power, aforeign orforeign-controlled enterprise ororganization.
Where theoffence consisted offurnishing orgiving access toinformation, processes, and
documents ...whose exploitation, disclosure orcompilation could prejudice France 'sfundamental
interests, thetermofimprisonment is15years (Articles 411-6 to411-8 ofthenewCriminal Code).
- Newplant variety certificates
Under Article L.623-32 oftheCPI,ifthere isrepeated infringement ofanewplant variety
certificate, atermofimprisonment ofsixmonths canbeordered inaddition tothefinespecified below.
Thetermofimprisonment isfiveyears ifanewplantvariety thatisthesubject ofanapplication
foracertificate ismade public orexploited before theMinistry ofDefence hasauthorized itorbefore
theexpiry ofaperiod offivemonths from thedateoffiling theapplication andifviolation ofthe
procedure prejudices national defence (Article L.623-35 oftheCPI). Theprovisions ofArticles 411-6
to8ofthenewCriminal Code apply where appropriate.
- Trade secrets
Thepenalty specified inArticle L.621-1 oftheCPIistwoyears'imprisonment. Theprovisions
ofArticles 411-6 to8ofthenewCriminal Code alsoapply where appropriate.
- Monetary fines
- Industrial designs andmarks
Articles L.521-4 toL.521-6 oftheCPIinthecaseofindustrial designs, andArticles L.716-9
toL.716-11, together withArticle L.716-12 oftheCPIformarks, provide forthetermofimprisonment
described above, together withafineofF1,000,000, which isdoubled iftheoffence isrepeated or
iftheoffender isorhasbeencontractually bound totheinjured party.
Afinealsoapplies tolegalpersons under theconditions applicable tocopyright andrelated
rights.
- Geographical indications anddesignations oforigin
Theoffences ofaffixing, altering ormisusing designations oforigin orindications ofsource
arepunishable byafineofF250,000, which maybecombined withatermofimprisonment.
Fraud concerning thenature, composition ororigin ofaproduct, interaliawhen thefraud
hasharmful consequences forhuman oranimal health, orforgery offood, agricultural ornatural
products, ispunishable byafineofF250,000, which maybecombined withatermofimprisonment.
Theoffence ofpossessing forged goods ispunishable byafineofF30,000, which maybe
combined withatermofimprisonment.
Allthese penalties areincreased iftheoffence isrepeated (Article L.213-5 ofthe
Consumer Code).IP/N/6/FRA/1
Page21
- Patents
Anyperson improperly claiming tobetheowner ofapatent orofapatent application isliable
toafineofF50,000, which may bedoubled iftheoffence isrepeated within fiveyears
(Article L.615-12 oftheCPI).
Infringement ispunishable byafineofF1,000,000, together withatermofimprisonment,
which aredoubled iftheoffence isrepeated oriftheoffender isorhasbeencontractually bound to
theinjured party (Articles L.615-14 andL.615-14-1 oftheCPI).
Violation oftheprocedure covered byArticles L.612-9 andL.612-10 oftheCPI(protecting
theinterests ofnational defence) issubject toafineofF30,000, eveniftheviolation hasnotprejudiced
national defence (Article L.615-13 oftheCPI).
Violation ofthisprocedure inconnection withinternational patent applications orapplications
forEuropean patents ispunishable byafineofF40,000 (Articles L.615-15 andL.615-16 ofthe
CPI).
Ifdisclosure wasforthebenefit ofaforeign power, afineofF1,000,000 maybeordered,
depending onwhether thepurpose oftheoffender 'sactivity wastoobtain orfurnish information,
processes, documents ...orwhether hecollected orcompiled information, processes, documents ...
inorder tohandthemovertoaforeign power, aforeign orforeign-controlled enterprise ororganization.
Where theoffence consisted offurnishing orgiving access toinformation, processes, documents ...
whoseexploitation,disclosureorcompilationcouldprejudiceFrance'sfundamentalinterests,theamount
ofthefineisincreased toF1,500,000 (Articles 411-6 to411-8 ofthenewCriminal Code).
- Newplant variety certificates
Article L.623-34 oftheCPIstates that"Any person improperly claiming tobetheowner of
acertificate oranapplication foranewplant variety certificate shallbeliable toafineofF10,000.
Intheevent ofarepeated offence [within fiveyears], thefinemaybedoubled ...".
Article L.623-32 oftheCPIprovides that"Any intentional violation oftherights oftheowner
ofanewplantvariety certificate, asdefined inArticle L.623-4, shallconstitute anoffence punishable
byafineof...F15,000".
Inaddition, Article L.623-35 oftheCPIprovides thatviolation ofaprocedure atastage that
concerns protection oftheinterests ofnational defence ispunishable byafineofF30,000 (which is
notcombined withthetermofimprisonment mentioned above unless theviolation hasprejudiced the
interests ofnational defence).
Theprovisions ofArticles 411-6 to8ofthenewCriminal Code mayapply.
- Trade secrets
Thefinespecified inArticle L.621-1 oftheCPI, which iscombined withtheterm of
imprisonment, amounts toF200,000. Theprovisions ofArticles 411-6 to8ofthenewCriminal Code
alsoapply where appropriate.
- Seizure,forfeitureanddestructionofinfringinggoodsandmaterialsandimplements
fortheir productionIP/N/6/FRA/1
Page22
- Industrial designs
Articles L.521-3 andL.521-3-1 oftheCPIprovide that,evenifthedefendant isreleased,
theobjects infringing rights maybeconfiscated and,intheevent ofconviction also"theinstruments
having served specifically tomanufacture theincriminated articles".
- Marks
Under Article L.716-8-1 oftheCPI"Officers ofthejudicial police may, assoonasoffences
under Articles L.716-9 andL.716-10 havebeenreported, effect theseizure ofgoods unlawfully
manufactured, imported, stocked, placed onsale, delivered orsupplied, andofanymaterial and
equipment specially installed forthepurposes ofsuchunlawful acts." Moreover Article L.716-14
oftheCPIauthorizes thecourt toorder thattheconfiscated goods bedelivered uptotheowner of
themark thathasbeeninfringed, without prejudice toanydamages, orthatthegoods bedestroyed.
- Other
- Marks
Articles L.716-11-1, L.716-11-2 andL.716-12 oftheCPIrepeat alltheprovisions described
above forindustrial designs, making themapplicable tomarks (including those onthecriminal liability
oflegalpersons).
Furthermore, Article L.716-13 oftheCPIgives thecourtthepossibility ofordering theposting
ofthedecision inaccordance withtheconditions laiddown inthesecond paragraph ofArticle L.335-6
oftheCPI(concerning copyright).
- Geographical indications anddesignations oforigin
Therecognized offence ofaffixing, altering ormisusing ageographical indication ordesignation
oforigin mayleadtotheposting ofthedecision anditsfullorpartial publication innewspapers specified
bythejudge, attheexpense oftheperson convicted (paragraph 2ofL.115-16 oftheConsumer Code).
- Industrial designs
Article L.521-4 oftheCPIprovides that"...thecourt mayorder thetotalorpartial, permanent
ortemporary closure, foraperiod notexceeding fiveyears oftheestablishment thathasserved for
thecommission oftheoffence" andspecifies themeasures tobetaken ifstaffaredismissed, atthe
expense oftheperson convicted. Iftheoffence isrepeated, inaddition todoubling thepenalties, the
second paragraph ofArticle 521-6 oftheCPIprovides that"The guilty parties may...bedeprived,
foraperiod notexceeding fiveyears, oftherighttoelectandbeelected tocommercial courts, chambers
ofcommerce andindustry andprofessional chambers andtojointconciliation boards."
Thepenalties provided under Article 131-39 ofthenewCriminal Code, forcriminal liability
oflegalpersons, apply.
- Patents
Iftheoffence isrepeated, inaddition todoubling ofthepenalties, thesecond paragraph of
Article L.615-14-1 oftheCPIprovides that"The guilty parties may...inaddition bedeprived, for
aperiod notexceeding fiveyears, oftherighttoelectandbeelected tocommercial courts, chambers
ofcommerce andindustry andprofessional chambers andtojointconciliation boards."IP/N/6/FRA/1
Page23
- Trade secrets
Paragraph 2ofArticle L.152-7 oftheLabour Code prescribes that"Thecourt mayalsoorder,
asacomplementary penalty, thedeprivation ofcivic, civilandfamily rights foramaximum period
offiveyears asprovided byArticle 131-26 oftheCriminal Code".
25. Describeprovisionsgoverningthelengthandanycostofproceedings.Provideanyavailable
dataontheactual duration ofproceedings andtheir cost, ifany.
Seereply toquestion 8.
II. LITERARY AND ARTISTIC PROPERTY RIGHTS
Civil andadministrative procedures andremedies
(a) Civil judicial procedures andremedies
1. Specify thecourts which have jurisdiction overIPRinfringement cases
Preliminary remark:
Thefirstparagraph ofArticle L.331-1 oftheCPIprovides that"Alldisputes relative tothe
application oftheprovisions ofPartOneofthisCode which arewithin thejurisdiction ofthecivil
courts shallbesubmitted tothecompetent courts, without prejudice totherightoftheinjured party
toinstitute criminal proceedings under thegeneral rulesoflaw." Aplaintiff whose literary andartistic
rights have been infringed mayinstitute civilorcriminal proceedings andthefirstparagraph of
Article L.331-1 oftheCPIrefers tothegeneral rules oflawgoverning thesharing ofjurisdiction
between administrative andcivilcourts.
Civil courts which havejurisdiction overIPRinfringement cases
TheCode doesnotprescribe thesolejurisdiction ofFirstInstance Courts forinfringement
ofliterary andartistic property rights andthegeneral rulesoflawconcerning thesharing ofjurisdiction
andgeographical scope apply.
Inprinciple, aFirstInstance Court hasjurisdiction foralllitigation involving claims exceeding
F30,000, whereas theCourt ofInstance iscompetent tohearcases involving asmaller amount (see
Article 321-1 oftheCode oftheOrganization ofJustice). Commercial courts havejurisdiction ifthe
dispute isbetween twotraders. However, ifthedispute involves onenatural person andatrader, the
plaintiff whoisanatural person hastheoption ofbringing thecasetotheCourt ofFirstInstance or
thecommercial court.
Industrial tribunals havejurisdiction inallindividual cases relating toalabour contract.
Administrative courts withjurisdiction forinfringement ofliterary andartistic property rights
Inaccordance withthegeneral rules oflaw,administrative courts havejurisdiction tohear
cases ofinfringement involving public lawpersons.IP/N/6/FRA/1
Page24
Exceptions
Thesecond paragraph ofArticle L.113.9 oftheCPIgives solejurisdiction totheFirstInstance
Court oftheregistered place ofbusiness oftheemployer incases relating toeconomic rights insoftware
anditsdocumentation created byemployees intheexercise oftheirduties.
Article L.122.9 oftheCPIprovides thatFirstInstance Courts should hearcases ofmanifest
abuse intheexercise ornon-exercise oftherights ofexploitation byadeceased author 'srepresentatives
andanydispute between suchrepresentatives.
ThePresident ofaFirstInstance Court alone isallowed todecide uponmatters ofinfringement
seizure inthecases specified inArticle L.332.1 oftheCPI,totheexclusion ofallother courts.
2. Which persons have standing toassert IPRs?
Inliterary andartistic property law,thefollowing persons areempowered toassert theirrights:
(1) Owners ofrights: authors, performers, producers ofphonograms andvideograms,
andaudiovisual communication enterprises, butonlytotheextent thattheyhavenot
beendeprived oftheireconomic rights. Inanyevent, theartist andperformer retain
therightofaction related tomoral rights.
(2) Assignees ofrights mayassert theirliterary andartistic property rights iftheeconomic
rights havebeentransferred tothem.
(3) According toArticle L.331.1 oftheCPI,regularly constituted bodies forprofessional
defence areentitled toinstitute legalproceedings todefend theinterests entrusted to
themunder theirstatutes. Thesame applies tocivilcompanies forthecollection and
distribution ofroyalties andrelated rights (Article L.321.1 oftheCPI).
(4) TheMinister responsible forculture mayreferamatter tothecourts intheabsence
ofarecognized representative orheir(Articles L.122.9 andL.112.2 oftheCPI).
(5) According toArticle L.331.3 oftheCPI,theNational Centre forCinematography
mayexercise therights acknowledged forthecivilparty withrespect totheoffence
ofinfringement ofanaudiovisual workwhere thepublic proceedings havebeeninitiated
bythepublic prosecutor orbytheinjured party.
How maytheyberepresented?
Inaccordance withthegeneral rules oflaw,theparties must berepresented byanattorney
when thedispute comes before aFirstInstance Court. Anattorney isalsonecessary incases being
heard byadministrative courts when thereisaclaim forcompensation. Ontheother hand, anattorney
isnotrequired ifthedispute isheard byaCourt ofInstance, acommercial courtoranindustrial tribunal.
Inproceedings heard inchambers, theparties mayputtheirowncaseandthelawdoesnotcontain
anyspecial provisions regarding theirrepresentation (except inParis, where according toajudicial
decision cases inchambers following asummons areputbyalawyer).
Arethere requirements formandatory personal appearances before thecourt bytheright
holder?IP/N/6/FRA/1
Page25
Thegeneral rules oflawinthisrespect aretobefound inChapter IIIoftheNewCode of
Civil Procedure (NCPC). Article 184thereof provides that"The judge may, inallmatters, order the
parties, oroneofthem, toappear inperson." Thesubsequent Articles (uptoArticle 198)complete
thisprovision.
3. What authority dothejudicial authorities have toorder, attherequest ofanopposing
party, aparty toaproceeding toproduce evidence which lieswithin itscontrol?
Thegeneral rules oflawapply. Article 11oftheNCPC (tobefound inBook I,Provisions
Common toallCourts) states that:
"The parties arebound tocooperate intheinvestigation, leaving thejudge todraw any
conclusions intheevent ofanabstention orrefusal.
Ifoneparty withholds anitemofevidence, thejudge may, attherequest oftheother party,
require himtoproduce itunder penalty ofafine,ifneedbe.Hemay, attherequest ofone
oftheparties, demand ororder, under thesame penalty, ifnecessary, theproduction ofall
documents inthepossession ofthirdparties where there isnolawful impediment."
Thesubtitle ofTitle VIIoftheNCPC (thejudicial administration ofthemeans ofproof)
concerns theevidence (exchange ofdocuments between theparties andobtaining documents heldby
athirdparty). Article 132oftheNCPC provides that"Theparty whorelies onadocument mustmake
itavailable toevery other party totheproceedings. Themaking available ofthedocuments mustbe
spontaneous." Articles 133to142givefurther details onthisaspect. Forexample, thejudge may
order aparty tocommunicate thedocuments onpainofafine.
Article 143oftheNCPC states that"The factsuponwhich theresolution ofthesuitdepends,
may, attherequest oftheparties orsuasponte ,bethesubject ofanyorder ofinvestigation legally
permissible." Pursuant tothesubsequent Article, theinvestigation order mayberendered whenever
thejudge lackssufficient basistomake aruling. Lastly, Article 145provides that"Ifthereisalegitimate
reason topreserve ortoestablish, before anyproceedings, themeans ofproving factsuponwhich the
resolution ofasuitmight depend, orders ofinvestigation legally permissible mayberendered atthe
request ofanyinterested party, bypetition orbyaninterim order".
Moreover, forintellectual property there isaspecial procedure fordealing withthemeans
ofproof, namely, infringement seizure. Thisisallowed byArticles L.332.1 toL.332.4 oftheCPI.
Ifawork isunlawfully reproduced, infringement seizure maybeordered byapolice
commissioner, butinother cases citedinArticle L.332.1 (seereply toquestion 10),aswellasinthe
caseofsoftware (Article L.334.4 oftheCPI), itmustbeauthorized bythePresident oftheFirstInstance
Court through anorder issued ondemand anditmaybenon-contentious (seeArticle 493oftheNCPC,
which defines anexparte order).
Inthecaseofcopyright andsoftware, infringement seizure consists either ofactual seizure
ofcopies ordescriptive seizure (Article L.332.1 oftheCPIforcopyright andL.332.4 forsoftware).
Asfarascopyright isconcerned, ifthedistrainer failstosubmit thematter tothecompetent
court within 30daysofseizure, thedistrainee orthegarnishee mayrequest thePresident oftheFirst
Instance Court, acting inchambers, tolifttheseizure (Article L332.3 oftheCPI).
Inthecaseofsoftware, descriptive seizure andactual seizure become nullandvoidifthere
isnowritorsummons within 2weeks oftheseizure (Article L.332.4 oftheCPI).IP/N/6/FRA/1
Page26
ThePresident oftheFirstInstance Court maymake authorization tocarry outtheseizure subject
topriordeposit ofadequate security bytheperson requesting seizure (lastparagraph ofArticle L.332.1
oftheCPI).
Asfarasrelated rights areconcerned, theCode doesnotprovide foranyinfringement seizure
procedure, thusthegeneral rulesoflawapply. Nevertheless, Article L.335.1 oftheCPIauthorizes
competent police officers toeffect seizure ofunlawfully produced phonograms andvideograms after
having established theoffences referred toinArticle L.335.4 oftheCPI(seereply toquestion 10).
4. What means exist toidentify andprotect confidential information brought forward as
evidence?
Frenchlawdoesnotcontainanyspecialprovisionsonprotectingtheconfidentialityofinformation
provided injudicial proceedings concerning IPRs. TheNCPC 'sgeneral provisions allow either the
judge inchambers orthejudge directing thepreparation ofthetrial(whose powers arebroader and
whoactswhen investigation isrequired before sending thecasetotrial)totakethemeasures requested
bytheparties inthisrespect.
Article 435oftheNCPC allows ajudge todecide that,under certain circumstances, thehearings
should beheldorshould continue inchambers.
5. Describetheremediesthatmaybeorderedbythejudicialauthoritiesandcriteria,legislative
orjurisprudential, fortheir use:
- Injunctions
Thepurpose ofremedies orcivilpenalties istoendtheinfringement andcompensate forthe
prejudice caused. Thejudge mustfirstofallprohibit anycontinuance oftheinfringing acts.Prohibition,
which isnotincluded inthelistofremedies inthequestionnaire, isnevertheless thefirstpossible penalty.
Judges mayaddinjunctions totheprohibition measures inorder toensure thattheirdecisions arecarried
out.
Fines, which areaspecial formofinjunction, aremuch more commonly usedasaprovisional
measure orforthepurpose ofterminating actsofunfair competition.
There arenospecial provisions onIPRs. Consequently, thegeneral rulesoflawoninjunctions
apply (Chapter IofTitle IVoftheNCPC deals withenjoinment inArticles 1425-1 to1425-9).
Article 1425-4, inparticular, states that"Where thejudge considers that,onthebasisofthedocuments
produced, there aregrounds forthedemand, heissues anorder ofenjoinment thatisnotsubject to
appeal. Hedefines thepurpose oftheobligation andthetime-limit andconditions within which it
mustbecarried out.Moreover, theorder specifies theplace, dateandtimeofthehearing atwhich
thecasewillbeconsidered, unless theplaintiff states thattheenjoinment order hasbeencarried out."
According toArticle 1425-7 oftheNCPC "Where theenjoinment order hasbeencarried out
within thetime-limit fixed, theplaintiff informs theclerk ofthecourt accordingly. Thecaseisthen
withdrawn. Intheabsence ofsuchinformation andiftheplaintiff isnotpresent atthehearing without
justifying hisabsence, thecourt declares theenjoinment tobenullandvoid...".
- Damages, including recovery ofprofits, andexpenses, including attorney 'sfees
Inaccordance with thegeneral rules oflaw,compensation fortheprejudice caused by
infringement isdealtwithaccording totherulesoncivilliability laiddown inArticles 1382and1383IP/N/6/FRA/1
Page27
oftheCivil Code. Forcases involving literary andartistic property rights, however, thevictim of
infringement hasachoice between thecompensation provided inordinary lawandseizure.
Article L.335-7 oftheCPIprovides that,ifthere hasbeeninfringement, "...theequipment, the
infringing articles andthereceipts thathavebeenconfiscated shallbehanded tothevictim orhis
successors intitletocompensate themfortheprejudice theyhavesuffered; theremaining indemnity,
ortheentire indemnity ifthereisnoconfiscation ofequipment, infringing articles orofreceipts, shall
besettled through ordinary channels".
Withregard toattorneys 'fees,traditional caselawisthat"inorder toestimate thecompensation
duebytheinfringer, theirrecoverable costspaidoutbytheauthor toensure respect forhisrights shall
betaken intoaccount".
- Destruction orother disposal ofinfringing goods andmaterials/implements for
their production
Pursuant tothegeneral rulesoflaw,thejudge isempowered toorder allappropriate measures
forcompensation inkindandcantherefore order thedestruction ordisposal ofthegoods.
Asregards literary andartistic property, thequestion ofwhether civilcourts canorder the
seizure provided forincriminal lawunder Articles L.335-6 andL.335-7 oftheCPIhasbeensettled.
According tolegalprecedents, themeasure maybeordered bythecivilcourts separately from any
criminal penalties. Civil courts maytherefore order theconfiscation ofallorpartoftheproceeds
obtained byreason oftheinfringement, aswellastheconfiscation ofallphonograms, videograms,
articles andcopies thatareinfringing orhave been unlawfully reproduced andoftheequipment
specifically installed forthepurpose ofcommitting theoffence.
- Anyother remedies
Inthecaseofliterary andartistic property, ajudge mayorder allappropriate compensation
measures inkind, including thepublication ofsentences andother measures.
6. Inwhat circumstances, ifany, dojudicial authorities have theauthority toorder the
infringer toinform theright holder oftheidentity ofthird persons involved intheproduction
anddistribution ofthegoods orservices found tobeinfringing andoftheirchannels ofdistribution?
Such ameasure, taken intheform ofaninjunction, would becontrary totheprinciple of
presumption ofinnocence andtherighttoremain silent, which arerecognized incriminal lawinFrance.
AttheEuropean level, twodecisions, onebytheEuropean Court ofHuman Rights (Funcke
vs.France, 25February 1993), andtheother bytheCourt ofJustice oftheEuropean Communities
(Orkem case,18October 1989) confirm thataninvestigation measure cannot impose self-incrimination
byanaccused person inrelation tofactsthatstillhavetobeproved.
7. Describe provisions relating totheindemnification ofdefendants wrongfully enjoined.
There arenospecial provisions inliterary andartistic property law. Nevertheless, legal
precedents show thatinfringement proceedings wrongfully instituted inbadfaithmaygiveriseto
counter-claims onthebasisofArticle 1382oftheCivil Code. Thecourts maythenorder thepayment
ofdamages tothedefendant andpublication ofextracts fromthesentence attheexpense oftheplaintiff.
Towhat extent arepublic authorities and/or officials liable insuchasituation andwhat
"remedial measures" areapplicable tothem?IP/N/6/FRA/1
Page28
There arenospecial provisions relating toliterary andartistic property asfarastheliability
ofpublic authorities and/or officials isconcerned.
8. Describe provisions governing thelength andcostofproceedings. Provide anyavailable
dataontheactual duration ofproceedings andtheir cost.
Seereply toPartIquestion 8.
(b) Administrative procedures andremedies
9. Reply totheabove questions inrelation toanyadministrative procedures onthemerits
andremedies thatmayresult from these procedures.
There isnoprovision intheCode allowing theadministration toimplement procedures relating
tothemerits ofthecaseortoimpose administrative penalties.
Provisional measures
(a) Judicial measures
10. Describe thetypes ofprovisional measures thatjudicial authorities mayorder, andthe
legal basis forsuchauthority.
Inrelation tocopyright:
Inthecontext ofaninfringement seizure procedure, thefirstparagraph ofArticle L.332-1
oftheCPIallows police commissioners toseize "...copies constituting anunlawful reproduction of
thework".
Thesecond paragraph ofthisArticle alsostates that:
"Ifseizure willhavetheeffect ofretarding orsuspending public performances which arein
progress orwhich havealready beenannounced, aspecial authorization must beobtained from the
President oftheFirstInstance Court, byanorder issued ondemand. ThePresident oftheFirstInstance
Court mayalsoorder, inthesame form:
1. Suspension ofallmanufacture inprogress serving theunlawful reproduction ofawork;
2. seizure, whatever thedayortime, ofthecopies constituting anunlawful reproduction
ofawork, whether already manufactured orintheprocess ofmanufacture, ofthe
receipts obtained andofcopies unlawfully used;
3. seizure ofreceipts fromanyreproduction, performance ordissemination, byanymeans
whatsoever, ofawork ofthemind, carried outinviolation oftheauthor 'srights."
Inrelation tosoftware:
Thefirstparagraph ofArticle L.332-4 oftheCPIprovides thatinfringement seizure "...shall
becarried outunder anorder issued onrequest bythePresident oftheFirstInstance Court. The
President shallauthorize distraint where appropriate".
Inconnection withrelated rights:IP/N/6/FRA/1
Page29
Article L.335-1 oftheCPIprovides that"Assoonasoffences under Article L.335-4 ...have
been established, thecompetent police officers mayeffect seizure oftheunlawfully reproduced
phonograms andvideograms, ofthecopies andarticles manufactured orimported unlawfully andof
theequipment specially installed forthepurpose ofsuchacts."
Inthecaseofanordinary lawaction inchambers, thejudge sitting inchambers iscompetent
toorder anypreventive measures necessary inorder toprevent imminent injury thatmaybecaused
totheauthor.
11. Inwhat circumstances maysuchmeasures beordered inaudita altera parte?
Theonlyexception totheadversarial principle asfarasliterary andartistic property isconcerned
relates toinfringement seizure procedure. Allthemeasures provided inArticles L.332.1 andL.332.4
oftheCPIcantherefore betaken inaudita altera parte (seeArticle 493oftheNCPC, which provides
thatanexparte order isaninterim decision taken inaudita altera parte).
12. Describe themain procedures fortheinitiation, ordering andmaintenance inforce of
provisional measures, inparticular relevant time-limits andsafeguards toprotect thelegitimate
interests ofthedefendant.
Procedures forinitiating action
Inrelation tocopyright:
Inaninfringementseizureprocedure,ArticleL.332.1oftheCPIprovidesthatcopiesconstituting
anunlawful reproduction ofthework maybeseized "attherequest ofanauthor ofawork ...orhis
successors intitle" addressed tothepolice commissioner orthecourts inplaces where there areno
police commissioners.
Special authorization bythePresident oftheFirstInstance Court, through anorder issued on
demand, must beobtained intheother cases referred tointhisArticle andfortheeffective seizure
ofsoftware (seereply toquestion 10).
Asfarasrelated rights areconcerned, thelawdoesnotprovide foranyinfringement seizure
procedure, therefore, thegeneral rules oflawapply. Article L.335.1 oftheCPI,however, allows
theowners ofrelated rights, through police officers, toeffect seizure ofphonograms andvideograms
unlawfully reproduced orimported, aswellastheequipment usedtoreproduce them.
Time-limits formaintaining provisional measures inforce
Forcopyright: Inrelation toinfringement seizure procedure, Article L.332.3 oftheCPI
provides that"Ifthedistrainer failstosubmit thematter tothecompetent courtwithin 30daysofseizure,
thelifting oftheseizure maybeordered bythePresident oftheFirstInstance Court, acting inchambers."
Inthecaseofsoftware, Article L.332-4 provides thatinfringement seizure shallbenulland
voidfailing awritofsummons within 2weeks oftheseizure.
Forrelatedrights,nospecialtime-limitformaintainingprovisionalmeasuresinforceisprovided
intheCPI.IP/N/6/FRA/1
Page30
Safeguards toprotect thelegitimate interests ofthedefendant
Forcopyright,thethirdparagraphofArticleL.332.1oftheCPIprovidesthatinaninfringement
seizure procedure, "When issuing theorders referred toabove [cf.thecases mentioned inthereply
toquestion 10],thePresident oftheFirstInstance Court mayorder theperson requesting seizure to
provide prior adequate security."
Thefirstparagraph ofArticle L.332-2 oftheCPIgives thedistrainee orthegarnishee the
possibility ofrequesting thePresident oftheFirstInstance Court, within 30daysofthereport ofseizure
orofthedateoftheorder referred toinArticle L.332-1, "...toorder thelifting oftheseizure or
tolimititseffect oragain toauthorize resumption ofmanufacture orofthepublic performances, under
theauthority ofanadministrator appointed asreceiver, toholdtheproceeds from suchmanufacture
orperformance onbehalf oftheperson towhom thework belongs". Ifheallows therequest ofthe
distrainee orgarnishee, thePresident oftheFirstInstance Court, acting inchambers, mayorder the
petitioner todeposit asumasaguarantee foranydamages towhich theauthor might beentitled (second
paragraph ofArticle L.332.2 oftheCPI).
13. Describe provisions governing thelength andcostofproceedings. Provide anyavailable
dataontheactual duration ofproceedings andtheir cost.
Seereply toPartIquestion 8.
(b) Administrative measures
14. Reply totheabove questions inrelation toanyadministrative provisional measures.
Administrative bodies arenotempowered toorder provisional measures inrelation to
infringement ofcopyright orrelated rights.
Nevertheless, Article L.331.2 oftheCPIonreports oninfringement provides thatproof of
theexistence of"...anyinfringement oftheprovisions ofBooks I,IIandIII...maybeprovided by
thestatement ofasworn agent designated, asappropriate, bytheNational Centre forCinematography,
bytheprofessional bodies ofauthors orbythesocieties [forthecollection anddistribution ofauthors '
royalties]. Such agents shallbeapproved bytheMinister responsible forculture ...".
Special requirements related toborder measures
15. Indicate forwhich goods itispossible toapply forthesuspension bythecustoms authorities
oftherelease intofreecirculation, inparticular whether these procedures areavailable alsoin
respect ofgoods which involve infringements ofintellectual property rights other thancounterfeit
trademark orpirated copyright goods asdefined intheTRIPS Agreement (footnote toArticle 51).
Specify, together with relevant criteria, anyimports excluded from theapplication ofsuch
procedures (such asgoods from another member ofacustoms union, goods intransit ordeminimis
imports). Dotheprocedures apply toimports ofgoods putonthemarket inanother country
byorwiththeconsent oftheright holder andtogoods destined forexportation?
Pursuant toArticle L.335-10 oftheCPI,thecustoms administration may,atthewritten request
ofanowner ofcopyright oraneighbouring right, withhold inthecourse ofitsinspections goods alleged
byhimtobeinfringing thatright.IP/N/6/FRA/1
Page31
Theexhaustion ofrights within theEuropean Union invalidates theapplication ofmeasures
tosuspend marketing provided thatthegoods forwhich therequest hasbeenmade arenotinfringing
goods orhavebeenoffered forsaleontheCommunity market withtheconsent oftheowner ofthe
rights.
16. Provide adescription ofthemain elements oftheprocedures relating tothesuspension
oftherelease ofgoods bycustoms authorities, inparticular thecompetent authorities (Article 51),
therequirements foranapplication (Article 52)andvarious requirements related totheduration
ofsuspension (Article 55). How have Articles 53(security orequivalent assurance), 56
(indemnification oftheimporter andoftheowner ofthegoods) and57(right ofinspection and
information) been implemented?
Competent authority: thecustoms administration, more specifically theDirection Nationale
duRenseignement etdesEnquêtes Douanières (DRNED) (National Directorate ofCustoms Information
andEnquiries).
Requirements foranapplication: written application bytheowner ofcopyright orarelated
right, accompanied byproof ofhisrightandadescription ofthegoods allegedly infringing thatright
(Article L.335.10 oftheCPI). Article R.335.1 oftheCPIfixestheprocedures fortherequest and
states thatit"may bemade priortotheimport oftheallegedly infringing goods intoFrance. Inwhich
case, itisvalid foroneyearandmayberenewed".
Requirements relating totheduration ofsuspension: Article L.335.10 oftheCPIprescribes
thatthewithholding measure requested bytheowner ofacopyright orarelated right..."shall belifted
asofrightwhere theplaintiff fails, within 10working daysfollowing notification ofthewithholding
ofthegoods, toprove tothecustoms services:
- Either thatprecautionary measures under Article L.332-1 havebeentaken;
- orthathehasinstituted proceedings before thecivilcourtorthecourtofmisdemeanours
andhasprovided thenecessary guarantees tocover hisliability intheevent ofthe
infringement claim being eventually considered unfounded."
Right ofinspection andinformation: inthecaseofliterary andartistic property, thelast
paragraph ofArticle L.335.10 oftheCPIprovides that"Forthepurpose oftheinstitution ofthelegal
proceedings referred tointheforegoing paragraph, theplaintiff mayrequire thecustoms administration
tocommunicate thenames andaddresses ofthesender, theimporter andtheconsignee ofthegoods
withheld, oroftheholder thereof, andalsothequantity thereof, notwithstanding theprovisions of
Article 59bisoftheCustoms Code concerning theprofessional secrecy towhich officials ofthecustoms
administration arebound."
17. Describe provisions governing thelength andcostofproceedings. Provide anyavailable
dataontheactual duration ofproceedings andtheir cost. How longisthevalidity ofdecisions
bythecompetent authorities forthesuspension oftherelease ofgoods intofreecirculation?
Intheabsence ofspecial provisions intheCPIoncopyright andrelated rights, thegeneral
rules oflawapply.
18. Arecompetent authorities required toactupon their owninitiative and,ifso,inwhat
circumstances? Arethere anyspecial provisions applicable toexofficio action?
Seereply toquestion 17above.IP/N/6/FRA/1
Page32
19. Describe theremedies thatthecompetent authorities havetheauthority toorder andany
criteria regulating their use.
Seereply toquestion 17above.
Criminal procedures
20. Specify thecourts which have jurisdiction overcriminal actsofinfringement ofIPRs.
Inthecaseofliterary andartistic property, Article L.331.1 oftheCPIallows theinjured party
"toinstitute criminal proceedings under thegeneral rules oflaw", i.e.before amagistrate 'scourt in
thefirstinstance.
21. Inrespect ofwhich infringements ofwhich intellectual property rights arecriminal
procedures andpenalties available?
Theprovisions onliterary andartistic property aretobefound inArticles L.335.1 toL.335.9
oftheCPIandArticles 323.1 to323.7, 410.1 and411.6 to411.8 ofthenewCode ofCriminal
Procedure.
Forcopyright: thefirstparagraph ofArticle L.335.2 oftheCPIprovides that"Any edition
ofwritings, musical compositions, drawings, paintings orother printed orengraved production made
inwhole orinpartcontrary tothelawsandregulations relating totheproperty ofauthors shallconstitute
aninfringement." "The sale, exportation andimportation ofinfringing works" alsoconstitute
infringement (third paragraph ofArticle L.335.2 oftheCPI).
Pursuant toArticle L.335.3 oftheCPI"Any reproduction, performance ordissemination of
aworkofthemind, byanymeans whatsoever, inviolation oftheauthor 'srights asdefined andregulated
bylawshallalsoconstitute aninfringement. Theviolation ofanyoftherights ofanauthor ofsoftware
asdefined inArticle L.122-6 shallalsoconstitute aninfringement."
Forrelated rights: Article L.335.4 oftheCPIstates thatthefollowing areoffences: "Any
fixation, reproduction, communication ormaking available tothepublic, onpayment orfreeofcharge,
oranytelediffusion ofaperformance, aphonogram, avideogram, oraprogram made without
authorization, where suchisrequired, oftheperformer, thephonogram orvideogram producer or
theaudiovisual communication enterprise ...".
ThisArticle alsoimposes penalties for"Any importation orexportation ofphonograms or
videograms made without theauthorization oftheproducer ortheperformer, where suchisrequired
..."(second paragraph ofArticle L.335-4), and"Failure topaytheremuneration duetotheauthor,
theperformer orthephonogram orvideogram producer inrespect ofprivate copying orpublic
communication orofthetelediffusion ofphonograms ..."(third paragraph ofArticle L.335.4).
Other relevant textsareArticle 79-1ofLawNo.86-1067 of30September 1986 onfreedom
ofcommunication, implemented byLawNo.92-1336 of16December 1992onpenalties forunlawfully
receiving broadcast programmes defined inthefollowing terms: "themanufacture, importation for
saleorrental, offering forsale,possessing withaview toselling, ortheinstallation ofequipment,
materials, devices orinstruments wholly orpartly designed fortheunlawful receiving ofbroadcast
programmes when theseprogrammes arerestricted toaspecified audience thathasaccess tothemsubject
toremuneration paidtotheperson operating theservice".IP/N/6/FRA/1
Page33
Articles 323.1 to7ofthenewCriminal Code punish infringement of"automatic dataprocessing
systems". Theoffences covered bythese Articles are"thefactofunlawfully accessing orremaining
inallorpartofanautomatic dataprocessing system, thefactofhindering oraltering theoperation
ofsuchasystem orthefactofunlawfully entering dataintosuchasystem orunlawfully modifying
ordeleting thedatacontained therein".
According toArticle 323.7 "attempts tocarry outtheoffences specified inArticles 323.1 to
323.3 shallbesubject tothesame penalties".
Lastly, Article 410oftheNCP includes theessential elements ofFrance 'scultural heritage
amongthecountry'sfundamentalinterests.Violationsoftheseinterestsintheformoffurnishingobjects,
documents, computer data...toaforeign power incurs thecriminal penalties laiddown inArticles 411.6
to8oftheNCP.
22. Which public authorities areresponsible forinitiating criminal proceedings? Arethey
required todothisontheir owninitiative and/or inresponse tocomplaints?
Thepublic prosecutor 'soffice mayinitiate criminal proceedings. Ifthere hasbeen an
infringement seizure, acopyofthereport ontheseizure istransmitted totheprosecuting authorities
andthepublic prosecutor 'soffice maydecide onitsowninitiative toinstitute proceedings against the
infringer before thecriminal courts. Inpractice, thepublic prosector 'soffice ispartytotheinfringement
proceedings iftheauthor orhissuccessors intitlebrings thematter before thecriminal courts, by
becoming aplaintiff orbyadirect summons addressed totheinfringer.
23. Doprivate persons have standing toinitiate criminal proceedings and,ifso,who?
Pursuant tothegeneral rulesoflaw,owners ofrights andtheirsuccessors intitlemayinitiate
criminal proceedings. Inaddition, thesecond paragraph ofArticle L.321-1 oftheCPIallows duly
established societies forthecollection anddistribution ofauthors 'royalties andrelated rights totake
legalaction todefend therights forwhich theyareresponsible under theirstatutes. Thesame applies
toprofessional associations (second paragraph ofArticle L.331.1 oftheCPI).
24. Specify, bycategory ofIPRandtypeofinfringement where necessary, thepenalties and
other remedies thatmaybeimposed:
Inthecaseofliterary andartistic property rights:
- Imprisonment
Article L.335.2 oftheCPImakes "Infringement inFrance ofworks published inFrance or
abroad" and"The sale,exportation andimportation ofinfringing works" punishable byatwo-year
prison termandthefinespecified below.
Article 335.4 oftheCPIimposes thesame penalties for"Any fixation, reproduction,
communication ormaking available tothepublic, onpayment orfreeofcharge, oranytelediffusion
ofaperformance, aphonogram, avideogram oraprogram made without authorization, where such
isrequired, oftheperformer, thephonogram orvideogram producer ortheaudiovisual communication
enterprise ...".
Article L.335-9 oftheCPIdoubles thepenalties iftheoffences defined inArticles L.335-2
toL.335-4 arerepeated oriftheoffender hasbeencontractually bound totheinjured party.IP/N/6/FRA/1
Page34
Unlawfully accessing orremaining inallorpartofanautomatic dataprocessing system is
punishable byaone-year termofimprisonment (Article 323.1 oftheNCP). Hindering oraltering
theoperation ofsuchasystem orunlawfully entering data,unlawfully deleting ormodifying thedata
contained therein, arepunishable byathree-year prison term(Articles 323.2 and3oftheNCP).
Article 323.4 oftheNCP provides that"Participation inagroup setuporanunderstanding reached
forthepurpose ofpreparing oneormore oftheoffences specified inArticles 323.1 to323.3, ifone
ormore material factshaveoccurred, ispunishable bythesame penalties provided fortheoffence
itself orfortheoffence most severely punished."
- Monetary fines
Inthecaseofliterary andartistic property:
Theaforementioned offences concerning theproduction ordissemination ofworks, phonograms
orvideograms, arepunishable byafine(combined withthetermofimprisonment) ofF1,000,000.
Thesame fineisimposed inthecaseof"Failure topaytheremuneration duetotheauthor,
theperformer orphonogram orvideogram producer inrespect ofprivate copying orpublic
communication orofthetelediffusion ofphonograms ..."(third paragraph ofArticle L.335-4 ofthe
CPI).
Pursuant toArticle L.335-9 oftheCPI,these penalties aredoubled intheevent ofrepetition.
Article L.335-8 oftheCPIprovides forthecriminal liability oflegal persons forthe
aforementioned offences, andrefers tothenewCriminal Code. According toArticle 131-38 ofthis
Code, themaximum fineimposed onlegal persons isanamount corresponding to"five times that
specified fornatural persons under thelawthatpunishes theoffence", inthisparticular caseF5,000,000.
Unlawful access toanautomatic dataprocessing system issubject toafineofF100,000, in
addition toatermofimprisonment (Article 323-1 oftheNCP). Hindering theoperation orunlawful
alterationofthesystem'soperation,ortheunlawfulentry,deletionormodificationofdata,arepunishable
byafineofF300,000, combined withatermofimprisonment (Articles 323-2 and3oftheNCP).
Article 323-4 referred toabove imposes thesame penalties forparticipating inagroup of"hackers".
Article 323-6 oftheNCP provides forthecriminal liability oflegal persons byreferring to
Articles 131-38 and131-39 oftheNCP. Thefineapplicable tolegalpersons therefore varies from
F500,000 toF1,500,000 depending ontheoffence committed.
- Seizure,forfeitureanddestructionofinfringinggoodsandmaterialsandimplements
fortheir production
Inthecaseofliterary andartistic property:
Pursuant toArticles L.335-6 andL.335-7 oftheCPI,ifthere isaconviction "...thecourt
mayorder confiscation ofallorpartoftheproceeds obtained byreason oftheinfringement and
confiscation ofallphonograms, videograms, articles andcopies thatareinfringing orhave been
unlawfully reproduced andoftheequipment specifically installed forthepurpose ofcommitting the
offence" (first paragraph ofArticle L.335-6 oftheCPI).
Thereceipts,thearticlesandtheequipmentconfiscatedarehandedtothevictimorhissuccessors
intitletocompensate them, without prejudice topayment ofanindemnity (Article L.335-7 ofthe
CPI).IP/N/6/FRA/1
Page35
With regard toinfringement ofautomated databanks ordatabases bynatural persons, Article
323-5 oftheNCPprovides for"theconfiscation oftheobject usedortobeusedtocommit theoffence
ortheobject thatistheresult, withtheexception ofobjects liable toberestored".
- Other
Inthecaseofliterary andartistic property:
Thesecond paragraph ofArticle L.335-6 oftheCPIstates thatthecourt mayorder, atthe
costoftheconvicted person, theposting ofthejudgement, anditspublication infullorasextracts
insuchnewspapers asitmaydesignate, without thecosts ofsuchpublication exceeding theamount
ofthefineincurred.
Article L.335-5 oftheCPIprovides that"...thecourt mayorder thetotalorpartial, permanent
ortemporary closure, foraperiod notexceeding fiveyears, oftheestablishment thathasserved for
thecommission oftheoffence" andtheaccompanying measures, attheexpense oftheperson convicted,
ifstaffaredismissed.
With regard tothecriminal liability oflegal persons, Article L.335-8 oftheCPIrefers to
Article 131-39 oftheCriminal Code. Thelatter states thatlegalpersons other thanpublic lawlegal
persons orprofessional associations areliable tooneormore ofthefollowing penalties, combined
withtheconfiscation, publication andclosure referred toabove:
- Aban,either permanently orforaperiod offiveyears, ondirectly orindirectly
exercising oneormore professional orsocial activities;
- probation foramaximum period offiveyears;
- exclusion fromgovernment procurement, either permanently orforamaximum period
offiveyears;
- banonmakingapublicissue,eitherpermanentlyorforamaximumperiodoffiveyears;
- banonissuing cheques (subject tocertain limitations) orusing credit cards, fora
maximum period offiveyears.
Inthecaseofinfringement ofanautomatic dataprocessing system, Article 323-5 ofthenew
Criminal Code provides thatnatural persons whohavecommitted oneoftheaforementioned offences
should besubject tothefollowing penalties inaddition tothepenalties applicable tolegal persons
(including confiscation ofthearticles orequipment, publication ofthejudgement andclosure ofone
ormore ofthecompany 'sestablishments):
- Deprivation ofcivic, civilandfamily rights foramaximum period offiveyears;
- abanonholding public office orexercising theprofessional orsocial activity inwhich
orinthecourse ofwhich theoffence wascommitted, foramaximum period of
fiveyears.
Article 323-6 oftheNCP refers toArticle 131-39 inrespect ofpenalties other thanfines
applicable tolegalpersons.IP/N/6/FRA/1
Page36
25. Describeprovisionsgoverningthelengthandanycostofproceedings.Provideanyavailable
dataontheactual duration ofproceedings andtheir cost, ifany.
Seereply toPartIquestion 8.