RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONIP/C/W/185
21 June 2000
(00-2501)
Council for Trade-Related Aspects
of Intellectual Property RightsOriginal:  English
REVIEW OF LEGISLATION
Responses from Singapore to Questions posed by Australia,
the European Communities and their member States, Japan and the United States
By means of a communication from the Permanent Mission of Singapore, dated 9 June 2000,
the Secretariat has received the following responses to questions posed by Australia;  the European
Communities and their member States;  Japan; and the United States, as distributed in documentsIP/C/W/177, W/178/Add.1, W/173 and W/174 respectively.
______________
AUSTRALIA
A. COPYRIGHT AND RELATED RIGHTS
1. Are there any specific exceptions to copyright under the law of Singapore to allow use of
copyright materials by third parties for permitted purposes (such as research, education, fair use orfair dealing)?  Are there any significant judicial decisions with bearing on this issue?  Are there any
specific rules or findings concerning exceptions or limitations to copyright protection of computer
software?
Sections 35 to 72 of the Copyright Act, Cap 63 list the provisions governing acts that would
not constitute infringement of copyright works and governing statutory licences for educational
institutions, libraries and educational institutions assisting handicapped readers to do limited copying
for limited purposes.  Section 107 to Section 116 govern corresponding or similar acts that would not
constitute infringement of copyright in sound recordings, films and broadcasts.
There has been one reported case so far in relation to the issue of fair dealing for private study
or research (see the case of Aztech Systems Pte Ltd v Creative Technology Ltd  (High Court of
Singapore) [1996] 1 SLR 683) and Creative Technology Ltd v Aztech Systems Pte Ltd  [1997] 1 SLR
621 (Court of Appeal of Singapore) ).
Apart from what is stated above, there are no specific rules or findings concerning exceptions
or limitations to copyright protection of computer software.
2. To what extent does current copyright protection in Singapore cover the use and
dissemination of copyright works on digital networks  such as the Internet?  Are there any specific
provisions in copyright law concerning the digital on-line environment, and are there any significant
judicial or administrative decisions with bearing on this issue?IP/C/W/185
Page 2
This is not a TRIPS-related question.  However, with a view to sharing of information,
Singapore would like to indicate that it has implemented a major portion of the 1996 WIPO Copyright
Treaty and the WIPO Performances and Treaty Phonograms.  The implementing provisions are found
in the Copyright (Amendment) Act 1999 (No. 38 of 1999).  There are as yet no judicial or
administrative decisions bearing on the issue of the use and dissemination of copyright works ondigital networks.
B. TRADEMARKS
3. Are there any specific provisions in Singapore's laws and regulations, or any significant
judicial decisions, with bearing on the use of trademarks or geographical indications on digital
networks such as the Internet?  Are there any relevant decisions or other legal provisions concerningthe relationship between intern et domain names and trademarks or geographical indications?
This is not a TRIPS-related question. However, there are no specific provisions in
Singapore’s law or significant judicial decisions de aling with the use of trademarks or geographical
indications on digital networks such as the Internet.  There are also no judicial decisions or legalprovisions concerning the specific issue of the relationship between internet domain names and
trademarks or geographical indications.  Presently, such issues which arise will be dealt with in
accordance with existing legal provisions on trademarks or geographical indications.
C. CONTROL OF ANTI-COMPETITIVE PRACTICES
4. Does Singapore law provide for any specific measures concerning practices that constitute an
abuse of intellectual property rights?  Are there any applicable court decisions or other legal or
administrative guidelines?
Article 40 of the TRIPS Agreement allows WTO Member States to have, if they so wish,
legislation dealing with measures which may constitute an abuse of intellectual property rights having
an adverse impact on competition.  Singapore does not presently have such legislation.
THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES AND THEIR MEMBER STATES
A. COPYRIGHT AND RELATED RIGHTS
1. Please identify the exceptions to copyright and related rights contained in the Copyright Act,
notably for libraries, educational purposes, private use, use by government officials.  Please explain
in detail how they can be justified under th e TRIPS Agreement and the Berne Convention.  Please
provide, if any, major judicial decisions interpreting these provisions.
In relation to exceptions for use by libraries, Section 48 of the Copyright Act, Cap 63
provides that libraries can make a copy of a work in the libraries' collection for the limited purpose of
preservation against loss or deterioration, for the purpose of research, for the purpose of replacing a
work which has been lost or damaged, or for replacing a work which has been lost or stolen.
In relation to exceptions for educational use, the exceptions are limited to copying of
insubstantial amounts of less than 5% by educational institutions and for the limited purpose of a
course of education provided by the educational institution.  In addition, for copying of an article in a
periodical publication, there is the requirement (Section 201 of the Copyright Act, Cap 63) tomaintain a record of the amount of copying done.  That record is open to inspection by copyright
owners who may require the payment of equitable remuneration from the educational institution for
the copying done.IP/C/W/185
Page 3
In relation to exceptions for research or private use, Section 35 of the Copyright Act, Cap 63
provides that a fair dealing with a work for the limited purpose of research or private study shall not
constitute an infringement of copyright in the work.  In considering whether a dealing is a fair dealing,
Section 35(2) provides that the court shall have  regard to the following non-exclusive matters:
(a) the purpose and character of the dealing, including whether such dealing is of a
commercial nature or is for non-profit educational purposes;
(b) the nature of the work or adaptation;
(c) the amount and substantiality of the part copied taken in relation to the whole work or
adaptation; and
(d) the effect of the dealing upon the potential market for, or value of, the work or
adaptation.  The fair dealing exception is substantially similar to that found in Article
107 of the Copyright Law of the United States of America in Title 17 of the United
States Code.
In relation to exceptions for use by the Government, the exception is confined to usage by the
Government.  In addition, there is the duty on the pa rt of the Government to inform the owner of the
copyright of the usage as soon as possible and to comply with such terms as are worked out between
the Government and the copyright owner.
There has been one reported case so far in relation to the issue of fair dealing for private study
or research (see the cases of Aztech Systems Pte Lid v Creative Technology Ltd  [1996] 1 SLR 683)
(High Court of Singapore) and Creative Technology Ltd v Aztech Systems Pte Ltd  [1997] 1 SLR 621
(Court of Appeal of Singapore)).
2. Does the exception provided in Section 39(3) of the Copyright Act extend beyond personal
use by the program owner?
Section 39(3) of the Copyright Act, Cap 63 provides that the copy must be created as an
essential step in the utilisation of a computer program in conjunction with a machine and the copy
must not be used in any other manner.  The provision is intended to cover the incidental copying made
in a machine such as a computer when a computer program is run in conjunction with the machine.
3. What is the purpose of Section 40A of the Copyright Act and why is it applicable only to
imported products?
Section 40A of the Copyright Act, Cap 63 deals with the question of product packaging in
relation to imported items. It is applicable to imported items since it is intended to complement
Section 32 of the Copyright Act, Cap 63 which deals with the issue of infringement by importation.
4. The Copyright (Import Restrictions) Regu lations in force in Singapore (document
IP/N/1/SGP/C/6) make mention of Section 142 of th e Act, but the Copyright Act, revised edition 1988
(document IP/N/1/SGP/C/1) of which the Council for TRIPS has been notified, contains no
Section 142.  Please explain this.
The Copyright (Import Restrictions) Regulations and the old Section 142 of the Copyright
Act have both been repealed.IP/C/W/185
Page 4
B. TRADEMARKS
5. What guidance is available to rights holders in the interpretation of "implied consent
(conditional or otherwise)" referred to in Article 29(1) of the Trade Marks Act?
The expression "implied consent" is a frequently used term in common law jurisprudence. It
means that in the circumstances of the case the consent is taken to be given by implication. In theevent of a dispute, it is a question of fact to be decided on a case by case basis.
C. INDUSTRIAL DESIGNS
6. Please explain whether or not your legislation extends the protection to designs dictated
essentially by technical or functional considerations.  Please explain how textile designs areprotected.
Industrial design protection in Singapore is presently available through registration of the
design in the United Kingdom.  The governing legislation in Singapore is the United Kingdom
Designs (Protection) Act (Cap 339), which applies to Singapore the United Kingdom’s RegisteredDesign Act (1949), as amended by subsequent legislation in relation to registered designs.  In
accordance with the applicable UK legislation, designs dictated essentially by technical or functional
considerations are not protected.
In addition, Section 70 of the Copyright Act provides that it is not an infringement of an
artistic work if a useful article has been made out of the artistic work and has been industrially applied
for more than 15 years.  A "useful article" is defined in Section 70(3) as an article having only
intrinsic utilitarian function that is not merely to portray the appearance of the article or to convey
information.
Textile designs are protected as industrial designs so far as they are new.
7. Please explain how your legislation protects right holders of a design against importing of
articles bearing embodied or copied design.
The United Kingdom’s Registered Designs Act 1949, as amended by any subsequent
legislation applies in Singapore by virtue of Section 2 of Singapore’s United Kingdom Designs
(Protection) Act. The issue raised is dealt with in  Section 7 of the United Kingdom Registered Design
Act, supplemented by case law.
8. Please mention whether or not your legislation provides for the right to issue a compulsory
licensing for industrial designs.
In the United Kingdom’s Registered Designs Act, Section 10 provides that any interested
person may apply to the UK’s Registrar of Designs for the grant of a compulsory licence in respect of
a registered design on the ground that the design is not applied in the UK by any industrial process or
means to the article in respect of which it is registered to such an extent as is reasonable in thecircumstances of the case and the registrar may make such order on the application as he thinks fit.
9. Please indicate for which period of time your legislation grants protection for industrial
designs.
Registration of a design confers protection for a period of 5 years from the date of application
and this protection is renewable with a renewal period of 5 years each, up to a maximum of 25 years.IP/C/W/185
Page 5
D. PATENTS
10. On what basis would the Government of Singapor e authorize a person to make, use, exercise
or vend a patented invention so that they were not infringing the patent in terms of Section 61 of the
Patents Act?
As no situation necessary for the application of Section 61 has arisen, it is difficult to
visualise the basis that would be applied. The circumstances of each case would have to be considered
carefully. The determining factors would be that the making, using, exercising or vending of the
invention is for the services of the Government, and only a Government department or a person
authorized in writing by the Government may av ail themselves of this provision. The terms and
conditions laid down in Section 65(a)-(c) of the Patents Act would have to be complied with inrelation to government’s use.
11. What is the basis in TRIPS for limiting process patent infringements to use of the process by a
person without consent only where that person has actual or implied knowledge in the terms of
Section 66(1)(b) of the Patents Act?
Section 66(1)(b) of the Patents Act is along similar lines in other countries (e.g. UK, EC, etc).
12. What is the meaning of the term "(conditional or otherwise)" in Section 66(2)(g) of the Patent
Act?  Would any conditions of the consent be respected in Singapore?
The phrase "conditional or otherwise" carries the usual dictionary meaning. It means "with or
without condition".  The answer to the second question follows from that to the first one.
E. LAYOUT DESIGNS (TOPOGRAPHIES) OF INTEGRATED CIRCUITS
13. Does the qualified owner of a layout-design bear the burden of providing that an identical
lay-out design was not independently created to avoid a ruling that use of the layout-design is
non-infringing under the terms of Section 10(f) of the Layout-designs of Integrated Circuits Act 1999?
The normal rules of evidence in civil cases would apply in relation to the above question.
14. What is the meaning of "independently created" in Section 10(f)(ii) of the Layout-Designs of
Integrated Circuits Act 1999?
The term "independently created" has its usual dictionary meaning. In the event of a dispute,
the issue would be decided by the Courts.
JAPAN
A. COPYRIGHTS AND RELATED RIGHTS
1. Please explain how the protection is provided for works, phonograms, performances and
broadcasts from other WTO Members under the Law on Copyright and Neighbouring Rights of
Singapore (hereinafter referred to as the "Copyri ght and Neighbouring Rights  Law"). Please describe
the provisions of the Copyright and Neighbouring Rights Law which provide for the National
Treatment and Most-Favoured-Nati on Treatment as required by Articles 3 and 4 of the TRIPS
Agreement as well as Article 9.1 of the Agreement which incorporates Article 5(1) of the BerneConvention.IP/C/W/185
Page 6
Singapore's copyright law is governed by the Copyright Act, Cap 63 (which came into force
on 10 April 1987) and the Rules and Regulations made under it.  The Copyright (International
Protection) Regulations, which came into effect on 16 April 1998, extend copyright protection to
works, phonograms, performances and broadcasts from other WTO Members the same protection as
that available to citizens or residents of Singapore (national treatment).
In relation to published works, Regulation 3 of the Regulations provides that the Copyright
Act shall apply in relation to literary, dramatic, musical, artistic works and published editions first
published in a WTO country in like manner as those provisions shall apply in relation to these works
first published in Singapore.
In relation to unpublished works, the same Regulation also provides that the Copyright Act
shall apply in relation to persons who are citizens/nationals of or resident in a WTO country in like
manner as the Act shall apply in relation to persons who are citizens of or resident in Singapore
respectively.
In relation to films and sound recordings (or phonograms), Regulation 3 also provides that the
Copyright Act shall apply to such works made or first published in a WTO country in the same
manner as the Act shall apply to such works made or first published in Singapore.
In relation to sound and television broadcasts, Regulation 3 extends the protection in the
Copyright Act to broadcasts made by a relevant broadcaster from a place in a WTO country in thesame manner the Act applies in relation to broadcasts made by a broadcasting licensee from a place in
Singapore.
No MFN (most-favoured-nation) issue for Singapore arises in relation to copyright protection.
2. Please explain exceptions or exemptions of the National Treatment and Most-Favoured-Nation
Treatment under the Copyright and Neighbouring Rights Law, if any, permitted in Articles 3 and 4 of
the TRIPS Agreement.
There are no exceptions or exemptions from national treatment and most-favoured-nation
treatment under the Singapore Copyright Act.
3. Please explain whether and how Singapore provides retroactive protection to works,
phonograms, performances from other WTO Members as required by Articles 9.1, 14.6 and 70.2 of
the TRIPS Agreement which apply, mutatis mutandis, Article 18 of the Berne Convention.  Please
indicate the date to which such protection extends back with respect to each category of
subject-matter.
In relation to works, films, phonograms, audio performances and broadcasts, Section 2 of the
Copyright Act provides that the Act applies in relation to things existing on 10 April 1987 in like
manner as it applies in relation to things coming into existence after that date.  Regulation 6 of the
Copyright (International Protection) Regulations also provides that where a work was first publishedbefore 10 April 1987 (the effective date of the Copyright Act of 1987) in any WTO country,
Section 210 of the Act shall apply to the work as if the work was first published in Singapore.  Section
210 of the Copyright Act 1987 extends copyright protection to all existing works in which copyright
subsists by virtue of the Copyright Act 1911.
4. Please explain whether protection of "computer programs" under the Copyright and
Neighbouring Rights Law covers computer programs in both source and object code, as required by
Article 10.1 of the TRIPS Agreement.  Are those computer programs protected as literary works in
accordance with Article 2(1) of the Berne Convention?IP/C/W/185
Page 7
Section 7A(1) of the Copyright Act provides that a literary work includes a computer program
and Section 7 defines a computer program as "an expression, in any language, code or notation, of a
set of instructions (whether with or without related information) ….".  Thus, both the source code and
object code of a computer program are protected as a literary work in accordance with Article 10.1 ofthe TRIPS Agreement.
5. Please clarify whether "database" under the Copyright and Neighbouring Rights Law includes
compilation of data in machine-readable form.  Please explain how the law complies with Article 10.2
of the TRIPS Agreement in this respect.
Section 7A of the Copyright Act provides that a literary work includes a compilation in any form.
Thus a compilation whether in machine readable or other form is protected if it falls within the
definition in the Act.  The Act defines a "compilation" in Section 7(3) as follows:
(a) a compilation, or table, consisting wholly of works or protectable subject matter;
(b) a compilation, or table, consisting partly of relevant materials or parts of works or
other protectable subject matter; or
(c) a compilation, or table, of data other than works or protectable subject matter or parts
thereof;
(d) which, by reason of the selection or arrangement of its contents, constitute an
intellectual creation.
Further, Section 7A(2) provides that protection for a compilation is confined to the selection
or arrangement of materials which constitute an intellectual creation and is without prejudice and
independent of the copyright subsisting in the data or materials itself.
6. Please indicate whether compact discs, such  as CD-ROMs, mainly consisted of music and
accompanied by characters, still images, motion pictures or any other types of data than audio are
protected as "databases" under the Copyright Law, if such data, including music, can be retrieved.
Compact discs such as CD-ROMS containing music, still images, characters, motion pictures
will fall within the definition of "compilation" under Section 7(3) of the Copyright Act as a whole if
the arrangement or selection of the music, still images, characters, etc. constitutes an intellectual
creation.
7. Please explain the term of protection of a work, such as a work by a body corporate, under the
Copyright and Neighbouring Rights  Law, as required by Article 12 of the TRIPS Agreement.
In relation to phonograms, films, broadcasts and cable programs, copyright can vest in a body
corporate (see Section 81 of the Copyright Act read with Regulation 3 of the Copyright (International
Protection) Regulations) and the term of protection is 50 years after the expiration of the calendar year
in which the recording or film is first published, the broadcast was made or the cable programme is
first included in a cable programme service respectively (see Section 92 to 95).
8. Please explain how the exception of Article 35 of the Copyright Act of Singapore has been
strictly interpreted so as to bring them within the permissible limitations on Article 9(2) of the Berne
Convention and Article 13 of the TRIPS Agreement.IP/C/W/185
Page 8
In conformity with Article 9.2 of the Berne Convention and Article 13 of the TRIPS
Agreement, fair dealing is to be determined under Section 35 on the facts of each case.  Some of the
matters to which regard shall be had in determinin g the issue are laid down in Section 35(2) of the
Copyright Act and they are:
(i) the purpose and character of the dealing, including whether such dealing is of a
commercial nature or is for non-profit educational purposes;
(ii) the nature of the work or adaptation;
(iii) the amount and substantiality of the part copied taken in relation to the whole work or
adaptation;
(iv) the effect of the dealing upon the potential market for, or value of, the work or
adaptation.
8. Please explain how Articles 41, 107 and 198 of  the Copyright Act of Singapore comply with
Article 9(2) of the Berne Convention and Article 13 of the TRIPS Agreement, which require
limitations and exceptions to exclusive rights to be  limited to certain special cases which do not
conflict with a normal exploitation of the works and do not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate
interests of the right holder.
Section 41 of the Copyright Act is identical to the corresponding provision in other countries.
It is confined to reading or recitation (a transient activity) of a reasonable length from a published
literary or dramatic work.  The work must be a published work and only an extract of reasonable
length can be read or recited.  In addition, there is the requirement of giving a sufficientacknowledgement of the copyright in the work.  A "sufficient acknowledgement" is defined in
Section 7 as an acknowledgement identifying the work by its title and identifying the author.
Section 107 of the Copyright Act gives to broadcasters who have the authority to broadcast a
sound recording, whether by licence, assignment or the operation of the Act, the right to make anephemeral copy of that recording solely for the purpose of broadcasting without infringing copyright
in that recording.  The following conditions must be met:
(i) the provision applies only if the maker of the copy is concurrently the broadcaster or
if it were not so, the maker must pay to the copyright owner such equitable
remuneration as requested by the copyright owner;
(ii) all copies of the recording must be destroyed or delivered to the National Archives
within the relevant periods of 6 months or 2 years depending on whether the
broadcasting organisation is a non-profit organisation or not respectively.
Further, the provision is in compliance with Article 15 of the Rome Convention which is
incorporated in the TRIPS Agreement through Article 14.6.
Section 198 of the Copyright Act is confined to usage by the Government.  There is the duty
on the part of the Government to inform the owner of the copyright of the usage as soon as possible
and to comply with such terms as are worked ou t between the Government and the copyright owner.
9. Please explain how Articles 144 to 146 of the Copyright Act of Singapore comply with
Article 13 of the TRIPS Agreement which requires that limitations and exceptions to exclusive rights
be confined to certain special cases which do not conflict with a normal exploitation of the work and
do not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the right holder.IP/C/W/185
Page 9
As the Berne Convention itself allows the Appendix to the Berne Convention to be used in
appropriate circumstances, Sections 144 to 146 are in accordance with the Article 13 of the TRIPS
Agreement which incorporates Articles 1 through 21 of the Berne Convention and the Appendix
thereto.
B. TRADEMARKS
11. Please explain how Singaporean Trade Marks Ac t provides protection of well-known marks
when goods or services are not similar to those in respect of which a trademark is registered, as
stipulated in Article 16.3 of the TRIPS Agreement.
Section 8 of the Trade Marks Act, Cap 332 provides that a trademark will not be registered if:
there is an earlier trademark that is well known in Singapore and the use of the first-mentioned
trademark in relation to the goods or services for which the first-mentioned mark is sought to be
registered would indicate a connection between those goods or services and the proprietor of the well-
known mark; there exists a likelihood of confusion on the part of the public because of such use andthe interests of the proprietor of the well-known mark are likely to be damaged by such use.
C. PROTECTION OF UNDISCLOSED INFORMATION
12. As a condition of approving the marketing of pharmaceutical or of agricultural chemical
products which utilise new chemical entities, does  Singaporean legislation require the submission of
undisclosed test or other data, the origination of which involves a considerable effort?  If so, please
explain how Singapore protects such data against unfair commercial use.
The Medicines Act, Cap 176 and Control of Plants Act, Cap 57A provide a 5-year protection
period of undisclosed information by imposing a duty on government officials not to disclose
confidential information received in the course of licensing regulations for pharmaceutical and
agricultural products.
13. Please explain how Singapore regulates the acquisition of undisclosed information by third
parties who knew, or were grossly negligent in failing to know, that such practices were involved in
the acquisition, as required by footnote to Article 39.2 of the TRIPS Agreement.
Singapore complies with Article 39.2 of the TRIPS Agreement by applying the common law.
Under the common law, a civil action may be brought to protect undisclosed information against
unauthorized disclosure and unfair commercial use.
D. ENFORCEMENT
14. Please indicate the remedies which judicial authorities order regarding intellectual property
rights, including injunctions, damages, expenses, destruction or disposal of infringing goods,
materials or implements for their production.  Please explain the criteria for and the way of
calculation to decide the amount of the damages which judicial authorities order to the person who
infringes intellectual property rights to pay to the right holder.
Please see Singapore's answer to question 5 of the Checklist of Issues on Enforcement
(document IP/N/6/SGP/1).
The guiding principle behind damages is to compensate the plaintiff for the infringement of
his rights.  The basic measure is the damages or loss proved to have been suffered by the intellectual
property rights holder as a result of the infringement.  There are several methods of assessing the loss.IP/C/W/185
Page 10
The actual amount would depend on how the plaintiff exploits the intellectual property rights in issue.
For example, if the plaintiff copyright owner grants  licences to others to exploit the work on payment
of a royalty or licence fee, then such a licence fee or royalty, as would have been charged, might be
the appropriate basis for the award.  Alternatively, if the plaintiff himself actually exploits his
copyright in the marketplace, so that the defendant's  infringing activities are actually competing with
the plaintiff's business, then damages on a lost sales basis may be more appropriate.
15. Please indicate titles of laws and regulations and their provisions in which the suspension of
the release of counterfeit trademark or pirated copyright goods is prescribed, as stipulated in
Article 51 of the TRIPS Agreement. Please explain ty pes of intellectual property rights about which
the suspension can be made upon an application by a right holder.
Please refer to Singapore's response to question 15 of the Checklist of Issues on Enforcement
(document IP/N6/SGP/1), relating to the enforcem ent of copyrights and trademarks. Suspension on
application is applicable to the copyright and trademark areas as required by the TRIPS Agreement.
16. Please explain the kind and amount of crimin al penalties including imprisonment and fines
regarding intellectual property rights. In particular, are the crimes prosecuted only when the injured
party has made a formal accusation? Please explain whether penalties are consistent with Article 61
of the TRIPS Agreement which requires the penalties to be sufficient to provide a deterrent
consistently with the level of penalties applied for crimes of a corresponding gravity.
The answers to the above query can be found in the responses to questions 21, 22 and 24 of
the Checklist of Issues on Enforcement (document IP/N/6/SGP/1).  It can be seen from the response to
question 21 of the Checklist that the penalties provided under our legislation are consistent with
Article 61 of the TRIPS Agreement.
UNITED STATES
A. COPYRIGHT AND RELATED RIGHTS
1. Section 48(2) of the Singapore Copyright Act (Copyright Act), as amended in 1999, allows
libraries, without permission from, or compensation to the right holder, to make a digitized copy ofany work in the library collection, despite the fact that this copy can provide the master for additional
copies of the work, which can then be disseminated over the digital network to others.  Please explain
how, in view of this amended provision, the Copyright Act otherwise prevents the improper
dissemination (dissemination not in compliance with  provisions of the TRIPS Agreement) over the
digital network of those works.
The Copyright Act, Cap 63, contains a number of safeguards to prevent improper
dissemination of a digitized copy made by libraries and archives.  This is done by requiring libraries
and archives under Section 201 to make a notation stating:
(i) that the copy was made on behalf of the person or body administering the library, and
(ii) the date on which the copy was made.
If the notation is not done, the library or archive cannot rely on Section 48 as a defence.  In
addition, Regulation 9 of the Copyright Regulations provides that it is an offence carrying a maximum
fine of $1,000 if the officer-in-charge of a library or archive does not retain the relevant recordsrequired under Section 201 for a period of 4 years thereafter. A copyright owner has the right to
inspect all such records or notation held by libraries.IP/C/W/185
Page 11
2. Amendments to the Copyright Act, adopted in  1999, create broad new exceptions for making
copies of works available by educational institutions over a network without the permission of the
copyright owner.  These new provisions do not appear to require that educational institutions adopt
safeguards on their network operations to prevent unauthorized access and copying of protectedmaterials.  Please explain how controls will be applied to ensure that unauthorized copying and
dissemination of entire works does not occur.
Amendments made in 1999 to Sections 51 and 52 of the Copyright Act merely extend the
exercise of the existing statutory licences for educational institutions therein to networks operated or
controlled by the educational institutions to enable access by persons undertaking a course of
education provided by the educational institution.  Under Section 51, there are certain limitations,which are as follows:
(i) the copying by the educational institutions must be carried out on the premises of the
educational institutions or on a network operated or controlled by the educational institutions
to enable persons undertaking a course of education provided by the educational institution toaccess the work;
(ii) the provision only applies to the making of less than 5 pages of a work containing
less than 500 pages or 5% of a work containing more than 500 pages.
Similarly, the following limitations apply in Section 52:
(i) an educational institution can make copies of a work only for the limited purpose of
the educational purposes of that or another educational institution;
(ii) copies cannot be made of two or more articles in the same periodical publication
unless they relate to the same subject matter.  If a work is separately published, only a
"reasonable portion" of the work may be copied unless new copies of the work cannotbe obtained within a reasonable time at an ordinary commercial price;
(iii) an educational institution that wishes to rely on Section 52 is required to keep a
record of the number of copies made under Section 52 (see Section 201).  Where the
copy is made on a network, the number of copies made shall be taken as the number
of students enrolled on the relevant course of education (see the amended
Regulation 7 of the Copyright Regulations).  In practice, in view of the notation
requirement, it is reckoned that it is unlikely that copies of works made under thestatutory licence in Section 52 will be made freely available to unauthorized persons
since educational institutions have to account for all copies made.  Further, under
Section 52(11), an equitable remuneration mu st be paid to the copyright owner upon
written request made by him during the prescribed period of four years after the
copies are made.
3. The Copyright Act, as amended, provides for broad exceptions allowing for copying (without
permission of the right holder) by libraries, c opying and distribution by educational institutions,
copying by individuals for private and/or domestic use, copying by government officials, or by private
parties acting in the service of the government.  In  view of these broad exceptions, please explain how
the Copyright Act otherwise prevents the improper dissemination (dissemination not in compliancewith provisions of the TRIPS Agreement) of a work.
The exceptions for copying by libraries in Sections 45 to 49 are limited to: copying for
specific purposes of preservation against loss or deterioration; to copying by libraries on behalf of aIP/C/W/185
Page 12
user of a reasonable portion for private study or research and supported by an appropriate declaration
by the user; to unpublished works that have been in existence for more than 50 years after the death of
the author.  In addition, under Section 201, there is the requirement of maintaining records by libraries
of the number of copies made under those provisions and copyright owners have the right to inspect
all relevant declarations and notations held by libraries.
In respect of copying by educational institution, please see the answer to Question 2 posed by
the United States, above.
The exception for copying by private individuals in Section 35 applies only to copying of a
"reasonable portion" for the sole purpose of private study or research.  Section 7 defines "a reasonable
portion" as less than 10% of a work.
The exception in Section 198 of the Copyright Act is confined to usage by the Government.
There is the duty on the part of the Government to inform the owner of the copyright of the usage as
soon as possible and to comply with such terms as  are worked out between the Government and the
copyright owner.
B. INDUSTRIAL DESIGNS
4. Articles 25 and 26 of the TRIPS Agreement provide for the protection of independently created
industrial designs that are new or original.  Please describe in detail the corresponding provisions inthe Singapore laws or regulations and cite to those provisions.
Industrial design protection in Singapore is presently available through registration of the
design in the United Kingdom.  The governing legislation in Singapore is the United Kingdom
Designs (Protection) Act (Cap 339), which applies to Singapore the United Kingdom's RegisteredDesigns Act 1949, as amended or substituted by subsequent United Kingdom’s legislation in relation
to registered designs. Section 2 of the Singapore legislation states that once a design owner has
obtained registration of his design in the United Kingdom, he will enjoy all rights in relation to the
design in Singapore, as if the certificate of registration in the United Kingdom had been issued with
an extension to Singapore.  All new or original designs which have secured registration in the United
Kingdom will be protected in Singapore. There is no requirement for re-registration of the United
Kingdom registered design in Singapore.  A new Re gistered Designs Bill is under consideration for
introduction to the Singapore Parliament soon.
C. PATENTS
5. Article 66 of the Singapore Patents Act (Patents Act), which corresponds to Article 28.1 of the
TRIPS Agreement, states that, where the patent is a product, a person that "makes, disposes of, offers
to dispose of, uses or "imports" the product infringes the patent".  This same article also states that a
person who “disposes of, offers to dispose of, uses or imports” any product obtained directly by
means of a patented process infringes the patent.  Please confirm that the terms “dispose of” and
“offers to dispose of” mean “sells” or “offers for sale” as required by Article 28.1 of the TRIPSAgreement or, if that is not the case, explain the meaning of the expressions.
The terms "sell" and "offers to sell" used in Article 28.1 of the TRIPS Agreement would fall
within the ambit of "dispose of" and "offers to dispose of" of Section 66 of the Patents Act, Cap 221
respectively.IP/C/W/185
Page 13
D. PROTECTION OF UNDISCLOSED INFORMATION
6. Article 39.2 of the TRIPS Agreement provides for the protection of undisclosed information
that is secret, has commercial value because of its secrecy and has been subject to reasonable steps to
keep it secret.  Please describe in detail that part of the Singapore laws or regulations that implement
Article 39.2, and cite to those provisions.
Singapore complies with Article 39.2 of the TRIPS Agreement by applying the common law.
Under the common law, a civil action may be brought to protect undisclosed information against
unauthorized disclosure and unfair commercial use.
7. Article 39.3 of the TRIPS Agreement requires th at data submitted to obtain marketing
approval of pharmaceutical or agricultural chemic als utilizing a new chemical entity be protected
against unfair commercial use and from disclosure.  Please describe in detail how Singapore's laws
or regulations implement those obligations, and cite to those provisions.
With respect to compliance with Article 39.3 of the TRIPS Agreement, the Medicines Act,
Cap 176 and Control of Plants Act, Cap 57A provide for a 5-year protection period for undisclosed
information by imposing a duty on government offi cials not to disclose confidential information
received in the course of licensing regulations.
E. ENFORCEMENT1
Civil and Administrative Procedures and Remedies
Follow-up question to the response to Checklist question No. 2
8. Please explain "registered licensee" for the purposes of the Trade Marks Act and clarify
whether all licensees authorized to use a trademark have standing to assert intellectual property
rights.
"Registered licensee" should be understood to mean "licensee of a registered trademark".  All
licensees of a registered trademark have standing to bring proceedings for trademark infringement in
their own name.  However, if the licensee is not an exclusive licensee, the licensee can do so only ifthe proprietor does not institute proceedings within 2 months after being called upon and with leave of
court.  In addition, he has to join the proprietor either as a plaintiff or a defendant in the action.
Follow-up question to the response to Checklist question No. 3
9. What action may judicial and administrative authorities take if a party refuses to produce
evidence, which lies within its control?
A party who fails to comply with the rules of discovery and production of documents faces
certain consequences.  The court is required to make  any order which it thinks just and this includes
striking out the claim of the defaulting plaintiff, or ordering the defence to be struck out and that
judgement be entered against the defaulting defendant.   Failure to comply with the rules of governing
discovery and production of documents may also lead to committal for contempt of court.
                                                     
1 Follow-up questions to Singapore's responses to the Checklist of Issues on Enforcement (document
IP/N/6/SGP/1).IP/C/W/185
Page 14
Follow-up question to the response to Checklist question No. 4
10. What criteria do judges use to determine if it is in  the interest of justice, public safety, etc. to
hold proceedings in camera?
The underlying principle is that the administration of justice would be rendered impractical by
the presence of the public, whether because the case could not be effectively tried, or the parties
entitled to justice would be reasonably deterred from seeking it at the hands of the court.
Follow-up questions to the response to Checklist question No. 5
11. What criteria do courts use to determine that an issue qualifies as "serious" and subject to an
interlocutory injunction?
By "serious", the court must be satisfied that the claim is not frivolous or vexatious.  The
court is concerned with whether the evidence adduced at the hearing reveals issues which may enable
the plaintiff to succeed, rather than the strength of his case.
12. Please provide an example of a "relevant matter" sufficient to warrant additional damages
pursuant to the Copyright Act and the Layout-Designs of Integrated Circuits Act.
There is no decided Singapore cases on what is meant by "relevant matter" sufficient to
warrant additional damages pursuant to the Copyright Act and the Lay-out Designs of Integrated
Circuits Act.  The expression "all other relevant matter" is intentionally wide so as to enable the Court
to award additional damages in appropriate cases.
Follow-up question to the response to Checklist question No. 6
13. Please clarify whether courts also have the authority to order the infringer to provide
information on the channels of distribution.
The court has inherent and statutory authority to make an order requiring the infringer to
inform the rights holder of the identities of third persons involved in the distribution of the infringing
goods or services.
Follow-up question to the response to Checklist question No. 7
14. What criteria do courts use to determine the amount of compensation the infringer should pay
to the defendant if no infringement is found?
By the use of the word "infringer" in the question, we assume that this is referring to a
plaintiff whose action for infringement has been unsuccessful.  We have also used "infringer" in this
context in our answer.
Interlocutory Injunction
During the application for the interlocutory injunction, the court does not require the plaintiff
to specify the amount of damages that he ought to pay if the court finds no case of
infringement.  Therefore, the court does not use any criteria at this stage.
Where the infringement action fails, the defendant in the infringement action can take out a
separate action for damages against the plaintiff for groundless threat of intellectual propertyIP/C/W/185
Page 15
rights infringement.  The criteria used by the courts for determining this damages will depend
on the specific intellectual property rights involved, as indicated below.
Copyright
Under section 200(1)(c) of the Copyright Act, th e court may order the infringer to pay to the
defendant such damages that the defendant "has sustained".
Under section 140IA(1) of the Copyright Act, where copies of the supposedly infringing item
has been seized and the objector concerned fails to take infringement action within the
retention period for the copies, a person aggrieved by such seizure may apply to the court for
an order of compensation against the objector.  Where the court is satisfied that the applicanthad suffered loss or damage as a result of the seizure of the copies, the court may order the
objector to pay compensation in such amount as the court thinks fit to the applicant.
Trademarks
Under section 35 of the Trade Marks Act, the court may order the infringer to pay to the
defendant such damages in respect of any loss he "has sustained".
Under section 89 of the Trade Marks Act, where goods have been seized and the objector
concerned fails to take infringement action within the retention period for the goods, a personaggrieved by such seizure may apply to the Court for an order of compensation against the
objector.   Where the Court is satisfied that the applicant had suffered loss or damage as a
result of the seizure of the goods, the Court may order the objector to pay compensation in
such amount as the Court thinks fit to the applicant.
Patents Act
Section 77 of the Patents Act provides that where a person by circulars, advertisements or
otherwise threatens another person with proceedings for any infringement of a patent, a
person aggrieved by the threats may, bring proceedings in the court against the person making
the threats, claiming damages in respect of any loss which the aggrieved person "has
sustained by the threats".
Layout-Designs of Integrated Circuits Act
Section 17 of the Layout-Designs of Integrated  Circuits Act provides that where a person, by
means of circulars, advertisements or otherwise, threatens another person with proceedings inrespect of an infringement, the Court may, on the application of a person aggrieved, award
compensation for damage "sustained".
Follow-up question to the response to Checklist question No. 8
15. Please provide information on the average costs and length of time to process intellectual
cases.
Please see Singapore's answer to Question 8 of the Checklist of Issues on Enforcement
(document IP/N/6/SGP/1).
Our courts only have information on the average length of time to process civil cases.
Depending on the complexity of the case, for civil cases heard in the High Court, the average waiting
period from the close of pleading to trial is 1 month.IP/C/W/185
Page 16
Follow-up question to the response to Checklist question No. 9
16. Please clarify whether any administrative procedures and remedies are available for
trademark and copyright infringement cases.
In trademark infringement cases, the Registrar of Trade Marks has the power to disallow the
registration of a trademark upon an application by a trademark owner to oppose the registration
thereof during a prescribed period.  There are no administrative procedures and remedies available for
copyright infringement cases.  Persons wishing to take action for copyright infringement need to
institute court proceedings.
Follow-up question to the response to Checklist question No. 10
17. Please explain the conditions imposed on the execution of an order to prevent possible
injustice to the defendant.
Examples of conditions imposed on the execution of an order (interlocutory injunction,
Anton Piller Order and Mareva injunction) to prevent possible injustice to the defendant are as
follows:
Interlocutory Injunction
After executing the order, if the court finds that the order or carrying the order out has caused
loss to the defendant, and decides that the defendant should be compensated for that loss, the
plaintiff shall comply with any order the court may make to pay compensation to the
defendant.
Anton Piller order
1. No item may be removed from the premises until a list of the items to be removed has
been prepared, and a copy of the list has been served on the defendant, and he has
been given a reasonable opportunity to check the list.
2. The premises must not be searched, and items must not be removed from them,
except in the presence of the defendant or his employee.
3. The defendant is entitled to seek legal advice, and to ask the court to vary or discharge
the order, provided he does so at once and that meanwhile he permits the plaintiff'ssolicitor to enter the premise, but not to start to search.  (However, except for the
purpose of obtaining legal advice, the defendant must not directly or indirectly inform
anyone of the proceedings or of the content of the order, or warn anyone that
proceedings have been or may be brought against him by the plaintiff.)
Mareva injunction
1. The order does not prohibit the defendant from using funds necessary for (stipulated
by the plaintiff when he applies for the order) his ordinary living expenses and a
reasonable sum on legal advice and representation. But before spending any moneythe defendant must inform the plaintiff's solicitors of the source of the fund.IP/C/W/185
Page 17
2. The order does not prohibit the defendant from dealing with or disposing of any of his
assets in the ordinary and proper course of business. The defendant shall account to
the plaintiff for the amount of money spent in this regard.
3. The defendant may agree in writing with the plaintiff's solicitors that the funds
necessary for the defendant's ordinary living expenses as stipulated by the plaintiff
should be increased or that the order for the Mareva injunction should be varied in
any other respect.
Follow-up question to the response to Checklist question No. 11
18. Please clarify the difference between an Anton Piller order, a Mareva injunction and any
other injunctions that courts may impose.
Anton Piller order
The plaintiff will want to apply for an Anton Piller order when there is a grave danger that the
defendant will dispose of or destroy incriminating evidence in his possession, whether
documents, articles or other materials, and their continued existence is necessary for the
purpose of the plaintiff's case.  Apart from being a type of injunction, the Anton Piller order
also involves aspects of the discovery and interrogatory processes.  The order enables the
plaintiff or his representative to enter the defendant's premises to search for, inspect and seizethe materials so that they may be preserved until the trial.
Mareva injunction
The plaintiff will want to apply for a Mareva injunction to prevent the defendant from
removing his assets out of jurisdiction or from disposing of them within the jurisdiction so as
to avoid having to comply with a potential judgement in favour of the plaintiff.  The effect of
the injunction, generally, is to freeze the assets of the defendant until the conclusion of the
trial.
Injunctions in general
An injunction is an order of court made at the instance of the applicant (either the plaintiff or
defendant) which either prohibits the other party from acting or continuing to act in a
particular manner or compels the other party to take certain steps.
Special Requirements Related to Border Measures
Follow-up question to the response to Checklist question No. 15
19. What criteria do Customs officials use to determine that infringing goods are being imported
for personal use?
The general criteria used by Customs officials are based on section 136(7) of the Copyright
Act. Essentially, items would be presumed to be for private use if there are less than 5 copies and they
are not intended to be used for the purposes of trade or distribution.
Follow-up questions to the response to Checklist question No. 16
20. List the type of information or evidence required in the application to Customs officials.IP/C/W/185
Page 18
Application to suspend the import of infringing articles under the Copyright and Trade Marks
Acts is made to the Customs.  The information or evidence required in the application to Customs for
suspension of infringing copyright or trademarks are listed in the Schedule to the Copyright (Border
Enforcement Measures) Regulations 1998 and the Schedule to the Trade Marks (Border Enforcement
Measures) Rules 1999 respectively. They comprise the following:
- name of proprietor or licensee;
- name and address of the importer;
- name of ship, aircraft flight number or vehicle registration number;
- name of place by which the goods are to be imported into Singapore;
- estimated time of arrival;
- country of origin;
- grounds on which the goods are claimed to be infringing goods; and
- full description of the goods (including the quantity and value), number of
packages, marks used, bill of lading/airway bill/consignment reference
number and any other particulars necessary for their identification.
21. How is the amount of the security determined for the purposes of compliance with Article 53 of
the TRIPS Agreement, and who determines it - customs or judicial officials?
In accordance with Article 53 of the TRIPS Agreement, the amount of security will be fixed
at an amount sufficient to protect the defendant and the Customs Authorities and to prevent abuse of
the procedure. The amount would be determined by Customs on a case by case basis.
22. In cases where the action is dismissed, how is the amount of compensation to the defendant
determined?
See the answer given in question 14 posed by the United States, above.
Follow-up question to the response to Checklist question No. 19
23. Please describe the remedies that courts (i .e. destruction and disposal) are authorized to
impose in intellectual cases involving infringing shipments.
In cases involving infringing shipments detained by Customs, the Court may order that the
infringing shipments be destroyed or delivered up to the owner of the copyright concerned or
otherwise dealt with in such a manner as the Court deems fit.
Criminal Procedures
24. Please provide a more detailed explanation of the procedures for investigating and
prosecuting copyright and trademark cases
Please see Singapore's answer to question 22 of the Checklist of Issues on Enforcement
(document IP/N/6/SGP/1).IP/C/W/185
Page 19
The Police will upon the completion of their investigations refer the cases to the Attorney
General Chambers (AGC) for directions. AGC will direct the Police to proceed with the case in court
if AGC is satisfied that there is sufficient evidence to proceed. In cases where criminal proceedings
are initiated by way of fiats, the AGC will also have to ensure that there is sufficient evidence to
proceed before authorizing counsel appointed by the intellectual property owners to conduct theprosecution in court.
25. Please provide statistical information related to civil copyright, trademark, geographical
indication, industrial design, patent, integrated-circuit layout design of integrated-circuit, and trade
secret enforcement for each of the years 1996, 1997 and 1998, including the number of cases filed;
injunction issued; infringing products seized; infringing equipment seized; cases resolved (including
settlement); and the amount of damages awarded.
As a preliminary point, even though this question has been listed under the heading "Criminal
Procedures", we assume that since this question refers to "civil copyright", "injunction" and "amount
of damages awarded", it is actually referring to Civil Procedure.
Our courts only have the statistical information on civil copyright, trademark, patent and trade
secret cases as shown below.
Copyright
In 1996, 16 copyright cases were filed. Of these, there were 12 judgements, 3 discontinuances
and 1 settlement. In 1997, 7 cases were filed. Of these, there was 1 judgement, 3
discontinuances, 2 transfers and 1 settlement. In 1998, 16 cases were filed. Of these, there
were 5 judgements, 6 continuances, 2 transfers, 1 settlement and 2 dismissals.
Trademarks / Service Marks
In 1996, 25 trademark/service marks cases were filed. Of these, there were 21 judgements, 3
discontinuances and 1 order reserved. In 1997, 16 cases were filed. Of these, there was 12
judgements, 2 discontinuances and 2 writs expired. In 1998, 48 cases were filed. Of these,
there were 23 judgements, 18 continuances, 2 writs expired, 3 settlements, 1 dismissal and 1
transfer.
Patents
In 1996, 3 patent cases were filed. Of these, there was 1 judgement issued and 2
discontinuances.  In 1997, 1 case was filed. This was subsequently discontinued. In 1998, 3cases were filed. Of these, there were 2 judgements issued and 1 discontinuance.
Trade Secrets / Law of Confidence
There were no cases on trade secret/law of confidence filed in 1996 and 1997. In 1998, 1 case
was filed. This was subsequently discontinued.
26. Please provide statistical information related to criminal enforcement in the area of copyright
piracy and trademark infringement for each of the years 1996, 1997, 1998 and 1999, including the
number of raids, prosecutions, convictions and amo unt of fines and/or jail terms (including whether
the fines were paid and whether the jail term was actually served or was suspended) and any other
information establishing that the criminal system operates effectively to deter copyright piracy and
trademark counterfeiting.IP/C/W/185
Page 20
In 1998, the authorities arrested 157 persons in about 682 raids and inspections. In 1999, the
authorities arrested 1,980 persons in about 2,713 raids and inspections. No figures are available for
1996 and 1997.
In view of the quality of evidence, the conviction rate in copyright and trademark
infringement cases is generally very high. In addition, the Singapore Courts have imposed stiff
penalties for copyright and trademark infringement. Offenders are often given jail terms which may
vary from 3 to 38 months and imposed fines which may go up to S$1.5 million.
In Singapore, fines and imprisonment sentences awarded are required to be paid/served as the
case may be. A person who is unable to pay the fine will have to serve a sentence in default.
According to the 1997 and 1998 surveys conducted by the Political & Economic Risk
Consultancy (PERC), Singapore continues to have th e best level of IPR protection in Asia. A separate
survey by the International Institute of Manageme nt Development (IMD) has also ranked Singapore
as having the best IPR protection regime in Asia for the past 5 consecutive years.
27. Please describe any new initiatives the Government of Singapore might have planned to
improve enforcement, particularly  criminal enforcement, of intellectual property rights.
Restructuring the Enforcement Unit
The Singapore Police Force has placed great emphasis in the enforcement and protection of
intellectual property rights. For the year 2000, the Police will enhance this further and will
work closely with the right holders. The Police are in the midst of planning the reorganisation
and upgrading of the existing IPR Warrant Unit to a branch level. For this purpose, the unit
will become the Intellectual Property Rights Branch (IPRB) and will be upgraded under theSpecialised Crime Division, CID.
Amendments to Legislation to Discourage Illegal Replication of CDs
To ensure that there is no illegal manufacturing and replication of optical discs (OD),
Singapore took the initiative to amend legislation to license OD manufacturers (via
amendments to the Control of Manufacturer Act, Cap 57 - CMA) and control the imports ofOD manufacturing equipment (via amendments to the Regulation of Imports and Exports
Regulations - RIER). Singapore is amongst the few countries in the world to have introduced
such controls.
The CMA amendment classifies Compact Discs (CDs), Video Compact Discs (VCDs), CD-
ROMS, DVDs and DVD-ROMs as controlled items. Thus, only approved manufacturers are
permitted to manufacture these items.
The RIER amendments prevent unauthorized manufacturers from importing mastering and
manufacturing equipment into Singapore to manufacture optical discs. Only approvedmanufacturers are able to import such equipment. In addition, the RIER also prohibit the
transfer of such equipment to an unauthorized manufacturer.
OD manufacturers have also publicly committed to adhere to a Code of Conduct that requires
them to put in place practices that will prevent piracy of copyright materials in their plants.IP/C/W/185
Page 21
IP Education Programme
Singapore realizes that public education in relation to IP is an important factor in the
protection of IPR. Hence it has embarked on a well-planned and co-ordinated programme for
this purpose.
The Singapore Trade Development Board (TDB), in association with the IP owners, launched
an on-going IP Education Programme in December 1998 with the aim of raising the
awareness and educating the public on the importance of protecting IPR.
Besides developing a specially designed anti-piracy logo, a radio campaign and a series of IP
posters distributed to general public areas such as schools, community centres, libraries, etc.,the Programme will continue to organize new initiatives to spread the anti-piracy message
through the various media channels.
The IP Education Programme is very innovative and successful. This had prompted the
Business Software Alliance (BSA) to present an award to Singapore on the 16 July 1999 torecognize and compliment its IP education efforts.
__________