RESTRICTED
WORLD TRADE IP/C/W/53
24February 1997
ORGANIZATION(97-0764)
Original: English Council forTrade-Related Aspects
ofIntellectual Property Rights
FOLLOW-UP TOTHE REVIEW OFLEGISLATION ON
COPYRIGHT AND RELATED RIGHTS
Questions posed bytheEuropean Communities andtheirMember States
BymeansofacommunicationfromthePermanentDelegationoftheCommissionoftheEuropean
Communities, dated 19February 1997, theSecretariat hasreceived further follow-up questions from
theEuropean Communities andtheirMember States posed totheUnited States ontheimplementation
oftheTRIPS Agreement withregard tocopyright andrelated rights intheUnited States.
_______________
1. CantheUSplease saywhether there havebeenanydevelopments relating toanyofthebills
listed inthereply toadditional question 2posed bytheEuropean Communities anditsMember States,
thatis,thebillswhich would extend theexemption provided forunder Section 110,Sub-section 5,
ofthe1976 USCopyright Act? Could theUSalsoclarify thelegal implications oftheproposed
exemptions? Furthermore, willtheUSGovernment ruleoutanysupport for,andpublicly oppose
further progress on,boththese billsandanyfuture billsattempting towiden theexemption from
copyright protection inrespect ofthepublic performance ofcopyright material byplaying abroadcast
including thematerial inpublic, and,ifnot,cantheUSplease explain whyanywidening ofthe
exemption would notconflict with: (i)thenormal exploitation ofthework, and,therefore, Article 13
ofTRIPS; and(ii)Article 11oftheBerne Convention which requires theexclusive rightofpublic
performance byanymeans tobeprovided formusical works?
2. Further totheanswer tofollow-up question 2posed bytheEuropean Communities andits
Member States, cantheUSplease confirm thatthenewfederal anti-bootlegging legislation applies
tofixations oftheperformances, taking place upto50years ago,andincluding performers whoare
nationals ofother WTO countries, sothatthemaking ofreproductions ofsuchfixations requires the
consent oftheperformers asrequired byArticle 14,paragraphs 1and6,ofTRIPS?
3. Further totheanswer tothefollow-up question 2mentioned inquestion 2above, cantheUS
please confirm whether allstates havelawsgiving protection consistent withArticle 14.1ofTRIPS
tonon-musical performers andwhether allstates provide thisprotection tofixations oftheperformances,
taking place upto50years ago,andincluding performers whoarenationals ofother WTO countries?
./.IP/C/W/53
Page2
4. Theanswer toquestion 8ofthequestions posed bytheEuropean Communities anditsMember
States andtheanswer tofollow-up question 8arenoted, butcantheUSplease explain howitjustifies
thestatement that"TRIPS doesnotcontain theconcept ofcountry oforigin" given thatArticle 5of
theBerne Convention, which doesinclude thisconcept, mustbecomplied withtomeettheterms of
Article 9ofTRIPS? Furthermore, cantheUSplease explain inmore detail howitjustifies theuse
oftheBerne Convention concept of"simultaneous publication" todecide whether works areofUS
origin andtherefore should notconstitute "restored works" given thatthewaythisconcept isused
intheUSexcludes some works firstpublished inother WTO countries from "restored work" status
whereas, asaresult ofthewaytheconcept isusedintheBerne Convention, some works which might
otherwise receive noprotection areincluded?
5. Theanswer toadditional question 1posed bytheEuropean Communities anditsMember States
isnoted, but,given thateventurning onhome receiving apparatus inashop orrestaurant sothat
customers canhearitmeans thatthemusic inthebroadcast isperformed tothepublic, howdoesthe
USreconcile Section 110,Sub-section 5,ofthe1976 UScopyright legislation withArticle 11ofthe
Berne Convention, bearing inmind thatArticle 11oftheBerne Convention mustbecomplied with,
duetoArticles 9and13oftheTRIPS Agreement?