WORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONIP/C/W/373/Add.1
21 October 2002
(02-5760)
Council for Trade-Related Aspects
of Intellectual Property RightsOriginal:  English
REVIEW OF LEGISLATION
Responses from Chinese Taipei to the questions posed by Australia, Canada, the European
Communities and their member States, Japan, Korea, Switzerland and the United States
Addendum
By means of communications from the Permanent Mission of the Separate Customs Territory
of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu, dated 12 and 13 September and 2 October 2002, theSecretariat has received the following responses  to questions and follow-up questions posed by
Australia, Canada, the European Communities and their member States, Japan, Korea, Switzerland
and the United States circulated in documents IP/C/W/364, 366, 367, 362/Add.1, 380, 372 and 379,
respectively.
_______________
AUSTRALIA
A. TRADEMARKS AND GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS
1. What legislation does Chinese Taipei h ave in place to implement protection of
geographical indications as required by Articles 22 and 23 of the TRIPS Agreement?
I. Implementing Article 22 of the TRIPS Agreement:
The geographical indications to all goods and services are protected as "certification marks"
under Article 73 of the Trademark Law.
Subparagraph 6, Article 37 of the Trademark Law provides that no application may be filed
for registration of a trademark design that is likely to mislead the public with respect to the nature,
quality or place of origin of the goods.  Article 52 of the same Law also states that an interested party
may request the competent authority to conduct a review for invalidation of the registration if it is inviolation with the aforementioned provision.
For any use of geographical indications that constitutes unfair competition, Article 21 of the
Fair Trade Law, in conformity with Article 10 bis of the Paris Convention, provides that enterprises
shall not make false or misleading representations either on their products or in the advertisements of
their products. In addition, they shall not sell, transport, export or
 import goods bearing false or
misleading representations.IP/C/W/373/Add.1
Page 2
II. Implementing Article 23 of the TRIPS Agreement:
Pursuant to Paragraph 2, Article 33 of th e Tobacco and Alcohol Administration Law,
producers or importers may choose to label geographical indications on their alcohol products, but the
labelling shall not constitute false or misleading representation.
The language of Article 23.1 of the TRIPS Agreement is incorporated into Article 13 of the
Regulation Governing the Labelling of the Alcohol Products.
2. How are geographical indications defined under the relevant legislation?
The geographical indications to all goods and services are protected as "certification marks".
For the definition of certification marks, please refer to Article 73 of the Trademark Law.
In addition, geographical indications for wines and spirits are defined under Article 13 of the
Regulation Governing the Labelling of the Alcohol Products.
3. Does Chinese Taipei provide protection for geographical indications from other
countries?
Yes.  Foreign geographical indications are eligible for the protection under the Trademark
Law, the Fair Trade Law and the Tobacco and Alcohol Administration Law.
4. How many geographical indications are cu rrently recognised by Chinese Taipei, and
how many proposed geographical indications a re currently being considered for recognition by
Chinese Taipei?
In general, all products are eligible to apply for certification mark and acquire protection for
their geographical indications under the Trademark Law.  Under this regime, one domestic rice
product has recently been approved for the protection as a certification mark.  There is no proposed
geographical indication currently being considered for recognition.
In addition, for alcohol products in particular, additional protection is provided in accordance
with Article 23 of the TRIPS Agreement.  Due to the fact that the Regulation Governing the Labeling
of the Alcohol Products does not establish any application procession for the protection of
geographical indications, we could not provide with specific numbers "currently recognized" per se .
We could, instead, confirm that all geographical indi cations of imported alcohol products, as long as
they are recognized by their countries of origin, would be eligible for protection under the saidRegulation.
5. Does Chinese Taipei's legislation provide a mechanism to adjudicate between competing
claims for recognition of a particular geographical indication?
According to Articles 46 and 52 of the Trademark Law, the proceedings of opposition and
invalidation are provided for adjudicating the recognition of a particular geographical indication.
For the geographical indication protection on wines and spirits, the competent authority will
adjudicate between competing claims for recognition of a particular geographical indication.
6. How does Chinese Taipei's trademark legislation define a trademark?  Are letters,
numerals, shapes and colours eligible for registration as trademarks, as required by Article 15of the TRIPS Agreement?IP/C/W/373/Add.1
Page 3
Article 5 of the Trademark Law stipulates the definition of a trademark.  Pursuant to the said
Article, letters, numerals and colors are eligible for trademark registrations.
A draft amendment to the said Law has covered three-dimensional marks to be eligible for
trademark registration.
7. How does Chinese Taipei meet the obligations of Article 21 of the TRIPS Agreement
concerning the licensing and assignment of trademarks?
Pursuant to Article 26 of the Trademark Law, the owner of the registered trademark may
license other persons to use his trademarks on the whole or a part of the goods covered by his or her
trademark registration.   Compulsory licensing of trademarks is not permitted in the Trademark Law.
Pursuant to Article 28 of the said Law, the owner of the registered trademark has the right to
assign the trademark with or without the transfer of the business to which the trademark belongs.
B. COPYRIGHT
8. How does Chinese Taipei meet the obligations of Article 14 of the TRIPS Agreement
concerning the protection of performers, producers of phonograms and broadcasting
organizations?
Pursuant to Article 7 bis of the Copyright Law, the performance of a performer is treated as a
work.  Thus, performers are granted with the exclusive rights including reproducing their performance
by means of sound recording, video recording or photography, broadcasting their performance in
public and performing in public by means of loudspeakers or other equipment (please refer to
Paragraph 2, Article 22, Article 24 and Paragraph 2, Article 26 of the same Law.)
Pursuant to Subparagraph 8, Paragraph 1, Article 5 of the Copyright Law, a sound recording
is defined as work.  The producers of phonograms (authors of sound recordings) are granted with the
exclusive rights including reproduction, public broadcast, lease of their sound recordings and
adaptation of their sound recordings into derivative works or to compile it into compilation works
(please refer to Paragraph 1, Article 22, Articles 24, 28 and 29 of the same Law.).
Although broadcasting organizations are not dire ctly protected under the Copyright Law, any
programs broadcast by those organizations are protected as long as such programs meet with the
definition of works as provided for in Paragraph 1, Article 5 of the same Law.
Thus, all the protection of performers, producers of phonograms and broadcasting
organizations accorded by the Copyright Law is in compliance with the requirement of Article 14 ofthe TRIPS Agreement.
9. What procedures are available to a person seeking to enforce his or her copyright?
(a) What remedies are available to a person whose copyright has been infringed?
When a person whose copyright has been infringed, the person may request for criminal
remedy and civil compensation, including removal of infringement of its rights, prevention of
likelihood of infringement and compensation of injury.  Further details are provided under Chapter VI
and VII of the Copyright Law.IP/C/W/373/Add.1
Page 4
(b) If awards of damages are available, how are the amounts of damages assessed?
Pursuant to Article 88 of the Copyright Law, the compensation that the injured party may
claim would be assessed according to either the estimated losses of the said party or the profit
obtained by the infringer.  If it is difficult to prove the damage of the injured party, the said party mayrequest the court, subject to types and degrees of gravity, to determine the amount of compensation
between NT$ 10,000 and NT$1,000,000.
(c) If monetary fines are imposed on copyri ght infringers, how is the amount of the
fine assessed?
The monetary fines imposed on copyright infringers, subject to types and degrees of gravity,
is up to NT$450,000 (Please refer to Articles 91-103 of the Copyright Law).
C. B
IOTECHNOLOGY
10. What intellectual property protection is available for biotechnology inventions?  Does
Chinese Taipei exclude from patentability any of  the items listed in Article 27.3 of the TRIPS
Agreement?
Biotechnology inventions are protected as subject-matter of invention patent right and enjoy
the same level of protection stipulated under Articles 19 to 21 of the Patent Law.
Yes.  Subparagraphs 1 and 2, Article 21 of the Patent Law regulates the following items
excluded from patentability as listed in Article 27.3 of the TRIPS Agreement:
1. New varieties of animals and plants, except the cultivation and growth processes of
new plant varieties; and
2. Diagnostic, treatment or surgical methods for diseases afflicting humans or  animals.
In addition, new plant varieties are protected under the Plant Seed Law.
CANADA
1. What recourse do right holders have in respect of wilful trademark counterfeiting or
copyright piracy on a commercial scale, as required by Article 61 of the TRIPS Agreement?
In conformity with Article 61 of the TRIPS Agr eement, the right holders in respect of willful
trademark counterfeiting or copyright piracy can file their complains to the police authority, the
criminal investigating authority or the courts directly.
The penalties dealing with copyright piracy, subject to types and degrees of gravity, include
an imprisonment of up to seven years and a fine of up to NT$450,000 (Please refer to Articles 91-103
of the Copyright Law).
The penalties dealing with trademark counterfeiting, subject to types and degrees of gravity,
include an imprisonment of up to three years and a fine of up to NT$200,000 (Please refer to
Articles 62 to 64 of the Trademark Law).IP/C/W/373/Add.1
Page 5
Relevant provisions on remedies available including confiscation to combat counterfeiting
and piracy are Article 38 of the Criminal Code and Articles 470, 472 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure
JAPAN
Responses to Additional Questions posed by Japan
A. COPYRIGHT
1. Does Article 22 (reproduction right) cover th e temporary copies such as the storage in
RAM? If it is the case, please explain how your authority draws the line between the temporary
copies to be covered under the reproduction righ t and the ones that are not, referring to the
actual cases.
Subparagraph 5, Paragraph 1, Article 3 of the present Copyright Law contains a definition of
reproduction that implicitly covers temporary copies.  While all temporary reproduction fall under thecategory of reproduction, some of the temporary repr oduction might be considered fair use, which
should be decided by the courts on individual merits.  There is so far no court decision regarding the
scope or criteria of fair use of temporary reproduction.
Amendments are now under consideration to codify the above-mentioned interpretation.
After the insertion of "temporary reproduction", specific provisions dealing with its fair use would
also be stipulated.
2. Judging from Article 29 and Article 60 of the Copyright Law, it is understood that the
right of rental is not accorded to authors of cinematographic works.  Does the situation in
Chinese Taipei clear " impairment test" under Article 11 of the TRIPS Agreement for not
granting the right to the authors?   If your authority believes that it is the case, please explain
why, referring to the relevant information such as the number of video-rental shops.
Article 29 of the Copyright Law accords rental right to authors of cinematographic works,
while Article 60 of the same Law applies the first sale doctrine to those works.
In light of the fact that those provisions has not led to widespread of copying of
cinematographic works, it therefore clears the "impair ment test" and is in conformity with Article 11
of the TRIPS Agreement.
Currently there is no information regarding the number of video-rental shops.
3. Game software has two aspects.  One is that of a cinematographic work and the other is
that of computer software.  Do the authors of game software have the right of rental?  Please
explain whether or not Article 60 of the Copyright Law is applied to game software.
Game software is protected as computer software under the Copyright Law.
In accordance with Article 29 and proviso of Paragraph 1, Article 60, the authors of game
software enjoy full and unlimited right of rental, as required under Article 11 of the TRIPS
Agreement.IP/C/W/373/Add.1
Page 6
4. Please explain if Copyright Law provides broadcasting organization with the right
stipulated in the first sentence of Article 14.3 of the TRIPS Agreement.  If not, the first sentence
of Article 24 of the Copyright Law might be inconsistent with Article 14.3 of the TRIPS
Agreement since Article 14.3 of TRIPS Agreement covers the rebroadcasting right.  If your
authority believes that Article 24 meets the obligation under TRIPS Agreement, please explainwhy.
Although broadcasting organizations are not dire ctly protected under the Copyright Law, any
programs broadcast by those organizations are protected as long as such programs satisfy the
definition of works as provided for in Paragraph 1, Article 5 of the same Law.  Owner of copyright in
the subject matter of broadcast are protected in accordance with relevant provisions of the Berne
Convention, as required under Article 14.3 of the TRIPS Agreement.
5. The time-limit of requesting compensation for infringement in Article 89 bis might have
the same effect as the "unreasonable time-limit" in Article 41 of the TRIPS Agreement. Please
explain the consistency between Article 89 bis of the Copyright Law and Article 41 of TRIPS
Agreement.
Article 89 bis of the Copyright Law applies the same formula regarding time-limits as
stipulated under Paragraph 1 of Article 197 of the Civil Code.  All claims on torts for damages can be
made up to two years after the complainant knows of the loss and the identity of the obligor and, in
any cases, within ten years after the infringement takes place.  Even if Article 89 bis of the Copyright
Law were stroked out, the rules would remain the same under the application of Paragraph 1, Article
197 of the Civil Code.
Taking into account Article 41.5 of the TRIPS Agreement, the Article 89 bis of the Copyright
Law does not entail unreasonable time-limits; it is consistent with Article 41.2 of the TRIPS
Agreement.
6. Please explain the scope of "derivative works" in Article 106 quater  of the Copyright
Law.  For example, please let us know whether the following examples fall under the concept of
"derivative works" in Article 106 quater . (a) Japanese cinema with Chinese caption,
(b) Japanese cartoon with Chinese translation, (c) Combination CD consisting of several
Japanese songs.  Please explain the consiste ncy of the Article with Article 18 of Berne
Convention as well.
Subparagraph 10, Paragraph 1 of Article 3 of the Copyright Law defines derivative works that
covers those works whose creation are based upon pre-existing works by translation, musical
arrangement, revision, filming or other means.
All three examples listed above do not constitute derivative works.  In those circumstances,
the exploitations of those Japanese works shall be governed under Article 106 ter of the Copyright
Law, which is in conformity with Article 18 of the Berne Convention.
7. Please explain the purpose and scope of "fair use of a work" in Article 65 of the
Copyright Law, since Article 65 might allow the wider "limitation and exception " than
Article 13 of TRIPS Agreement.
The following are the four criteria stipulated in Paragraph 2 of Article 65 of the Copyright
Law:
1. The purpose and nature of the exploitation, including whether such exploitation is of
a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;IP/C/W/373/Add.1
Page 7
2. The nature of the work;
3. The amount and substantiality of the portion exploited in relation to the work as a
whole; and
4. Effect of the exploitation on the work's current and potential market value.
The coverage of those four criteria are within the scope of "limitation and exception" as stipulated
under Article 13 of TRIPS Agreement.
8. Please explain the consistency between Article 26 of the Copyright Law and
Article 11 bis(1)(iii) of the Berne Convention.
Rights accorded under Article 11 bis (1)(iii) of the Berne Convention are fully implemented
by Article 24 to 26 of the Copyright Law.
Responses to Follow-Up Questions posed by Japan
A. COPYRIGHT
1. Concerning the submitted answer 4 and 5 regarding Article 106 ter of the Copyright
Law, please provide us detailed criteria to de cide the scope of "has begun the exploitation".
Please also explain the consistency between Article 106 ter and Article 18 of the Berne
Convention.  In this connection, Article 70.4 of the TRIPS Agreement stipulates that the
equitable remuneration is at least necessary in such cases as described in Article 106 ter of the
Copyright Law.  Therefore please discuss how Article 70.4 of TRIPS Agreement is implementedin the Copyright Law.
There is no established criteria made by the administrative authority.  It should be decided by
the courts on individual merits.  Please refer to our reply to your original question 4.
Article 106 ter is enacted in accordance with Article 18 of the Berne Convention, as referred
to in Article 70.2 of the TRIPS Agreement.  E quitable remuneration, as stipulated under Article 70.4
of the TRIPS Agreement, is under consideration.
B. TRADEMARK
2. Concerning the submitted answer 7 regarding Article 16.2 and 16.3 of the TRIPS
Agreement, please explain, if any, criteria or interpretation for the judgement of well-known
trademark.
Criteria for the judgment of well-known trademark are stipulated in the administrative
guideline, "Main Points for Determining Well-Known Marks."  Please refer to Attachment A of our
reply to question 12 posed by the European Communities.
C. GEOGRAPHICIAL INDICATION
3. Concerning the submitted answer 8.2 regarding Article 23.1 of the TRIPS Agreement,
please provide the specific products, if same protection provided under the Article 23.1 would
be given to the products other than wine and spirits.
No.  The protection of geographical indication on wines and spirits, as required under Article
23.1 of the TRIPS Agreement, would not be extended to other products.IP/C/W/373/Add.1
Page 8
D. PATENT
4. Concerning the submitted answer 9, does Chines e Taipei allow to claim a priority based
on a PCT international application only for Austra lia?  If so, is this treatment inconsistent with
Article 4 of the TRIPS Agreement, i.e. Most-favoured-Nation Treatment? If it is consistent with
the Article 4 of the TRIPS Agreement, please explain the grounds.
According to Article 11 of the Patent Cooperatio n Treaty, when the application complies with
the minimum requirements for obtaining an international filing date, it has the effect of a regional
patent application in those PCT Contracting States.
We will recognize the claim to priority right of a patent application, in accordance with
Article 5 of the Paris convention, as referred to under Article 3 of the TRIPS Agreement, as long as
we can confirm that the domestic laws and regulations of the relevant WTO Member implement thesaid Article of the Patent Cooperation Treaty.
The above-mentioned practice will be applied to all WTO Members on MFN basis.
E. UNDISCLOSED INFORMATION
5. Concerning the submitted answer 13 regarding Article 39.3 of the TRIPS Agreement,
please explain whether the specific terms of protection of prohibition for disclose o the
Undisclosed Information submitted to the govern ment are provided in the relevant laws and
regulations, such as the Trade Secret Law, the Civil Servant Law, the Criminal Law and other
relevant law.
There is no time-limit regarding the protection for undisclosed information against disclosure
under the Trade Secret Law, the Civil Servant Law and the Criminal Law, as long as the information
remains secret.
The protection for a period of 7 years for undisclosed information against unfair commercial
use is provided under the "post-marketing surveillance system on new drugs."
Please refer to our replies to question 11 posed by the United States and question 6 posed by
Korea.
F. ENFORCEMENT
6. Concerning the submitted answer 16 regarding the Code of Civil Procedures, please
explain how the document in a "non-public manner" is dealt with by the court in the statute
and/or practice.
In accordance with the ratio legis  of Paragraph 2, Article 344 of the Code of Civil
Procedures, when deciding upon the justifiability of refusing to submit relevant document, the court
is, if it deems necessary, entitled to order the party to submit the document in the closed session of the
court, instead of in the regular court session which is open to the public.
Neither the opposing party nor the public has any access to the privacy or trade secret of the
submitting party or third party.
7. (i)  Concerning the submitted answer 17(i), does the concept of "injured parties" in
Article 88 of the Copyright Law cover not only right holders but also licensees?  Please explainIP/C/W/373/Add.1
Page 9
the differences between "right holders" in Article 2 of TRIPS Agreement and "injured parties"
in Article 88 of the Copyright Law.
Pursuant to Paragraph 4, Article 37 of the Copyright Law, as amended on 12 November 2001,
an exclusive licensee may exercise rights in the capacity of the economic rights owner.  On the other
hand, the right holder within the scope of the licence may not exercise rights.
The "injured party" specified under Article 88 of the Copyright Law covers all persons whose
right accorded under the Copyright Law is unlawfully damaged.
(ii)  Concerning the submitted answer 17(ii), your civil proceedings are to effective
remedies against patent infringement in terms of  Article 41.1 of the TRIPS Agreement.  Please
indicate statistical or other information of remedies for patent infringement, including thenumber of incidents, the number of injunctions and the level of compensations of damages.
We have no statistical or other information on remedies for patent infringement, including the
number of incidents, the number of injunctions and the level of compensations of damages.
8. Concerning the submitted answer 18(2) regarding Article 90 bis of the Copyright Law,
according to Article 90 bis, right holders are required to prepare large amount of deposit in
order to get an injunction order, and consequent ly it is quite difficult for them to apply the
injunction order.  This provision might be inconsistent with Article 53.1 of the TRIPS
Agreement since this deposit system unreasonabl y deters recourse to the injunction procedure.
Please explain the consistency between Article 90 bis of the Copyright Law and Article 53.1 of
the TRIPS Agreement.  Please explain what measures your authority will take in order to stop
the export of infringing goods effectively in re lation to Article 53.1 of the TRIPS Agreement.
The bond requirement stipulated under Article 90 bis of the Copyright Law takes into account
the competing interests of all parties.
The intention of the bond is to compensate the such exporter or importer in case where he or
she may suffer any injury through the wrong detention of goods.
The right holder may also apply to the judicial authorities to order the provisional measure
through civil or criminal procedure.  The customs may then suspend the release of the goods
accordingly.
Pursuant to Article 61 of the Customs Law and Article 17 of the Trade Law, the customs
would, upon ex officio  discovery of suspected IPR infringement on importing or exporting goods,
suspend the release of those goods and take initiatives to notify the right holders.  The right holders
whom may then take th e following two options:
1. file an official complaint to the prosecutors and request for seizure of those products
suspected of infringement in accordance with Articles 133 and 232 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure; or
2. post a bond to the customs to suspend the release of those goods in accordance with
Article 90 bis of the Copyright Law.
Actions taken under option 1 for the seizure of those products in criminal procedures are free
of charge.IP/C/W/373/Add.1
Page 10
Under this circumstance, the bond requirement stipulated under Article 91 bis of the Copyright
Law is in conformity with Article 53.1 of the TRIPS Agreement.
EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES AND THEIR MEMBER STATES
A. GENERAL PROVISIONS
1. Please state whether your IP legislation includes measures to protect public health and
nutrition, and to promote the public interest in sectors of vital importance to your socio-
economic and technological development as mentioned under Article 8 of the TRIPS
Agreement.  If yes, please describe these measures and explain how such measures are
consistent with the provisions of the TRIPS Agreement.
Our IP-related legislation does have measures to protect public health and nutrition and to
promote the public interest in sectors of vital importance to socio-economic and technological
developments as set forth in both Articles 8.1 and 8.2 of the TRIPS Agreement.
Relevant provisions include:
Articles 9, 44 to 65 and 69 of the Copyright Law;
Article 37 of the Trademark Law;
Articles 21, 58, 78 and 80 of the Patent Law; andArticles 10, 14, 19, 21, 22 and 24 of the Fair Trade Law.
B. C
OPYRIGHT AND RELATED RIGHTS
2. Given that Chinese Taipei is not a party to the Berne Convention, which measures have
been taken in order to comply with  Article 9 of the TRIPS Agreement?
The 1992 amendment to the Copyright Law already provided the same level of protection as
required under Articles 1 to 21 of the Berne Convention and its Appendix.
Relevant provisions governing those measures include: Article 4 (Works of foreign
persons), Subparagraph 9, Paragraph 1 of Article 5 (Architectural works), Article 6 (Derivative work),
Articles 30 and 34 (Term of protection) and Articles 44 to 65 (Fair use).
3. Please explain how your legislation deals with copyright piracy and, in particular, with
material made available, without authorizat ion of the right owner, over the internet.
Piracy over internet constitutes infringement of reproduction rights under Article 22 of the
Copyright Law.  Pursuant to Article 91 of the same Law, the corresponding penalties include
monetary fines and an imprisonment from six months to five years.  Relevant remedies are also
available under Articles 84 and 88 of the said Law.
A draft amendment that accords the right of communication to the public, including materials
made available over the internet as stipulated in WCT and WPPT, is now under consideration.
4. Please describe the protection accorded to authors of computer programs, databases or
compilations of data.IP/C/W/373/Add.1
Page 11
Pursuant to Subparagraph 10, Paragraph 1, Article 5 of the Copyright Law, computer
programs are defined and protected as literary works.  Thus, authors of such works enjoy full
copyright protection as provided under Article 10 of the same Law.
With creative originality, databases or compilations of data are protected as independent
works under Article 7 of the Copyright Law and enjoy full copyright protection as provided in
Article 10 of the said Law.   
5. Please state whether your legislation provides for a rental right and, if so, the works to
which it applies.
Article 29 of the Copyright Law accords the right to lease to all works except performances.
However, Article 60 of the same Law applies the first sale doctrine to all works other than sound
recordings and computer programs.  In short, the sound recordings and computer programs enjoy full
and unlimited right to lease as required under Article 11 of the TRIPS Agreement.
6. Please describe the rights granted to performers, producers of phonograms (sound
recordings) and broadcasting organizations under your legislation.
Pursuant to Article 7 bis of the Copyright Law, the performance of a performer is treated as a
work.  Thus, performers are granted with the exclusive rights including reproducing their performance
by means of sound recording, video recording or photography, broadcasting their performance inpublic and performing in public by means of loudspeakers or other equipment (please refer to
Paragraph 2, Article 22, Article 24 and Paragraph 2, Article 26 of the same Law.)
Pursuant to Subparagraph 8, Paragraph 1, Article 5 of the Copyright Law, sound recording is
defined as work.  The producers of phonograms (authors of sound recordings) are granted with theexclusive rights including reproduction, public broadcast, lease of their sound recordings and
adaptation of their sound recordings into derivative works or to compile it into compilation works
(please refer to Paragraph 1, Article 22, Articles 24, 28 and 29 of the same Law.).
Although broadcasting organizations are not dire ctly protected under the Copyright Law, any
programs broadcast by those organizations are protected as long as such programs satisfy the
definition of works as provided for in Paragraph 1, Article 5 of the same Law.
Thus, all the protection to performers, producers of phonograms and broadcasting
organizations accorded by the Copyright Law is in conformity with the requirement of Article 14 of
the TRIPS Agreement.
G. T
RADEMARKS
7. Article 5, second paragraph of the Trademark Law of Chinese Taipei (hereafter "TM
Law"), allows that a sign which is not inherently distinctive may still be registered if the
applicant demonstrates acquired distinctiveness through use.  Please indicate whether such is
equally possible for single colour marks.  In addition, please explain whether the registration ofsmell and sound marks will be permissible.
Although Paragraph 2, Article 5 of the Trademar k Law provides that registration of trademark
may be acquired by demonstrating distinctiveness through use, registrations of trademark on single
colour, smell and sound are not yet permissible in pursuance to Paragraph 1, Article 5 of the said Law.Those provisions are in conformity with Article 15.1 of the TRIPS Agreement.IP/C/W/373/Add.1
Page 12
A draft amendment to the Trademark Law extends the scope of registrability of a trademark
to include single colour and sound is now under legislative review.
8. Article 25 TM Law seems to indicate that renewal will be refuse d in cases where the
trademark owner did not genuinely use his trademark within a period of three years prior tothe filing of the (renewal) application.  Does this mean that the owner will have to demonstrate
genuine use each time he seeks for renewal?  Please explain how this provision complies with
Article 19 of the TRIPS Agreement.
In accordance with Paragraph 2, Article 25 of the Trademark Law, when filing a renewal
application on trademark, the applicants are required to provide the competent authority with
supporting documents on the genuine use of such trademark.  In practice, an affidavit provided by theapplicants is usually considered sufficient.
Although it is not required under Article 19 of the TRIPS Agreement, we have taken into
consideration of relevant development under the Trademark Law Treaty and are currently considering
the abolishment of the requirement for supporting documents on genuine use.
The cancellation of trademark registration after an uninterrupted period of at least 3 years of
non-use, as stipulated under Article 19 of the TRIPS Agreement, will be implemented, after the
proposed amendment, solely under Subparagraph 2, Paragraph 1, Article 31 of the Trademark Law.
9. Please explain how the TM Law complies with the provisions of Article 22 and 23 of the
TRIPS Agreement.  More precisely, please explain how the TM Law protects geographical
indications as requested by the TRIPS Agreement.
Protecting geographical indications via Trademark Law is not requested by the TRIPS
Agreement.  In our system, relevant legislations  would include the Trademark Law, the Fair Trade
Law and the Tobacco and Administration Law as followed.
I. Implementing Article 22 of the TRIPS Agreement:
The geographical indications to all goods and services are protected as "certification marks"
under Article 73 of the Trademark Law.
Subparagraph 6, Article 37 of the Trademark Law provides that no application may be filed
for registration of a trademark design that is likely to mislead the public with respect to the nature,
quality or place of origin of the goods.  Article 52 of the same Law also states that an interested party
may request the competent authority to conduct a review for invalidation of the registration if it is inviolation with the said provision.
For any use of geographical indications that constitutes unfair competition, Article 21 of the
Fair Trade Law, in conformity with Article 10 bis of the Paris Convention, provides that enterprises
shall not make false or misleading representations either on their products or in the advertisements oftheir products. In addition, they shall not sell, transport, export or import goods bearing false or
misleading representations.
II. Implementing Article 23 of the TRIPS Agreement:
Pursuant to Paragraph 2, Article 33 of th e Tobacco and Alcohol Administration Law,
producers or importers may choose to label geographical indications on their alcohol products, but the
labeling shall not constitute false or misleading representation.IP/C/W/373/Add.1
Page 13
The language of Article 23.1 of the TRIPS Agreement is incorporated into Article 13 of the
Regulation Governing the Labeling of the Alcohol Products.
10. Please explain what is meant by Chinese "Standard Quality" marks as referred to in
Article 37.4 TM Law.  Article 37.6 TM Law seems to provide a protection that is in line withArticle 22.3 of the TRIPS Agreement, please indicate where the TM law provides for an
additional protection for geographical indications for wines and spirits.
The Chinese "Standard Quality" mark referred to in Article 37.4 of the Trademark Law
represents, in fact, the Chinese National Standards (CNS) Mark.  CNS Marks are awarded by the
Bureau of Standards, Metrology and Inspections (BSMI) to honour both manufacturers and products
that conform to quality standards required by CNS.  The regime is not designed for the protection ofgeographical indications.
Conditions to refuse or invalidate the registration of a trademark that contains or consists of a
geographical indication as required under Articles 22.3 and 23.2 of the TRIPS Agreement are
implemented under Subparagraph 6, Article 37 and Article 52 of the Trademark Law.
In practice, when dealing with trademark registration that contains or consists of a
geographical indication identifying wines and spirits, any false representations will be considered as
misleading to the public.  That practice is codified under a draft amendment to the Trademark Law
that is now under legislative review.
11. Article 32 and Article 44 TM Law provide for the possibility to file an administrative
appeal against decisions that are taken by th e Trademark Office.  Please explain how the TM
Law complies with Article 41.4 of the TRIPS Agreement (opportunity for review by a judicial
authority of final administrative decisions).
Pursuant to the Law of Administrative Litigation, interested parties may file litigation to the
administrative courts for judicial review upon reception of the decision on administrative appeal.
Therefore, our legislation does provide a mechanism to judicial bodies, i.e. the administrative
courts, against final administrative decisions as required under Article 41.4 of the TRIPS Agreement.
12. Please explain how the TM Law affords protection to well-known trademarks
(Article 6 bis of the Paris Union Convention).  Please also explain how the Chinese Taipei
legislation defines a well-known trademark.  Will Chinese Taipei take into consideration the
Joint Recommendation concerning Provisions on  the Protection of Well-Known Marks that
were adopted by the Assembly of the Paris Union for the Protection of Industrial Property andby the General Assembly of the World In tellectual Property Organization (WIPO) in
September 1999?
The Trademark Law and the Fair Trade Law provide adequate and effective protection on
both registered and non-registered well-known trademarks.
I. Implementing Article 16.2 of the TRIPS Agreement:
Pursuant to Articles 61 and 62 of the Trademar k Law, the owner of the registered trademark,
including well-known trademark, shall have the exclusive right to prevent all others from usingidentical or similar signs for goods which are identical or similar to those in respect of which the
trademark is registered.IP/C/W/373/Add.1
Page 14
Subparagraph 7, Article 37 of the Trademark Law accords further protection for non-
registered well-known trademarks against the registration of other marks.  (Please refer to Article 31.1
of the Enforcement Rules of Trademark Law for the criteria to determine well-known trademarks and
service marks.)  In addition, Article 52 of the same Law provides that cancellation on registered
trademarks that may result confusion with well-known trademarks may be requested anytime withinthe term of protection of ten-year.
Article 77 of the Trademark Law extends the scope of the trademark protection, mutatis
mutandis, to services.
Pursuant to Article 20 of the Fair Trade Law, all types of famous symbols, including well-
known trademarks or services marks, registered or not, are eligible for protection against the use ofidentical or similar signs on goods or services which would cause confusion.
II. Implementing Article 16.3 of the TRIPS Agreement:
In accordance with Subparagraph 7, Article 37 of the Trademark Law, goods and services,
which are not similar to those in respect of which a well-known trademark is registered, shall be
excluded from registration of their trademarks and service marks.  In addition, non-registered well-
known trademarks and service marks are entitled to enjoying the same level of protection despite the
fact that it is not so required under Article 16.3 of the TRIPS Agreement.
Article 24 of the Fair Trade Law also provides that no enterprise shall otherwise have any
deceptive or obviously unfair conducts that is able to affect trading order. Regardless of similar or not
similar goods or services, protections for well-known trademarks and service marks are provided
against deceptive or obviously unfair conducts that are likely to damage the interests of trademark
owners.
Those criteria stipulated in the Main Points for Determining Well-Known Marks (see
Attachment A ) are in conformity with the Joint R ecommendation Concerning Provisions on the
Protection of Well-Known Marks that were adopted by the Assembly of the Paris Union for the
Protection of Industrial Property and by the General Assembly of the World Intellectual Property
Organization (WIPO) in September 1999.
H. G
EOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS
13. Chinese Taipei recently enacted the Regulati on Governing the Labeling of the Alcoholic
Products.  Article 13 provides for the definition of a geographical indication in Chinese Taipei
legislation.  Please indicate how a geographical indication can be protected through this
legislation.  Please indicate whether Chinese Taipei intends to enact a regulation for other
geographical indications then those for alcohol products.
The Regulation Governing the Labeling of the Alcohol Products was promulgated on
December 30, 2000.  Article 13 of the Regulation, empowered by Article 33 of the Tobacco and
Alcohol Administration Law, provides the definition and protection of geographic indication labelingon alcohol products.  Any violations to the said Regulation will be adjudicated by the competent
authority in pursuance to Article 52 of the Tobacco and Alcohol Administration Law.  Manufactures
and/or importers of such products are subject to fines and those products may be confiscated.
This high level of protection applies to alcohol products only.  We have no intention to extend
the protection to other products.IP/C/W/373/Add.1
Page 15
14. Please describe and explain the provisions in Chinese Taipei legislation establishing a
link, if any, between the characteristics of an indication and its geographical origin.
The geographical indications to all goods and services are protected as "certification marks."
For the definition of certification marks, please refer to Article 73 of the Trademark Law.
In addition, geographical indications for wines and spirits are defined under Article 13 of the
Regulation Governing the Labeling of the Alcohol Products.
15. Please explain what use has been made in Chinese Taipei of the exceptions under
Article 24 of the TRIPS Agreement?  Please provide examples of the use of the exceptions by
courts, or lists of names considered  as generic in your jurisdiction.
Exceptions to GI protections under Article 24 of the TRIPS Agreement are implemented
through those exercises of bona fide  use under Article 23 of the Trademark Law.  Up to date, there
has been no case brought up by GI holders to exclude others from making the same or similar
labeling.  Therefore, we cannot provide examples of the use of the exceptions by our courts, and we
have no confirmed list yet with names considered as generic.
16. Please explain how foreign geographical indi cations enjoy the protection prescribed by
Articles 22 and 23 of the TRIPS Agreement.  Can you please provide us with an overview of all
the geographical indications that are currently protected in Chinese Taipei?
Foreign geographical indications are eligible for the protection, as required under Articles 22
and 23 of the TRIPS Agreement, under the Trademark Law, the Fair Trade Law and the Tobacco and
Alcohol Administration Law.
I. Implementing Article 22 of the TRIPS Agreement:
The geographical indications to all goods and services are protected as "certification marks"
under Article 73 of the Trademark Law.
Subparagraph 6, Article 37 of the Trademark Law provides that no application may be filed
for registration of a trademark design that is likely to mislead the public with respect to the nature,
quality or place of origin of the goods.  Article 52 of the same Law also states that an interested party
may request the competent authority to conduct a review for invalidation of the registration if it is in
violation with the said provision.
For any use of geographical indications that constitutes unfair competition, Article 21 of the
Fair Trade Law, in conformity with Article 10 bis of the Paris Convention, provides that enterprises
shall not make false or misleading representations either on their products or in the advertisements of
their products. In addition, they shall not sell, transport, export or import goods bearing false or
misleading representations.
In general, all products are eligible to apply for certification mark and acquire protection for
their geographical indications under the Trademark Law.  Under this regime, one domestic rice
product has recently been approved for the protection as a certification mark.  There is no proposed
geographical indication currently being considered for recognition.IP/C/W/373/Add.1
Page 16
II. Implementing Article 23 of the TRIPS Agreement:
Pursuant to Paragraph 2, Article 33 of th e Tobacco and Alcohol Administration Law,
producers or importers may choose to label geographical indications on their alcohol products, but the
labeling shall not constitute false or misleading representation.
The language of Article 23.1 of the TRIPS Agreement is incorporated into Article 13 of the
Regulation Governing the Labeling of the Alcohol Products.
17. Please explain how Chinese Taipei nation als may ask for the protection of their
geographical indications.
Since there is no different treatment for the protection between domestic and foreign
geographical indications, the answer here would be the same as those indicated in Question 16.
E. I NDUSTRIAL DESIGNS
18. Please explain whether or not your legislat ion extends to the protection of designs
dictated essentially by technical or functional considerations.  Please explain how textile designs
are protected.
Protection of industrial designs is provided und er the Patent Law.  However, pursuant to
Paragraph 1, Article 108 of the Patent Law, our legislation does not extend protection of designsdictated essentially by technical or functional considerations.
According to the same Law, textile designs enjoy the same level of protection as new design
patents as long as they process novelty, creativity and industrial applicability.
19. Please explain how your legislation protects right holders of a design against importing
of articles bearing embodied or copied design.
Pursuant to Paragraph 1, Article 117 of the Patent Law, the patentee of a new design patent
shall have the exclusive right to exclude others from unauthorized manufacturing, selling, using or
importing products that are identical with or similar to the article claimed in the new design patent.
20. Please state whether or not your legislation provides for the rights to issue a compulsory
licence for industrial designs.
The Patent Law does not provide the right to issue a compulsory licence for industrial
designs.
21. Please indicate for what period of time your legislation grants protection for industrial
designs.
Pursuant to Paragraph 3, Article 109 of the Pate nt Law, term of protection of a new design
patent (industrial designs) begins from the allowance publication day and expires after 12 years from
the filing date of the patent application.
F. P
ATENTS
22. Please explain how the three criteria for the patentability of inventions as set out in
Article 27.1 (novelty, inventive step, industrial use) of the TRIPS Agreement are reflected in
your patent law and how they are applied in practice.IP/C/W/373/Add.1
Page 17
The three criteria for the patentability of inventions (i.e. novelty, inventive step, industrial
applicability) as set out in Article 27.1 of the TRIPS Agreement are reflected in Article 20 of the
Patent Law.  To be in parallel with other nations, these criteria are applied in practice in collaboration
with the examination guidelines, which refer to that  of the European Patent Convention, Japan and the
US.
23. Article 31(f) of the TRIPS Agreement stipulates that "use under a compulsory licence
shall be authorized predominantly for the supply of the domestic market".  Please describe how
the Chinese Taipei Patent Law complies with this Article.
Paragraph 1, Article 78 of the Patent Law complies with Article 31(f) of the TRIPS
Agreement by stipulating that the patent authority may grant a compulsory licence to the applicant to
put the patented invention into practice provided that such practice shall be restricted mainly to the
purpose of satisfying the requirements of domestic market.
24. Please describe how Chinese Taipei complies with Article 3 of the TRIPS Agreement
("national treatment") in regard to providing righ ts of priority (Article 4 of the Paris Union
Convention) for applications of patents, utility models or design patents from a WTO Member.
Upon our accession to the WTO on 1 January 2002, any person who has duly filed an
application for a patent, or for the registration of a utility model, or of an industrial design in any otherWTO Members shall enjoy, pursuant to Article 24 of the Patent Law, a right of priority.  Thus, our
practice complies with Article 4 of the Paris Convention, as required under Article 3 of the TRIPS
Agreement.
G. P
LANT VARIETY PROTECTION
25. In December 1988, the Chinese Taipei G overnment adopted the Plant Seed Law
(sui generis  system as provided for by Article 27.3 of the TRIPS Agreement).  The Plant Seed
Law was most recently amended on 17 May 2000.  Please describe how the protection of plant
varieties is regulated by this law.
The Plant Seed Law of the Council of Agri culture was promulgated on 5 December 1988 and
was last amended on 30 January 2002 to provide protection on 88 species of plant varieties and therights of plant breeders.
Article 4 of the Plant Seed Law provides protection for plant varieties.  The said Article
stipulates that category of plants governed by this Law shall be designated and published by the
central authorities in charge.  Thus, the above-mentioned 88 species of plant varieties are protectedfollowing promulgation on 30 January 2002.
Taking into account of the development under UPOV 1991 Convention, a draft amendment
providing extension on the scope of plant species and reduction on the time of process of examination
of the said Law is under consideration.
H. L
AYOUT -DESIGNS OF INTEGRATED CIRCUITS
26. Please describe how your legislation protects topographies.
Protection of topographies, as stipulated in Article 35 of the TRIPS Agreement in relation to
the IPIC Treaty, is sufficiently provided through Articles 2, 5 to 7 and 15 to 17 of the Integrated
Circuit Layout Protection Act.IP/C/W/373/Add.1
Page 18
27. Please explain what protection your legisl ation grants to right holders against the
unlawful importation, sale or distribution for commercial purposes of topographies including
integrated circuits or other articles in which a topography is incorporat ed in accordance with
Article 36 of the TRIPS Agreement.
Pursuant to Article 36 of the TRIPS Agreement, Article 29 of the Integrated Circuit Layout
Protection Act protects the right holders against unlawful importation, sale or distribution for
commercial purposes of topographies including inte grated circuits or other articles in which
topography is incorporated.
28. Please explain how your legislation provi des for the derogation from Article 36 as
specified in Article 37 of the TRIPS Agreement where a person has no knowledge or reasonable
grounds to know when acquiring an integrated circuit or an article incorporating such an
integrated circuit that it contains an unlawful topography.
Paragraph 4, Article 18 of the Integrated Circuit Layout Protection Act stipulates that in case
where a person has no knowledge or reasonable grounds to know when acquiring an integrated circuit
or an article incorporating such an integrated ci rcuit that it contains an unlawful topography is not
under the jurisdiction of the said Act.
In addition, Article 31 of the same Law provides that upon notified by the right holder, any
subsequent importation or distribution will be entitled to equivalent compensation to the right holder.
29. Please state the term of protection granted by your legislation to topographies.
Article 19 of the Integrated Circuit Layout Protection Act stipulates that the term of
protection granted to topographies ends ten years after either the application date or its first
commercial exploitation date.
I. P ROTECTION OF UNDISCLOSED INFORMATION
30. Please explain how Chinese Taipei legislat ion defines undisclosed information.  Please
explain how Article 39.3 of the TRIPS Agreement  has been implemented in the legislation.
The undisclosed information is defined under Article 2 of the Trade Secret Law.  The
protection of those information as required under Article 39.3 of the TRIPS Agreement are
implemented as follows:
I. Protection against disclosure:
Article 9 of the Trade Secret Law provides that government officials shall keep the secrecy of
information provided as trade secret.  When those tests and other data submitted are claimed as trade
secret by the providers, the information shall be eligible for the protection accordingly.  In addition to
civil liabilities provided for under the Trade Secret Law, Article 4 of the Civil Servant Law andArticles 316 to 318 ter of the Criminal Code also provide criminal punishments for unlawful
disclosure of the secrets.
II. Protection against unfair commercial use:
The post-marketing surveillance system on new drugs was implemented since 1993.  The
system provides a total of seven-year protection for data submitted.  Any generic application
submitted thereafter must meet the same standards as those of the first applicant's local clinical trials.IP/C/W/373/Add.1
Page 19
For details of the system on the data exclusivity (so-called "pipeline protection") for new drugs,
please refer to our Public Notice No. 8246232 as Attachment B .
31. Please explain whether or not Chinese Taipei  legislation grants a defined period of time
for the protection of undisclosed information.  If so, please specify it.
I. Protection against disclosure:
There is no time-limit for the protection of undisclosed information.  Those information are
protected under relevant laws provided that they remain secret.
II. Protection against unfair commercial use:
The post-marketing surveillance system on new drugs provides the pipeline protection for a
period of seven years.
32. Please explain how Chinese Taipei intends to protect undisclosed test data and other
data submitted to Chinese Taipei authorities to obtain marketing approval for pharmaceuticals
against unfair commercial use and disclosure.
All new drugs enjoy the abovementioned pipeline protection.  When an entity that has not
produced its own data, but instead relies upon the data submitted by another, its application will beturned down.  For details, please also refer to our reply to your Question 30.
J. E
NFORCEMENT
33. Please describe how your legislation provides for effective action against infringement of
intellectual property rights.
For the remedies that the judicial authorities can employ regarding IPR infringements such as
injunctions, damages and expenses, please refer to Paragraphs 5 and 21 of the Checklist of Issues on
Enforcement (IP/N/6/TPKM/1).  Relevant provisions are also provided under Articles 277, 282 bis,
288, 342 to 349, 368 to 376 ter, 522, 532 and 538 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
For destruction and disposal of infringing goods, materials or implements for their
production, please refer to Article 88 bis of the Copyright Law, Paragraph 3, Article 61 of the
Trademark Law, Paragraph 3, Article 88 of the Patent Law, Paragraph 2, Article 11 of the Trade
Secret Law and Article 38 of the Criminal Code.
For the criteria and the way of calculation to determine the amount of damages by the courts,
please refer to Article 88 of the Copyright Law, Article 66 of the Trademark Law, Article 89 of the
Patent Law and Article 13 of the Trade Secret Law.
For the penalties on IPR infringements, please refer to Articles 91 to 103 of the Copyright
Law and Articles 62 to 64 of the Trademark Law.
34. Please explain whether or not your legisl ation provides for a mechanism to judicial
bodies of final administrative decisions.
Pursuant to the Law of Administrative Appeal, the interested parties may appeal to the
Ministry of Economic Affairs upon reception of administrative decision.IP/C/W/373/Add.1
Page 20
Pursuant to the Law of Administrative Litigation, interested parties may file litigation to the
administrative courts for judicial review upon reception of the decision on administrative appeal.
Thus, our legislation does provide a mechanism to judicial bodies, i.e. the administrative
courts, against final administrative decisions.
35. Please describe how your legislation authorizes judges to order production of evidence
by the opposing party.  Please give precise information on what measures are taken to ensure
the protection of confidential information.
Article 344 of the Code of Civil Procedure, as amended in February 2000, stipulates that:
"Either party is obligated to submit the following document(s):
I. Documents which have been referred to in the preliminary pleading or in the course
of oral proceedings;
II. Documents which the other party may be by law apply to inspect to or take delivery
of;
III. Documents made for the benefit of the other party;
IV. Commercial account books;
V. The document is made for the matter(s) related to the case.
If the content of the document listed in Subparagraph 5 of prior section is related to the
privacy or trade secret of plaintiff, defendant or third party, and if the document disclosed publicly
may cause serious damage to the plaintiff, defendant or the third party, the related party may refuse to
submit.  However, for the decision of whether th e related party may refuse to submit the document,
the court, when it considers necessary, may order the party to submit the document in a non-public
manner."
Relevant provisions also include in Articles 342 and 343 of the same Code.
36. Please quote provisions of your legislation that authorize judges to order a defendant to
desist from an infringement.
Pursuant to Articles 532 to 538 of the Code of Civil Procedure and in compliance with
Article 28 of the Civil Enforcement Procedure Law, judges are authorized to order the defendant to
desist from an infringement.
37. Article 45 of the TRIPS Agreement stipulates that "the judicial authority shall have the
authority to order the infringer to pay the right holder damages adequate to compensate for the
injury suffered".  Please indicate how the Chin ese Taipei civil judicial remedies comply with
this TRIPS obligation.  Please quote what prov isions of your legislation authorize judges to
order the payment to the right holder of ad equate damages to compensate the injury he
suffered.
For the remedies that the judicial authorities can employ regarding IPR infringements
including damages and expenses, please refer to Paragraph 3 of the Checklist of Issues on
Enforcement (IP/N/6/TPKM/1).
Relevant provisions include Article 88 of th e Copyright Law, Article 66 of the Trademark
Law, Article 89 of the Patent Law and Article 13 of the Trade Secret Law.
38. Please quote what provisions of your legislation authorize judges to order the payment
of the right holder's expenses by the infringer.IP/C/W/373/Add.1
Page 21
Pursuant to Articles 78 and 79 of the Code of Civil Procedure and Article 28 of the Civil
Enforcement Procedure Law, judges are authorized to order the payment of the right holder's expenses
by the infringer.
39. Please explain if and how judges have the authority to order that infringing goods are
placed outside channels of commerce or destroyed.
In accordance with Article 46 of the TRIPS Agreement, judges of civil proceedings are
authorized to order that infringing goods be placed outside channels of commerce or destroyed under
Article 88 bis of the Copyright Law, Paragraph 3, Article 88 of the Patent Law and Paragraph 3,
Article 61 of the Trademark Law.
40. Please quote what provisions of your legislation authorize judges to indemnify a
defendant in the event of abuse by the plaintiff.  Article 56 of the TRIPS Agreement provides
that the applicant may be ordered to pay a ppropriate compensation because of wrongful
detention of good.  Please explain how Chinese Taipei legislation complies with this Article ofthe TRIPS Agreement.
Article 531 of the Code of Civil Procedure and Article 184 of the Civil Code provide
authorization to judges to indemnify a defendant in the event of abuse by the plaintiff.
Article 90 bis of the Copyright Law and Implementation Regulations for Suspension of
Release of Goods Infringing on Copyrights or Plate Rights by Customs Authorities provide that the
copyright owner who applies for suspension of release of the imported or exported goods that are
suspected of infringement on his or her copyright shall post a bond in an amount equivalent to the
customs value of imported goods or the FOB price of exported goods to serve as a compensationsecurity for the defendant suffering any injury through the wrong detention of goods.  Thus, it
complies with Article 56 of the TRIPS Agreement.
41. Please explain how your legislation implements Article 50 of the TRIPS Agreement.
Article 84 of the Copyright Law, Article 61 of the Trademark Law and Article 88 of the
Patent Law provide the legal basis for right holders to request provisional measures to remove theinfringements, or to prevent the likelihood of the infringements.
Articles 368 to 376 ter of the Code of Civil Procedure provide provisional measures that the
right holder may request to preserve relevant evidence.
Thus, our legislation complies with relevant provisions as set forth in Articles 50.1(a) and
50.1(b) of the TRIPS Agreement.
42. Please identify the competent authoritie s in your jurisdiction which receive requests
from right holders for an application to suspe nd the release of counterfeit goods by the customs
authorities.
Competent authorities that receive requests to suspend the release of counterfeiting goods by
the customs are prosecutors (for criminal proceedings) and district courts (for civil proceedings).  In
addition, copyright holders can post a bond to the customs to suspend the release of the infringinggoods.
Relevant provisions include Article 133 of th e Code of Criminal Procedure and Article 532 of
the Code of Civil Procedure.IP/C/W/373/Add.1
Page 22
43. Please indicate whether or not procedures are available to suspend the exporting of
counterfeit goods.
A Public Notice No. 90105656 (see Attachment C)  was promulgated by the customs authority
on September 13, 2001.  The Notice provides the mechanism for trademark right holders to request
for temporarily prevention from releasing of the counterfeiting goods by the customs.
Article 90 bis of the Copyright Law and Implementation Regulations for Suspension of
Release of Goods Infringing on Copyrights or Plate Rights by Customs Authorities provide that the
copyright owner who applies for suspension of release of the imported or exported goods that are
suspected of infringing on his or her copyright shall post a bond in an amount equivalent to thecustoms value of imported goods or the FOB price of exported goods to serve as a compensation
security for the defendant suffering any injury through the wrong detention of goods.
44. Please quote what provisions of your legisl ation authorize the competent authorities to
order the destruction or disposal of infringing goods.
Pursuant to Article 61 of the TRIPS Agreem ent, provisions authorizing the competent
authority to order the destruction or disposal of infringing goods are as follows:
1. Article 38 of the Criminal Code;
2. Articles 470 and 472 of the Code of Criminal Procedure; and
3. Article 64 of the Trademark Law.
45. Please explain how your legislation implements Article 61 of the TRIPS Agreement.
The penalties dealing with copyright piracy, subject to different types and degrees of gravity,
include an imprisonment of up to seven years and a fine of up to NT$450,000 (Please refer to
Articles 91-103 of the Copyright Law).
The penalties dealing with trademark counterfei ting, subject to different types and degrees of
gravity, include an imprisonment of up to three years and a fine of up to NT$200,000 (Please refer to
Articles 62 to 64 of the Trademark Law).
For the forfeiture of infringing goods, please refer to our answers to Question 24 of the
Checklist of Issues on Enforcement (IP/N/6/TPKM/1).  Pursuant to Article 64 of the Trademark Law
and Article 38 of the Criminal Law, materials and implements used in making an infringing good
shall be confiscated.
Other provisions with criminal procedures and penalties in cases of infringement of
intellectual property rights include Articles 125 to 13 0 of the Patent Law, Article 41 of the Plant Seed
Law and Article 35 of the Fair Trade Law.
46. Please describe how Articles 42 and 43 of the TRIPS Agreement have been implemented
in the judicial rules of civil procedures.
Article 203 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which complies with Article 42 of the TRIPS
Agreement, provides that in addition to the presence of the statutory agents, the court may request,which is not mandatory, the presence of the party in order to elucidate or ascertain the relations
involved in the action.  Furthermore, Articles 298, 302, 307, 342 to 345 of the said Code also provide
legal basis to identify and protect confidential information.IP/C/W/373/Add.1
Page 23
Judicial rules of civil procedure on evidences are provided for in Articles 342 to 345 of the
Code of Civil Procedure.
47. Are cases involving repeat offenders and wilful piracy and counterfeiting referred to the
appropriate authorities for initiation of crim inal proceedings?  Can Chinese Taipei provide
some relevant statistics of cases that have led to prosecution under the criminal law provisions?
Pursuant to Article 228 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, prosecutors act ex officio  actions
for initiating criminal proceedings on cases involving repeated offenders and wilful piracy and
counterfeiting.  Please refer to Attachments D-I, D-II and D-III  for statistics of cases.
48. Does your legislation include ex officio  actions as allowed by Article 58 of the TRIPS
Agreement?
In accordance with Article 61 of the Customs Law and Article 17 of the Trade Law, the
customs authority may, upon ex officio  discovery of suspicious IPR infringements on importing or
exporting goods, the customs authority shall suspend the release of those goods while takinginitiatives to notify the right holders whom must apply to the court for provisional measure, or post a
bond to the customs to suspend the release of those goods.
KOREA
A. T
RADEMARKS
1. How is Article 23.2 of the TRIPS Agreement implemented in the Trademark Law?
Conditions to refuse or invalidate the regist ration of a trademark for wines and spirits that
contains or consists of a geographical indication as required under Article 23.2 of the TRIPS
Agreement are implemented under Subparagraph 6, Article 37 and Article 52 of the Trademark Law.
In practice, when dealing with trademark registration that contains or consists of a
geographical indication identifying wines and spirits, any false representations will be considered as
misleading to the public.  The current practice is codified under a draft amendment to the TrademarkLaw that is now under legislative review.
B. P
ATENT
2. Do you grant patent protection for inventions  in all fields of technology?  If there are
exceptions, please describe the exceptions and how these exceptions comply with Article 27 of
the TRIPS Agreement.
Our Patent Law grants patent protection for inventions relating to products and processes in
all fields of technology except for items as set forth under Article 21 of the said Law.
Those exceptional items as stipulated in Article 21 of the Patent Law are as follows:
1. New varieties of animals and plants, except the cultivation and growth processes of
new plant varieties;
2. Diagnostic, treatment or surgical methods for diseases afflicting humans or animals;3. Scientific theories or mathematical methods;
4. Rules or methods of games and sports;IP/C/W/373/Add.1
Page 24
5. Methods or plans which can be implemented only by means of human reasoning and
memory;  and
6. An invention that is contrary to public order, good custom or sanitation.
In addition, new plant varieties are protected under the Plant Seed Law.
Thus, our legislation complies with Article 27 of the TRIPS Agreement.
3. Please explain the protection of microorganisms under the Patent Law.
Microorganisms are eligible for patent protection.
In accordance with Paragraph 1, Article 26 of the Patent Law, when an invention patent
involving any new microorganisms, the applicant sh all, prior to applying for patents, deposit the
microorganisms at a local depositary institute designated by the patent authority.  However, the
deposit is not required if those microorganisms can be easily obtained by persons skilled in the art.
Pursuant to Paragraph 3 of the same Article where those microorganisms have been deposited
at a foreign depositary institute recognized by the patent authority prior to applying for patents and the
fact of such deposit has been stated in the application, the deposit shall to be made in a local
depositary institute within three months from the filing date.
4. Please explain the detailed conditions fo r permitting compulsory licences in Chinese
Taipei.
Our Patent Law does grant a compulsory licence subject to conditions enumerated in
Article 31 of the TRIPS Agreement.  The relevant conditions, corresponding with those enumerated in
Article 31 of the TRIPS Agreement, are listed  under Articles 78 to 81 of the Patent Law.
5. Please explain how Chinese Taipei implements Article 34 of the TRIPS Agreement
concerning the burden of proof.
In conformity with Article 34 of the TRIPS Ag reement, Article 91 of the Patent Law provides
for the principle of the reversal of burden of proof in a process patent litigation.
C. UNDISCLOSED INFORMATION AND UNFAIR COMPETITION
6. Does your legislation grant a defined period of time for the protection of undisclosed
information?  If so, please specify the period of protection.
I. Protection against disclosure:
There is no time-limit for the protection of undisclosed information.  Undisclosed information
is protected under relevant laws provided that it remains secret.
II. Protection against unfair commercial use:
The post-marketing surveillance system on new drugs provides the pipeline protection for a
period of seven years.
7. Please explain how Chinese Taipei protects data submitted for marketing approval
against disclosure and unfair commercial use, as required by Article 39.3 of the TRIPS
Agreement.IP/C/W/373/Add.1
Page 25
I. Protection against disclosure:
Article 9 of the Trade Secret Law provides that government officials shall keep the secrecy of
information provided as trade secret.  When the providers claim those tests and other data submittedas trade secret, the submitted information shall be accorded with the protection accordingly.  In
addition to civil liabilities provided for under the Trade Secret Law, Article 4 of the Civil Servant
Law and Articles 316 to 318 ter of the Criminal Code also provide criminal punishments for unlawful
disclosure of the secrets.
II. Protection against unfair commercial use:
The post-marketing surveillance system on new drugs was implemented since 1993.  The
system provides a total of seven-year protection for data submitted.  Any generic drug application
submitted thereafter must meet the same standards as those of the first applicant's local clinical trials.
For details of the system on the data exclusivity (so-called "pipeline protection") for new drugs,
please refer to our Public Notice No. 8246232 as Attachment B .
D. L
AYOUT -DESIGNS OF INTEGRATED CIRCUITS
8. Regarding the protection of IC layout-designs,  please specify the organizations in charge
of these matters.
The Intellectual Property Office (IPO) is the competent organization in charge of matters
governing the protection of IC layout-designs.
E. CHECKLIST
9. In the course of IPR infringement proceedings, are there provisions aimed at protecting
confidential information?
When any party to a lawsuit is required by the court, pursuant to Subparagraph 5,
Paragraph 1, Article 344 of the Code of Civil Procedure, to provide with document which involves the
privacy or trade secret of the plaintiff, defendant or a third party, and if the document disclosed
publicly may cause serious damage to them, the party may refuse to submit.  Under such
circumstance, the court, when it considers necessary, may order the party to submit the document innon-public manner.
10. Is it possible to seek injunction under Article 44 of the TRIPS Agreement against a
person responsible for IPR infrin gement even though that person proves that he or she did not
have knowledge of the relevant infringement?
Injunctions may be sought, in accordance with Articles 532 to 538 of the Code of Civil
Procedure and in compliance with Article 28 of the of the Civil Enforcement Procedure Law, against
the infringer who does not knowingly, or with reasonable grounds to know, engage in infringing
activity.
11. In case the infringer refuses to obey an order of the court to provide relevant
information or documents, what remedies are available to enforce the court order?
Pursuant to Article 95 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the defendant has the right to
remain silent.  That is, the infringer is entitled no t to cooperate, and can refuse to provide with any
information or documents requested.  No remedy is available to enforce the court order.  Under suchIP/C/W/373/Add.1
Page 26
circumstance, however, the court can issue a search warrant to locate those information and seize the
documents in accordance with Articles 122 and 133 of the same Code.
Pursuant to Article 345 of the Code of Civil Procedure, when the infringer refuses to obey an
order of the court to provide relevant information or document, the court may consider the allegation
regarding the relevant information or document as being true and correct.  Opportunity should be
provided for the infringer to argue otherw ise before the court rendering its decision.
12. What is the approximate rate of the provisional measure filings that are affirmed by the
courts?
We have no information regarding the rate of the provisional measure filing and that are
affirmed by the courts.
13. Has Paragraph 2, Article 53 of the TRIPS Agreement been accommodated in the
domestic regulations?
Procedures for suspension of release by customs authorities are provided against the
importation of counterfeit trademark or pirated copyright goods.  Those procedures are applicable to
goods which involve other infringement of intellectual property rights.  The procedures are in
conformity with Article 51 of the TRIPS Agreement; therefore, our domestic regulations do not
accommodate situations described under Paragraph 2, Article 53 of the said Agreement.
14. Article 60 of the TRIPS Agreement states that small quantities of goods of a non-
commercial nature contained in travellers' personal luggage or sent in small consignment are
exempt from the regulations related to the suspen sion of release by Customs authorities.  Does
Chinese Taipei have any regulations or provisions  to exclude the suspension of release in such
cases?  If so, what is the scope of goods that may be excluded?
Pursuant to Subparagraph 4, Article 87 of the Copyright Law, unauthorized importation of the
original or any copies of a work will be deemed as a copyright infringement.  However, in pursuance
to Subparagraph 3, Paragraph 1, Article 87 bis of the same Law, importation of the original or limited
copies of a work is permissible when such copies are, not for distribution, privately used by the
importer or as a part of a personal baggage when an individual arriving from other countries.   The
limitation of copy of a work is one copy per work at any one time as provided in a decree issued by
the competent authority.
SWITZERLAND
A. P ATENT
1. Does your legislation grant patent protection for inventions relating to products and
processes in all fields of technology?  Are there any exceptions?  If so, please explain what theseexceptions are and how they comply with Article 27 of TRIPS Agreement?
Our Patent Law grants patent protection for inventions relating to products and processes in
all fields of technology except for items as set forth under Article 21 of the said Law.
Those exceptional items as stipulated in Article 21 of the Patent Law are as follows:IP/C/W/373/Add.1
Page 27
1. New varieties of animals and plants, except the cultivation and growth processes of
new plant varieties;
2. Diagnostic, treatment or surgical methods for diseases afflicting humans or animals;
3. Scientific theories or mathematical methods;
4. Rules or methods of games and sports;5. Methods or plans which can be implemented only by means of human reasoning and
memory; and
6. An invention that is contrary to public order, good custom or sanitation.
The said provision complies with Article 27 of the TRIPS Agreement.
2. Does your legislation, in accordance with Article 27.1 in combination with Article 31 of
TRIPS Agreement, consider importation as "working" a patent (and therefore exclude
compulsory licensing of a product which is being imported)?
Article 56 of the Patent Law provides the patentee with the exclusive right, which includes
importation of a patent product.  In this sense, the importation is a proper working of patent.  In fact,there is no "working" requirement in our patent system.  Non-working is not a legitimate justification
to request for compulsory licensing.
The Patent Law is in consistency with Article 27.1 in combination with Article 31 of the
TRIPS Agreement.
3. Does your legislation make the granting of  a compulsory licence subject to all the
conditions enumerated in Article 31 of TRIPS Agreement?  Please cite the relevant provisions of
law.
Our Patent Law does grant a compulsory licence subject to conditions enumerated in
Article 31 of the TRIPS Agreement. The relevant conditions in corresponding to those as enumerated
in Article 31 of the TRIPS Agreement are listed in Articles 78 to 81 of the Patent Law.
4. Does your legislation provide for the principle of the reversal of burden of proof in a
process patent litigation?  Please cite the relevant provisions of law.
In conformity with Article 34 of the TRIPS Ag reement, Article 91 of the Patent Law provides
for the principle of the reversal of burden of proof in a process patent litigation.
B. P
ROTECTION OF UNDISCLOSED INFORMATION
5. Please explain in detail if your legislation ensures that undisclosed test or other data
submitted by an applicant to the responsible Government agency in the procedure for market
authorization of a pharmaceutical or of an agricultural chemical product is protected against
disclosure and against unfair commercial use by a competitor, for example by prohibiting a
second applicant from relying on, or from referring to the original data of the first applicant,
when applying subsequently for market auth orization for a similar product.  Does your
legislation provide for exceptions to this?  If yes, under what conditions would such exceptions
apply?  Does your legislation set a specific term of protection for undisclosed test or other data
of the first applicant?
I. Protection against disclosure:
Article 9 of the Trade Secret Law provides that government officials shall keep the secrecy of
information provided as trade secret.  When those tests and other data submitted are claimed as tradeIP/C/W/373/Add.1
Page 28
secret by the providers, the information shall be eligible for the protection accordingly.  In addition to
civil liabilities provided for under the Trade Secret Law, Article 4 of the Civil Servant Law and
Articles 316 to 318 ter of the Criminal Code also provide criminal punishments for unlawful
disclosure of the secrets.
Undisclosed information submitted by applicants to responsible agencies in the procedure for
market authorization of a pharmaceutical or of an agricultural chemical product is protected against
disclosure under the abovementioned provisions.
II. Protection against unfair commercial use:
The post-marketing surveillance system on new drugs was implemented since 1993.  The
system provides a total of seven-year protection for data submitted.  Any generic application
submitted thereafter must meet the same standards as those of the first applicant's local clinical trials.
For details of the system on the data exclusivity (so-called "pipeline protection") for new drugs,
please refer to our Public Notice No. 8246232 as Attachment.
All new drugs enjoy the abovementioned pipeline protection.  When a second applicant does
not produce its own data but, instead, relies upon the data submitted by previous applicant, its
application will be turned down.  There is no exception to the abovementioned protection.
C. E NFORCEMENT
6. Please describe how the Chinese Taipei legislation meets the requirements of Article 41
of TRIPS Agreement.  Please cite the relevant provisions of law.
Please refer to Paragraph 5 of the Checklist of Issues on Enforcement (IP/N/6/TPKM/1) for
remedies that the judicial authorities can employ regarding IPR infringements such as injunctions,damages and expenses.  Relevant provisions under the Code of Civil Procedure include Articles 277,
282bis, 288, 342 to 349, 368 to 376 ter, 522, 532 and 538.
For destruction and disposal of infringing goods, materials or implements for their
production, please refer to Article 88 bis of the Copyright Law, Paragraph 3, Article 61 of the
Trademark Law, Paragraph 3, Article 88 of the Patent Law and Paragraph 2, Article 11 of the Trade
Secret Law.
For criteria of and calculation methods for determining the amount of damages by the courts,
please refer to Article 88 of the Copyright Law, Article 66 of the Trademark Law, Article 89 of the
Patent Law and Article 13 of the Trade Secret Law.
7. Please describe in detail the civil judicial procedures and civil remedies available to
right holders according to your legislation in the different fields of intellectual property covered
by Part II of the TRIPS Agreement, allowing fo r effective action against acts of counterfeiting
and piracy.  Please cite the relevant provisions for your legislation providing for those civil
procedures and remedies.
The civil procedures and remedies governing counterfeiting and piracy include injunctions,
damages and expenses.  Please refer to Paragraph 5 of the Checklist of Issues on Enforcement
(IP/N/6/TPKM/1).  Relevant provisions  are provided under Articles 277, 282 bis, 288, 342 to 349, 368
to 376 ter, 522, 532 and 538 of the Code of Civil Procedure.IP/C/W/373/Add.1
Page 29
8. Please describe in detail the criminal actions and remedies that are available in your
legislation to combat counterfeiting and piracy.  Please cite the relevant provisions of your
legislation.
The penalties dealing with copyright piracy, subject to types and degrees of gravity, include
an imprisonment of up to seven years and a fine of up to NT$450,000 (Please refer to Articles 91-103
of the Copyright Law).
The penalties dealing with trademark counterfeiting, subject to types and degrees of gravity,
include an imprisonment of up to three years and a fine of up to NT$200,000 (Please refer to Articles
62 to 64 of the Trademark Law).
Relevant provisions of remedies available including confiscation to combat counterfeiting and
piracy are Article 38 of the Criminal Code and Arti cles 470, 472 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
9. Please indicate the scale of damages provided  by your legislation to compensate for the
injury a right holder has suffered because of an infringement of that person's intellectualproperty right by an act of counterfeiting or piracy.
Pursuant to Article 88 of the Copyright La w and Article 66 of the Trademark Law, the
compensation that the injured party may claim would be assessed according to either the estimated
losses of the said party or the profit obtained by the infringer.  If it is difficult to prove the damage of
the injured party, the said party may request the court, subject to types and degrees of gravity, todetermine the amount of compensation between NT$ 10,000 and NT$1,000,000 for copyright piracy,
or 500 to 1,500 times the unit retail price of the seized commodities for trademark counterfeit.
10. Please describe the provisional measures provided for in your legislation, in particular
those useful to combat counterfeiting and piracy.  Please describe the procedures that must befollowed, and cite the relevant provisions of law.
Pursuant to Article 61 of the Trademark Law and Article 84 of the Copyright Law,
provisional measures may be requested by right holders to the courts for the removal of the
infringements, or the prevention of the likelihood of the infringements.
Pursuant to Articles 532 to 538 of the Code of Civil Procedure and to Article 28 of the Civil
Enforcement Procedure Law, judges are authorized to order a defendant to desist from an
infringement.
11. Please indicate the authorities responsible for the application of the measures provided
by your legislation to combat counterfeiting and piracy.  Please explain whether the competent
authorities are empowered to act ex officio  and, if so, please indicate the enforcement actions
that may be taken.
The relevant authorities responsible for the application of the measures to combat
counterfeiting and piracy include the courts, the National Police Administration of the Ministry, theBureau of Investigation, Ministry of Justice (MJIB), the prosecutors and the customs.
The authorities responsible for taking ex officio  actions include:
1. The prosecutors, the Bureau of Investigation, Ministry of Justice (MJIB) and the
National Police Administration of the Ministry of Interior, who can initiate criminal
investigations; andIP/C/W/373/Add.1
Page 30
2. The customs, who may, upon ex officio  discovery of suspicious IPR infringements on
importing or exporting goods, suspend the release of those goods and take initiatives
to notify the right holders whom must apply to the court for provisional measure, or
post a bond to the customs to suspend the release of those goods.
12. Please describe any new initiatives that are planned to improve the enforcement of
intellectual property rights in your country, particularly initiatives to combat counterfeiting
and piracy.  Is there a particular action plan in place?
To improve IPR enforcement, in particular to combat counterfeiting and piracy, new
initiatives include the enactment of the Op tical Disk Law (ODL) on 16 November 2001, the
establishment of the Chip Marking System, the Tr ademark Export Monitoring System (EMS), and the
setting up of Joint Optical Disk Enforcement Task Force (JODE) on 1 September 2002.
The year of 2002 is declared as "Action Year of the IPR Protection".  Draft amendment bills
to the Copyright Law, the Trademark Law, the Patent Law and the Plant Seed Law are all underconsideration.  Please refer to Attachments D to F  for other progress and performance.
UNITED STATES
A. G
ENERAL
1. Please describe, in relation to each form of intellectual property covered by the TRIPS
Agreement, including plant variety protection , the manner in which your government provides
national treatment and most favoured nation treatment to nationals of other WTO Members.
All of our Laws and Regulations, in relation to each form of intellectual property covered by
the TRIPS Agreement, provide national treatment and most favoured nation treatment to nationals of
other WTO Members.
B. C OPYRIGHT AND NEIGHBOURING RIGHTS
2. We have a number of questions regarding specific provisions of your government's
copyright law and its consistency with relevant TRIPS provisions. We understand that the
Chinese Taipei government is presently considering a new draft copyright law, and it appears
that there are a number of issues with respect to the draft's consistency with relevant TRIPS
provisions.  In particular:
(a) Article 3(5) of the present copyright la w contains a definition of "reproduction"
that does not explicitly cover "temporary" reproductions, such as those made inthe random access memory (RAM) of a computer, as required by Berne
Article 9, as incorporated into TRIPS Article 9.  Please explain how this draft
article explicitly covers such "temporary" reproductions, such that it complies
with TRIPS Article 9?  We understand that MOEA's position is that temporary
copies are already implicitly considered reproductions under the currentdefinition.  Please explain how MOEA's position has been adopted by the
administrative agencies or the courts, pr oviding detailed descriptions of actions
taken or case citations.IP/C/W/373/Add.1
Page 31
Subparagraph 5, Paragraph 1, Article 3 of the present Copyright Law contains a definition of
reproduction that implicitly covers temporary copies.
In the explanatory notes supplementing to the draft amendment to the Copyright Law, it
explicitly states that all types of temporary or incidental copies as contained in works which aregenerated during internet transmission shall be treated as reproduction.
There has been no case citation by courts or action taken by the administrative agencies.
However, that explanatory note shall be used as a guideline by courts and/or by the administrative
agencies to deal with cases to be encountered in the future.
Thus, this provision is in conformity with Article 9 of the TRIPS Agreement and Article 9 of
the Berne Convention.
(b) Article 7 bis of the present copyright law limits protection of performances to
those of "pre-existing" works, even though a protected performance under
TRIPS may be of a work created simultaneously with the performance.  Please
explain how your government provides prot ection of performances of works
other than "pre-existing" works, as required by TRIPS.
Article 7 bis of the present Copyright Law accords protection of performances to those of pre-
existing works.  Pursuant to Paragraph 1, Article 5 of the same Law, in situation where a work created
simultaneously with the performance other than pr e-existing works, protection is also accorded.
(c) It appears that Article 22 of the most recent draft does not give performers the
right to control the unauthorized fixations of their performances, as required by
TRIPS.  Please explain how your govern ment protects performers' rights to
control the unauthorized
 fixations of their performances.
The discrepancy is found between the authentic Copyright Law in Chinese text and its
translation in English in terms of usage dealing with "performer(s)" who is (are) also interpreted as
author(s) so long as the performance is treated as a work.
Paragraph 2, Article 22 of the Copyright Law does provide authors of performances
(performers) with the exclusive right to reproduce their performances by means of sound recording,
video recording, or photography.  An Administrative Order has been recently issued to confirm that
position.  Please refer to Attachment G  for details.
In this sense, Article 22 of the said Law provides performers the rights to control the
unauthorized fixations of their performances.
(d) It appears that clause 2 of Article 56 bis of the most recent draft provides a
complete exemption for retransmission of free over the air broadcast signals of
works.  Under TRIPS Article 9 (which incorporates Article 11 bis of the Berne
Convention), the retransmission of broadca st signals is subject to an "exclusive"
economic right.  Please explain whether your government has plans to deleteclause 2 of Article 56 bis, or if not, how Article 56 bis can comply with Article
11bis of the Berne Convention, as incorporated into TRIPS Article 9.
Article 24 of the Copyright Law, which complies with Article 11 bis of the Berne Convention
and Article 9 of the TRIPS Agreement, provides authors the exclusive economic rights to publiclybroadcast including the retransmission of broadcast signals.IP/C/W/373/Add.1
Page 32
To improve meager signal reception in mount ainous areas, cable TV channel providers, upon
completion of their installation services in such remote areas, are opened to follow customary
practices to provide free basic channels to four wireless broadcasters.  In this sense, wireless
broadcasters as free riders take advantages of cable TV channel transmission services to deliver theirprograms to subscribers.  Under such circumstances, cable TV channel providers do not profit from
providing the above-mentioned retransmission services.
The proposal for the deletion of this Article is under consideration.
(e) Article 51 of the present copyright law contains an overly broad personal use
exception.  Please describe how your gov ernment will ensure that this exception
will be applied in compli ance with TRIPS Article 13, particularly in regard to
digital technologies.  Please explain wh ether your government plans to limit the
exception by permitting a single, anal og, copy for personal and private use.
There is no difference as to copy for both personal and private use in terms of using digital
and/or analog technologies as long as such use falls within the reasonable scope as stipulated in
Paragraph 2, Article 65 of the Copyright Law which refers to in substance Article 107 of the U.S.
Copyright Law.
(f) Article 106 ter and quater  of your present copyright law provide a broad two-
year transition period for the protection of WTO Members' works and other
subject matter.  Please explain how these articles comply with TRIPS Articles 9
and 14 (which incorporate Article 18(3) of the Berne Convention).
It is understood that Articles 106 ter and quater  of the Copyright Law regarding two years
transitional period for the protection of WTO Members' works and other subject-matters are stipulated
against a pitfall which not only consider our social economic structure, but also take into account the
lengthy process in our accession to the WTO.
Paragraph 3, Article 18 of the Berne Convention provides flexibility to determine the grace
period to be applicable to specific users utilizin g specific works.  Before the enactment of those
provisions, we have taken the initiative to consult with relevant international organizations and majorcountries.  We believe that the two-year grace period is reasonable and equitable.
C. T
RADEMARKS
3. Please explain how your trademark law provides for a presumption of likelihood of
confusion, as required by Article 16.1 of the TRIPS Agreement, where an identical mark for
identical goods and services is used without au thorization on identical goods or services, and
cite to the relevant provision.
Pursuant to Subparagraph 12, Article 37 of the Trademark Law, identical marks for identical
goods and services are not eligible for trademark registration.
According to Paragraph 2, Article 61 of the Trademark Law when an identical mark for
identical goods and services is used without authorization on identical goods or services, it shall be
deemed as an infringement of the right to the exclusive use of the trademark.
These provisions already surpass the presumption requirement stipulated under Article 16.1
of the TRIPS Agreement.IP/C/W/373/Add.1
Page 33
4. Please explain whether and how your tr ademark and other laws ensure protection of
well-known trademarks and service marks, citing to the relevant provisions of law.
The Trademark Law and the Fair Trade Law provide adequate and effective protection on
both registered and non-registered well-known trademarks.
I. Implementing Article 16.2 of the TRIPS Agreement:
Pursuant to Articles 61 and 62 of the Trademar k Law, the owner of the registered trademark,
including well-known trademark, shall have the exclusive right to prevent all others from using
identical or similar signs for goods which are identical or similar to those in respect of which the
trademark is registered.
Subparagraph 7, Article 37 of the Trademark Law accords further protection for non-
registered well-known trademarks against the registration of other marks.  (Please refer to Article 31.1
of the Enforcement Rules of Trademark Law for the criteria to determine well-known trademarks and
service marks.)  In addition, Article 52 of the same Law provides that cancellation on registeredtrademarks that may result confusion with well-known trademarks may be requested anytime within
the term of protection of ten-year.
Article 77 of the Trademark Law extends the scope of the trademark protection, mutatis
mutandis , to services.
Pursuant to Article 20 of the Fair Trade Law, all types of famous symbols, including well-
known trademarks or services marks, registered or not, are eligible for protection against the use of
identical or similar signs on goods or services which would cause confusion.
II. Implementing Article 16.3 of the TRIPS Agreement:
In accordance with Subparagraph 7, Article 37 of the Trademark Law, goods and services,
which are not similar to those in respect of which a well-known trademark is registered, shall be
excluded from registration of their trademarks and service marks. In addition, non-registered well-
known trademarks and service marks are entitled to enjoying the same level of protection despite the
fact that it is not so required under Article 16.3 of the TRIPS Agreement.
Article 24 of the Fair Trade Law also provides that no enterprise shall otherwise have any
deceptive or obviously unfair conduct that is able to affect trading order. Regardless of similar or not
similar goods or services, protections for well-known trademarks and service marks are provided
against deceptive or obviously unfair conducts that are likely to damage the interests of trademarkowner.
D. G
EOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS
5. Please describe in detail how and under what laws geographical indications are
protected in Chinese Taipei and cite to the relevant provisions of law.
I. Implementing Article 22 of the TRIPS Agreement:
The geographical indications to all goods and services are protected as "certification marks"
under Article 73 of the Trademark Law.
Subparagraph 6, Article 37 of the Trademark Law provides that no application may be filed
for registration of a trademark design that is likely to mislead the public with respect to the nature,IP/C/W/373/Add.1
Page 34
quality or place of origin of the goods.  Article 52 of the same Law also states that an interested party
may request the competent authority to conduct a review for invalidation of the registration if it is in
violation with the aforementioned provision.
For any use of geographical indications that constitutes unfair competition, Article 21 of the
Fair Trade Law, in conformity with Article 10 bis of the Paris Convention, provides that enterprises
shall not make false or misleading representations either on their products or in the advertisements of
their products. In addition, they shall not sell, transport, export or import goods bearing false or
misleading representations.
II. Implementing Article 23 of the TRIPS Agreement
Pursuant to Paragraph 2, Article 33 of th e Tobacco and Alcohol Administration Law,
producers or importers may choose to label geographical indications on their alcohol products, but the
labeling shall not constitute false or misleading representation.
The language of Article 23.1 of the TRIPS Agreement is incorporated into Article 13 of the
Regulation Governing the Labeling of the Alcohol Products.
6. Do the provisions of your law regarding geographical indications provide for any of the
exceptions to protection of geographical indica tions contained in Article 24 of the TRIPS
Agreement, and, if so, please describe the way in  which the exception is applied and cite to the
relevant provisions of law.
Exceptions to GI protections under Article 24 of the TRIPS Agreement are implemented
through the exercise of bona fide  use under Article 23 of the Trademark Law.
E. I NDUSTRIAL DESIGNS
7. Please describe in detail the way in which industrial designs, including textile designs,
are protected under your government's laws and regulations and cite to the relevant provisions.
Industrial designs, including textile designs, are protected under Articles 106 to 122 of
Chapter Four of the Patent Law.  The said provisions provide protections on industrial designs inrespect of the shape, pattern, color, or their combination of an article and through appealing to eyes.
Upon certification of a new design (industrial design) patent application, the applicant acquires the
exclusive rights to prevent others from unauthorized production, selling, use or importing identical or
similar design.  This exclusive right terminates after twelve years since the application date.
F. P
ATENTS
8. Article 33 of the TRIPS Agreement requires that patents have a term of protection that
does not end before a period of twenty years measured from the date of filing. Please describe
the term of protection for patents available under your government's patent law and indicate if
there is any variation in that term, in particul ar based on the date of the patent application.
Since the 1994 amendment, Paragraph 3, Article 50 of the Patent Law is in conformity with
Article 33 of the TRIPS Agreement by stipulating th at an invention patent right shall endure for a
term of 20-year from the filing date of the patent application.
However, pursuant to Article 134 of the 1994 amendment of the Patent Law, a 15-year term
of protection period was provided for those applications published prior to the 1994 amendment of thePatent Law.IP/C/W/373/Add.1
Page 35
During the preparation for our accession to the WTO, the aforementioned Article was already
amended to be in conformity with Articles 33 a nd 70.2 of the TRIPS Agreement. According to the
amended Article 134, all patents existing on the date of our WTO accession can be protected for a full
20-year term from the date of filing.
G. PLANT VARIETIES
9. Please describe in detail the manner in which plant varieties are protected under your
laws and cite to the relevant provisions.
Protections on plant varieties are covered under our Plant Seed Law.
In brief, Article 8 of the said Law provides the right holders are granted with the exclusive
right to promote, sell and use.  The term of protection lasts for 15 years from the date of
announcement.
Chapter 5 of the said Law stipulates relevant penalties on violations on those the exclusive
rights.  In particular, criminal procedures are covered in Articles 41 and 45 and administrative
procedures are covered in Articles 42 to 44 of the said Law.
H. LAYOUT -DESIGNS FOR INTEGRATED CIRCUITS
10. Please describe in detail how your government implements the obligations of section 6,
Part II of the TRIPS Agreement and cite to relevant provisions of law.
Section 6, Part II of the TRIPS Agreement is implemented as followed.
Protection on typographies, as stipulated in Article 35 of the TRIPS Agreement in relation to
the IPIC Treaty, is sufficiently provided through Articles 2, 5 to 7 and 15 to 17 of the Integrated
Circuit Layout Protection Act.
Pursuant to Article 36 of the TRIPS Agreement, Article 29 of the Integrated Circuit Layout
Protection Act protects the right holders against unlawful importation, sale or distribution for
commercial purposes of topographies including integrated circuits or other articles in which
topography is incorporated.
Paragraph 4, Article 18 of the Integrated Circuit Layout Protection Act stipulates that in case
where a person has no knowledge or reasonable grounds to know when acquiring an integrated circuit
or an article incorporating such an integrated ci rcuit that it contains an unlawful topography is not
under the jurisdiction of the said Act.
In addition, Article 31 of the same Law provides that upon notified by the right holder, any
subsequent importation or distribution will be entitled to equivalent compensation to the right holder.
Article 19 of the Integrated Circuit Layout Protection Act also stipulates that the term of
protection granted to topographies ends 10 years after either the application date or its first
commercial exploitation date.
I. UNDISCLOSED INFORMATION
11. Please provide detailed information on the way in which data submitted to your
government to obtain marketing approval for pharmaceuticals and agricultural chemicals isIP/C/W/373/Add.1
Page 36
protected against unfair commercial use.  We are seeking to learn, for example, for undisclosed
information related to which products qualifies for protection, the duration of such protection,
and the treatment accorded others seeking to  obtain marketing approval for an equivalent
product.  In our view, such protection should be available to all products contain a new
chemical entity whether the product is patented  or not.  How does your government prevent an
entity that has not produced its own data from relying on the data submitted by another?
I. Protection against disclosure:
Article 9 of the Trade Secret Law provides that government officials shall keep the secrecy of
information provided as trade secret.  When those tests and other data submitted are claimed as trade
secret by the providers, the information shall be eligible for the protection accordingly.  In addition tocivil liabilities provided for under the Trade Secret Law, Article 4 of the Civil Servant Law and
Articles 316 to 318 ter of the Criminal Code also provide criminal punishments for unlawful
disclosure of the secrets.
II. Protection against unfair commercial use:
The post-marketing surveillance system on new drugs was implemented since 1993. The
system provides a total of seven-year protection for data submitted.  Any generic application
submitted thereafter must meet the same standards as those of the first applicant's local clinical trials.
For details of the system on the data exclusivity (so-called "pipeline protection") for new drugs,please refer to our Public Notice No. 8246232 as Attachment.
All new drugs enjoy the abovementioned pipeline protection.  When an entity that has not
produced its own data but, instead, relies upon the data submitted by another, its application will be
turned down.
J. E
NFORCEMENT
General Obligations
12. The level of optical disk media piracy in Ch inese Taipei continues to be high despite the
recent enactment of an optical disc law.  It ha s been reported that losses to the copyright
industries has totaled over $333 million in 2001 as a result of OD piracy.  It is has been furtherreported that Chinese Taipei has at least 61 known optical media plants (and nine or more
underground plants), containing over 1,187 replication lines, including 93 DVD lines, 229
VCD/CD lines and 865 CD-R lines, engaged in the manufacture of finished optical media
products, including CDs, CD-ROMs, VCDs, DVDs, and "burned" CD-Rs, as well as blank
media, including blank CDs, CD-Rs, CD-RWs, DVD-Rs and DVD-RWs.  Total potentialproduction capacity of the plants (not including the CD-R capacity) is 1.127 billion, dwarfing
the 40 million unit legitimate domestic demand. Please explain how Chinese Taipei's
enforcement system is applied in practice to provide expeditious remedies against infringement
found at any of the plants, as required by TRIPS Article 41.1.  Please describe how the laws in
Chinese Taipei are applied in practice to provide deterrence against optical media piracy, asrequired by TRIPS Article 41.1.  Please explain in detail how Chinese Taipei can be in
compliance with its enforcement obligations, pur suant to TRIPS Article 41.1 given high rates of
OD piracy.
The accuracy of those figures statistics regarding the capacity and production lines of local
optical disk plants is subject to further verification.  The information provided is of commercial
confidentiality in nature that is protected under Trade Secret Law.IP/C/W/373/Add.1
Page 37
The government has always prioritized the IPR protection on the national agenda.  With
respect to the enforcement system, the prosecutors,  who act as the law enforcement agencies, are in
charge of investigating and prosecuting crimes.
The Optical Disk Law (ODL) was enacted and enforced on November 16, 2001 to oversee the
legitimate operation of optical media factory. Under the Law, a Joint Optical Disk Enforcement Task
Force (JODE) was formed to integrate the personnel and resources of relevant authorities to combat
on counterfeiting and piracy.
In order to implement the program of "Action Year of IPR Protection" declared by the
government earlier this year, the Ministry of Justice (MOJ) formulated an IPR crackdown taskforce
dedicated to the objectives include:
I. To sweep all those illegal optical disk plants;
II. To pursuit all levels of distributors, crime organizations and cross-border
infringement in connection with optical piracy and counterfeiting;
III. To crackdown on night markets and other trade outlets that are liable to sell
infringement goods;
IV. To crackdown on cyber piracy;  and
V. To coordinate with the Intellectual Property Office of Ministry of Economic Affairs,
IFPI, BSA and MPAA for identifying those suspicious infringement goods.
For the statistics and performance of IPR enforcement, please refer to those attachments
provided in response to your Questions 21 and 22.
Civil and Administrative Enforcement
13. Article 87(2) of the present copyright law requires proof of an "intent to profit," and the
apparent requirement that the infringer have ac tual knowledge in order for civil liability to
attach.  Please describe how Article 87(2) can comply with TRIPS, which does not permit
conditioning a civil infringement on having a prof it motive.  Also, please describe whether your
government plans to substitute the apparent actual knowledge requirement with the test of
whether the defendant "knew or ought reasonably to have known" that the act or copy was
infringing.
Article 87(2) of the present Copyright Law is in conformity with the TRIPS Agreement by
stipulating that infringements will be deemed to have occurred when distribute, or display or possess
with the intent to distribute, or deliver with the intent to profit, infringing articles that are known to
infringe on copyright.
Our legislation already considers "know or ought reasonably to have known" as part of
"apparent actual knowledge".  The test of whether the defendant "knew or ought reasonably to have
known that the act or copy was infringing" will be held subject to each case.
14. Article 87(5) of the present copyright law provides that it is an infringement to engage in
"end-user" infringement if it was motivated by "direct profit."  Please describe how this article
can comply with TRIPS Article 41.  Please describe whether your government intends to amend
Article 87(5) such that it is enough that the unauthorized use of software is done in a "business
context".
The level of protection as stipulated in Paragraph 5, Article 87 of the present Copyright Law
has already exceeded what is required under the TRIPS Agreement that since the Agreement does not
regulate the neutral possession and use of pirate software or pirated materials.IP/C/W/373/Add.1
Page 38
Circumstances where involves "business context", such as the installation of a single copy of
software onto multiple computers, have already constituted infringement of reproduction right and are
subject to criminal penalties as stipulated under Article 91 of the present Copyright Law.  Thus,
Paragraph 5, Article 87 of the present Copyright Law does provide adequate and sufficient protection.
15. It appears that the present copyright law contains no remedy providing for disposal of
or destruction of infringing goods, or of materials and implements the predominant use of
which has been in the creation of the infringi ng goods, as required by TRIPS Article 46.  Please
explain how your law complies in practice with the requirements of TRIPS Article 46.
Disposal and/or destruction of infringing goods, or of materials and implements for the
predominant use of which have been in the creation of the infringing goods as provided in Article 46
of the TRIPS Agreement has already been covered under Article 88 bis of the Copyright Law.
Criminal Enforcement:
TRIPS Article 61 requires the application of crimin al fines and imprisonment at levels sufficient
to provide a deterrent at least in cases of wilful piracy or counterfeiting on a commercial scale.
16. Piracy is not a "public crime" under your law except in limited cases (such as for
habitual offenders).  Please explain how your law complies with TRIPS Articles 41 and 61 byproviding "deterrent" fines and imprisonment without making piracy a "public crime."
Articles 41 and 61 of the TRIPS Agreement do not require Members to prosecute piracy as
public crime, i.e., prosecution without the requirement of complain by the copyright holders.  The
penalties available under our Copyright Law dealing with copyright piracy, subject to types anddegrees of gravity, include an imprisonment of up to seven years and a fine of up to NT$450,000
(Please refer to Articles 91-103 of the Copyright Law).
To further provide an effective and adequate protection, the draft amendment of the
Copyright Law extends the scope of public crime to include intent-to-profit infringements, such as
piracy, distribution or importation of infringing goods.
17. It appears that the draft copyright law contai ns low fines in the criminal provisions (up
to NT$500,000).  Please explain how the fines provide deterrence by lowering piracy levels.
Please explain how your government complies with TRIPS Article 61 without increasing
penalties to more "deterrent" levels.
To provide a more adequate level of deterrence as required in Article 61 of the TRIPS
Agreement, the draft amendment of our present Copyright Law has increased the fine to up to
NT$1,000,000 in criminal cases.
18. The present copyright law does not appear to make it a crime to possess in the course of,
in connection with, or for the purpose of trade or business an infringing article.  Does yourgovernment plan to amend its law to add a crime of possession in the course of, in connection
with, or for the purpose of trade or business an infringing article, in order to criminalize end-
user piracy of software and other copyrighted subject matter?
The level of protection as stipulated in Paragraph 5, Article 87 of the present Copyright Law
has already exceeded what is required under the TRIPS Agreement since the Agreement does not
regulate the neutral possession and use of pirate software or pirated materials.IP/C/W/373/Add.1
Page 39
Acts including distributing, displaying or possess ing with the intent to distribute, or delivering
with the intent to profit infringing articles with the knowledge that those articles infringing on
copyright are copyright infringements in accordance with Paragraph 2, Article 87 of the Copyright
Law.  For direct profit, to make use of a copy of a computer program with the knowledge that it
infringes on the economic right of such computer program is also a copyright infringement inaccordance with Subparagraph 5, Article 87 of the said Law.  Corresponding penalties provided under
Paragraph 3, Article 93 of the same Law include an imprisonment for up to 2 years and in addition
thereto a fine for up to NT$100,000.
Circumstances such as the installation of a single copy of software onto multiple computers
have already constituted infringement of reproduction right and are subject to criminal penalties as
stipulated under Article 91 of the present Copyright Law.  Corresponding penalties provided in thesame Article are an imprisonment for up to 3 years and in addition thereto a fine for up to
NT$200,000.
We believe those provisions provide adequate and sufficient protection.
19. It appears that Article 91 of the most recent draft copyright law requires proof that the
defendant intended to profit in order for criminal liability to attach.  Please explain how the
"intent to profit" standard in the draft complies with TRIPS Article 61, which requires criminal
liability to be available for at least "copyright piracy on a commercial scale."   Are there plans
to remove the "intent to profit" criteria from both civil and penal provisions of the draftcopyright law?
"Intent to profit", as frequently found through the Criminal Code and thus commonly applied
in court judgments, covers all actions associated with motivation of profit.  In that sense, selling one
or two copies of pirated CD will not be considered as "copyright piracy on a commercial scale," butsuch act has already constituted the "intent to profit."
In cases where there is no "intent to profit," if the infringement reaches commercial scale,
defined in a certain amount of monetary value, criminal penalties will be provided under Paragraph 2,
Article 91 of the latest draft amendment.
After the enactment of those provisions, we will notify the TRIPS Council and welcome its
review in due time.
20. It appears that the most recent draft law co ntains no confiscation remedy with respect
to infringing goods and any materials and implem ents the predominant use of which has been in
the infringement or a crime under the draft, as required by TRIPS Article 61.  Does yourgovernment intend to reinsert the previously deleted Article 98 (which provided a confiscation
remedy).  Otherwise, please describe how your law provides a confiscation remedy in practice,
in line with the requirements of TRIPS Article 61.
Article 38 of the Criminal Code already provides confiscation remedy as required under
Article 61 of the TRIPS Agreement.  Thus, the deleted Article 98 will not be reinserted.
21. We would appreciate statistical or ot her information on the following issues:
(i) the number of criminal investigations initiated for copyright piracy and
trademark counterfeiting;
(ii) the number of cases involving copyri ght piracy and trademark counterfeiting
that were prosecuted in Chinese Taipei;IP/C/W/373/Add.1
Page 40
(iii) the number of criminal convictions for copyright piracy and trademark
counterfeiting that have b een obtained this year;
(iv) the level of criminal fines assessed this year;
(v) the number and length of jails terms imposed this year; and
(vi) the final disposition of seized goods,  materials, and implements in criminal
prosecutions.
Please refer to Attachments E-I, E-II and E-III .
22. The United States would appreciate knowing the number of criminal prosecutions and
convictions by your government referred to in  the previous sub-paragraph under other laws,
including the Optical Media Management Statute ( 2001).  In particular, please provide statistics
on at least the following issues:
(i) the number of investigations initiated under the Optical Media Management
Statute;
(ii) the number of cases initiated under the Optical Media Management Statute;
(iii) the number of criminal convictions ob tained this year under the Optical Media
Management Statute;
(iv) the level of criminal fines assessed this year under the Optical Media
Management Statute;
(v) the number and length of jails terms imposed this year under the Optical Media
Management Statute; and
(vi) the final disposition of seized goods,  materials, and implements in criminal
prosecutions under the Optical Media Management Statute.
Please refer to Attachments F .
23. We would appreciate being advised of all efforts to coordinate administrative, civil and
criminal enforcement, including new regulations or initiatives undertaken to
(i) preserve evidence from civil and administrative investigations for use in
criminal investigations and prosecutions;
For preserving evidence in the civil proceedings , please refer to Chapter VII (Articles 522 to
538) of the Code of Civil Procedure.
In addition, to preserve the infringing goods, we have managed to rent storage for effectively
seize the infringing goods.
(ii) ensure that appropriate copyright and trademark matters are referred to
criminal investigation;
Certain types of piracy and counterfeit are considered criminal offences under Articles 91 to
103 of the Copyright Law and Articles 62 to 64 of the Trademark Law.  Those matters will be
followed with criminal investigations.
(iii) provide for coordination or cooperation among various enforcement authorities
on complex investigations.
To provide effective enforcement, the Joint Anti-Counterfeiting Team and its mechanism
were established by Anti-Counterfeiting Committee (ACC) and other competent authorities includeIP/C/W/373/Add.1
Page 41
the prosecutors, the Bureau of Investigation, Ministry of Justice (MJIB) and the National Police
Administration of the Ministry of Interior.  The team constantly organizes coordination meetings to
develop concrete anti-counterfeit action plans against IPR infringements.
In addition, the year of 2002 is declared as "Action Year for the IPR Protection".  More than
ten coordinative meetings have been held among those authorities to develop IPR enforcement plans
since beginning of the year.
24. According to the Checklist of Issues on En forcement (response to question 25), the
owner of the exclusive right to a trademark may request destruction of relevant writings and
documents relating to the trademark.  Please explain how Chinese Taipei's trademark law
complies in practice with the requirement that materials and implements used in making an
infringing good be destroyed, per TRIPS Article 46. Please also explain how your copyright law
complies with this requirement.
Our reply to Question 25 in the Checklist of Issues on Enforcement cited here is outdated.
For updated text, Please refer to Paragraph 3, Article 61 of the Trademark Law submitted underIP/N/1/TPKM/T/1.
In accordance with Article 46 of the TRIPS Agreement, judges in civil cases are authorized to
order that infringing goods be placed outside channels of commerce or destroyed under Article 88 bis
of the Copyright Law, Paragraph 3, Article 88 of th e Patent Law and Paragraph 3, Article 61 of the
Trademark Law.
25. Please explain whether judicial authorities have the authority to sanction a party to a
proceeding who has not produced evidence that lies within its control, and if so, what are these
sanctions?
Pursuant to Article 95 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the defendant has the right to
remain silent.  That is, the infringer is entitled  not to cooperate, and can refuse to provide with
relevant information or documents.  No remedy is available to enforce the court order.  Under such
circumstance, the court can issue a search warrant to locate and to attach those information or
documents in accordance with Articles 122 and 133 of the same Code.
26. According to the Checklist on Enforcement regarding remedies for intellectual property
infringement, how is "retail price" of the seized commodity defined in the trademark law, i.e.,
does the retail price of a seized commodity refer to the price of the genuine or non-genuine
article?
The "retail price" of the seized commodity defined in Subparagraph 3, Paragraph 1, Article 66
of the Trademark Law refers to the price of the non-genuine article.
27. According to the Checklist on Enforcement (response to question no. 5), court decisions
of intellectual property cases are published in a newspaper at the request of the infringed right
holder.  In general, are all intellectual prop erty enforcement related decisions published? If
there is publication, where is the decision pub lished, and is the published decision readily
available to the public?
Courts decisions including all intellectual property enforcement related decisions are
published in accordance with Article 225 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and Article 225 of the
Code of Civil Procedure.  All decisions are also published online and readily available to the public.
Please refer to www.judicial.gov.tw  for the texts of those decisions in Chinese.IP/C/W/373/Add.1
Page 42
28. It appears from draft laws available, and the Checklist on Enforcement, that fines in the
criminal provisions for intellectual property infringements go up only to NT$600,000.  Please
explain how these low fines provide deterrence by lowering infringement levels, in accordance
with TRIPS Article 61.
The amount of fines as criminal penalties in IP-related laws is reviewed periodically.
Adjustments have been made when appropriate.  For example, to provide a more adequate level of
deterrence as required in Article 61 of the TRIPS Agreement, the draft amendment of our present
Copyright Law has increased the fine to up to NT$1,000,000.
29. Please explain if there is a forfeiture remedy in your copyright and trademark law with
respect to infringing goods and any materials and implements used to make the infringing goods
in accordance with TRIPS Article 61.  If the copyright or trademark laws do not provide forsuch remedies, please describe how other laws provide for this remedy.
For the forfeiture of infringing goods, please refer to our answers to Question 24 of the
Checklist of Issues on Enforcement (IP/N/6/TPKM/1).
Pursuant to Article 64 of the Trademark Law and Article 38 of the Criminal Law, materials
and implements used in making an infringing good shall be confiscated.IP/C/W/373/Add.1
Page 43
ATTACHMENT A
Main Points for Determining a Well-Known Mark
(Promulgated on 10 August 2000 per Letter No. Chih-Shang 980-89500052)
1. These Main Points are enacted for the purpose of determining a well-known mark, as
provided for in Trademark Law (hereinafter "this Law").
2. A well-known mark set forth in the Law refers to a mark which has been generally recognized
by the relevant businesses or consumers based on the available concrete evidence pursuant to
paragraph one, Article 31 of the Enforcement Rules of the Law.
3. The determination of relevant businesses or consumers shall be based on the scope of
transaction of the goods and/or services to which the mark applies, including but not limited
to the following:
(1) actual and/or potential consumers of the goods and/or services to which the mark
applies;
(2) persons involved in channels of distribution of the goods and/or services to which the
mark applies;
(3) relevant business operators dealing with the goods and /or services to which the mark
applies.
4. A mark that has been generally recognized by any one of the relevant businesses or
consumers listed under Paragraph 3 shall be deemed a well-known mark..
5. Determination of a well-known mark shall take into account the following factors sufficient to
determine whether it is famous on a case by case basis:
(1) the degree of knowledge or recognition of the mark by the relevant businesses or
consumers;
(2) the duration, extent and geographical area of any use of the mark;(3) the duration, extent and geographical area of any promotion of the mark, including
advertising or publicity and the presentation, at fairs or exhibitions, of the goods
and/or services to which the mark applies;
(4) the duration, extent and geographical area of any registration, and/or any application
for registration, of the mark, to the extent that they reflect use or recognition of the
mark;
(5) the record of successful enforcement of rights in the mark, in particular, the extent to
which the mark was recognized as well-known by the administrative or judicial
authorities;
(6) the value associated with the mark;
(7) other factors sufficient to determine a well-known mark.
6. All the factors set forth in the preceding Paragraph 5 shall be verified by the following
evidence:
(1) invoices, marketing documents, import/export documents and detailed statistics data
of sales for the goods or services;
(2) advertisements in domestic or foreign mass media, such as newspapers, magazines or
television;
(3) documents relating to the sales outlets and channels of trade or types of distribution;
(4) showing appraisal of the mark in markets by traders, ranking in sales amounts,
ranking in the advertising expenditures, or the business status relating to the mark;
(5) proof of the year when the mark was adopted or created and the proof of continual
use of the mark;
(6) documents showing registrations status of the mark in and/or outside of this country,
including registrations made by the affiliates;
(7) relevant evidence or market survey reports issued by the credible organizations;
(8) documents showing the recognition made by the administrative or judicial authorities;IP/C/W/373/Add.1
Page 44
(9) other evidence proving the fame of the mark.
7. A well-known mark referred to herein is not limited to the mark which has been registered,
applied for registration or used in this country.
8. The use of a mark is not limited to use by the owner itself. Any use of the mark by the
owner's affiliates or a third party may be taken into consideration together with the factors set
forth under Paragraph 5 herein.
9. The proof of use should bear the specimen of the mark and date, or be supplemented by
whatever materials which are available to identify the specimen of the mark and date of use.
Such proof is not limited to those in the territory of this country. However, whether the proof
issued outside of this country is helpful depends on whether the relevant public in this country
are given the opportunity to know the mark.
10. In determining a well-known mark, examination shall be made by the Government Office in
charge of trademark matters in accordance with the evidence set forth under Paragraph 6
together with the factors set forth under Paragraph 5 herein; provided that this shall not applyif the fame of the mark is known to the public.
11. There is no need to present the same proof by the owner of the mark for a well-known mark if
the mark was once determined a well-known ma rk with submission of substantial evidence.
However, submission of relevant evidence may be required if deemed necessary on a case by
case basis.
In case of any discrepancy between this English translation and the original Chinese
text of the Law, the Chinese text shall govern.IP/C/W/373/Add.1
Page 45
ATTACHMENT B
This Public Announcement dated July 7, 1993.  No. Wei-Shu-Yao-8246232 the "Public
Announcement", implements.  effective August 1, 1993, the revised safety monitoring system.  The
purpose of the establishment of a revised safety monitoring system is to encourage the research anddevelopment of pharmaceuticals, protect pharmaceutical innovations and promote local clinical trials.
The Public Announcement revised and supersedes the Public Announcement of January 28, 1983, No.
Wei-Shu-Yao-412698; the Public Announcement of August 26, 1983, No. Wei-Shu-Yao- 443001 and
the Public Announcement of Public Announcement of December 10, 1988, No. Wei-Shu-Yao-
7637746.
LEGAL BASIS
The Legal Basis of the Public Announcement are
1. Article 45 of the "Pharmaceutical Affairs Law" and Articles 7, 56 and 57 of the "Medical
Care Law."
2. The US-ROC Trade Talks Memorandum of Understanding dated June 5, 1992 and the Letter
of Understanding of the US-ROC Intellectual Pr operty Rights Consultation held from March
8 to 12, 1993.
MATTERS ANNOUNCED
1. The Public Announcement governs the submission and approval of applications for New
Drug Registration.  The term "New Drugs" as used herein means "new drugs" as that term is
defined in Article 7 of the Pharmaceutical Affairs Law and all other drugs so designated by
the Department of Health.
2. An application for New Drug Registration must be supported by the following:
(i) the documents required in accordance with existing regulations; and
(ii) a report of local clinic trial.
If the application is approved, a product license for marketing approval (a "License") will be
issued by the Department of Health.  The New Drug named in the License will then be subject to the
safety monitoring system as described in paragraph 3 hereof.  In the case of applications forregistration submitted before August 1, 1994, protocols of local clinical trials may be submitted for
review before the clinical trials report required by subsection (ii) of this paragraph 2 is completed.
(Clinical trials reports are still required for applications submitted before August 1, 1994.)
3. A new drug shall be subject to safety monitoring for seven years from the date the License is
issued.  The safety monitoring period will be implemented in two phases as described below:
(1) The first monitoring period (phase I) will last five years from the date of issuance of
the License.  A generic application submitted during this period shall include:
(i) the documents required in accordance with the existing regulations; and
(ii) a report of the results of local clinical trials.  Such local trials must meet thesame standards as those of the first applicant's local clinical trials.
(2) The second monitoring period (phase II) will last for two years from the expiration of
the first period.  During this period, a generic application shall include:
(i) the documents required in accordance with existing regulations; and
(ii) a report of bioequivalence test which shall meet the requirements set forth inthe Department of Health Guidelines.
4. During the safety monitoring period of a New Drug, public hospitals procuring that New
Drug shall comply with the following guidelines:IP/C/W/373/Add.1
Page 46
(1) The clinical trials to be conducted locally for such New Drugs shall replace all
requirements for clinical trials required to obtain hospital formulary listing, and shall
constitute the only clinical testing or trial required of the first applicant for sale of the
New Drug to public hospitals in the ROC.  However, a public hospital may in its
discretion require as a prerequisite for formulary listing laboratory analysis of thedrug to confirm its composition.
(2) A New Drug which is approved through the drug approval process for New Drugs set
forth herein will be listed on a brand-name basis.
5. New Drugs Registrations that were approved  prior to June 5, 1992, concerning New Drugs
that were subject to the safety monitoring system under the Department of Health's public
announcement of 1983 concerning monitoring of new drugs will be listed on a brand-namebasis pursuant to paragraph 4(2) above and will be subject to safety monitoring according to
the criteria set forth in paragraph 4(2)above.  The monitoring period for such drugs shall be
from August 1, 1993 to July 31, 1995, unless the original monitoring period applicable to
such drugs would expire after August 1, 1995, in which case the monitoring period shall be
the monitoring period designated by the Department of Health's 1983 public announcementreferenced previously in this paragraph.
6. New drugs which were approved between June 5,1992 and August 1, 1993, or for which
applications have been submitted but not yet approved as of August 1, 1993, will be subject to
the following regulations:(1) Such drugs shall be subject to the seven year period of safety monitoring described in
paragraph 3 above, and shall be listed on a brand-name basis in public hospitals
during the safety monitoring period.
(2) During the safety monitoring period of such a drug, generic applications for such a
drug shall be supported by a report of bioequivalence test which shall meet therequirements set forth in the Department of Health Guidelines.
(3) Applicants for New Drugs of the type described in the first unnumbered subparagraph
of this paragraph 6 may submit an application for local clinical trials for such New
Drug.  The report of the results of the local clinical trial, upon approval by the
Department of Health, shall replace all requirements for clinical trials required for
hospital formulary listing in public hospitals.
7. During the safety monitoring period, applicants whose applications for New Drug
Registration have been approved by the Department of Health Licensee's must comply with
each of the following:
(1) All Licensees must submit adverse drug reaction reports to the Department of Health.
The first such report must be submitted six months after the issuance of the Licensesand every six months during phase I and phase II of the safety monitoring period
thereafter.  In the case of New Drugs that have been adopted for use by a local
teaching hospital, the Licensees shall include with the reports required by the
previous sentence adverse drug reports that include events of adverse drug reaction
that occurred locally.
(2) All Licensees must submit price information for each New Drug for which they are
the Licensees as follows.  The price figure for each New Drug that must be submitted
is the amount of the price for each new drug used by insurance companies or
competent authorities.  Such price figures must be compiled from sales in the R.O.C.
and from at least any three of the following ten countries: USA, Japan, UK, Canada,Australia, Germany, France, Switzerland, Ital y and Belgium.  Price figures from local
sales of New Drugs must be substantiated by photocopies of domestic commercial
invoices.  Price figures from foreign sales must be compiled by, or verified by, the
competent authority of the country in which the sales occur.IP/C/W/373/Add.1
Page 47
(3) Licensees who fail to submit the information required by paragraph 7(1) and (2) will
not be eligible to use the safety monitoring system.  The Department of Health shall
announce, by a public announcement, a list of all drugs which are the subject matter
of such Licenses and their respective dates of termination of safety monitoring.  The
Department of Health will then accept generic applications for such drugs byapplying only the criteria set forth in paragraph 3(2) hereof.
8. Drugs for special medical use as identified by the Department of Health will be exempted
from local clinical trials.  The guidelines concerning the procurement of New Drugs by public
hospitals set forth in paragraph 4 of the Public Announcement will not be applicable to such
products.IP/C/W/373/Add.1
Page 48
ATTACHMENT C
Directorate General of Customs Revises Regulations for Complaints against Infringing
Trademarks
In its letter dated September 13, 2001, Ref. Tai-Chung-Chu-Chi-90105656, the Directorate
General of Customs (DGOC) publicly announced revisions to the "Guidelines for DGOC and
Customs Bureaus' Handling of Complaints filed by Trademark Owners or Their Authorized Agents
against Imported/Exported Infringing Trademarks". The revisions are as follows:
a. In order to properly enforce protection of trademark rights, a trademark owner or its
authorized agent may file complaints in writing with the DGOC or the relevant customsbureau against imported or exported items that infringe the trademark (relevant details of the
DGOC and customs are set in the schedule below). Customs bureaus will cooperate with
trademark owners in prosecuting the counterfeit.
b. A complaint should contain the following information:
(a) Trademark registration documentation, and where the complaint is filed by theauthorized agent, the letter of authority must also be attached;
(b) Description of the facts of infringement and how the infringing items may be
recognized; and
(c) Relevant substantive details of the alleged infringing trademark, such as manufacturer
name, name of goods, export/import port and dates.
c. Upon locating goods consistent with the description in the complaint, the customs bureau will
undertake the following measures:
(a) After the complainant has been notified by telephone or fax, the complainant must
attend the customs bureau within the stipulated time (exportation by air: 4 hours; others: 1
business day) to identify the goods.  If the co mplainant fails to appear within the stipulated
time, the importer/exporter produces documentation showing it has been properly licensed, or
there is other evidence showing non-infringe ment, then provided such goods are not in
violation of any other exportation/importation laws and regulations, the customs bureau will
release the goods.
(b) Where the complainant identifies the goods as being in infringement of its trademark,
where the importer/exporter is unable to produce documentation showing it has been properly
licensed, or where the documentation produced is clearly questionable, the complainant mustapply to the court for provisional attachment within 3 business days.  The customs bureau will
cooperate in confiscating the goods and submit the same for prosecution in accordance with
the Trademark Law.  If the complainant fails to  do so within the stipulated time, the customs
bureau may submit samples of the goods for prosecution in accordance with the Trademark
Law, and should also order that the importer/exporter withdraw the goods.  Followinginvestigation by the prosecutors' office, cases submitted for prosecution will be handled by
the Board of Foreign Trade (MOEA) in accordance with the International Trade Law.
d. The letter dated December 9, 1996, Ref. Tai-Chung-Chu-Chi-85110203 issued by the DGOC
ceases to apply as of September 13, 2001.IP/C/W/373/Add.1
Page 49Attachment D-I
IPR Cases Investigated and Concluded by  Prosecution Offices of District Court （Jan-Jun of 2002)
Unit:  Case
Cases of Conclusions
Charge Capacity of Offenders Conclusions
CategoryCase
Receivedsub-totalCopy
rightTrade
MarkPatentManufactur
ersDistributor
sRetailers Others ProsecutedSummary
ProceedingDismissedChanged to
private
ProsecutionOthers
Jan to Jun 2002  2,892  2,469  1,758    489    222    409    116    966    978    670    447    752       4    593
year of 2001  3,426  3,349  2,459    641    249    465    171   1,417   1,296   1,197    521    847      22    762
% change as compared
with 2001-15.59% -26.28% -32.56% -23.71% -16.17% -12.04% -32.16% -31.83% -24.54% -44.03% -14.20% -11.22% -81.82% -22.18%IP/C/W/373/Add.1
Page 50 Attachment D-II
IPR Cases Where Final Judgments Rendered （Jan-Jun of 2002)
Unit: Case; Person;  NT Dollar
Final judgments and people sentenced Fine
Category Totalsub
total6months or
less6 Months -
1 year1 year-
2 years2 years - 3
years3 years- 5
years
over 5
yearsServitudeunder 10
thousands
10-50
thousandsover 50
thousandsnot
guilty other
Jan-Jun of 2002   1,342    754    541    53    147     12      1     -  67     -     13      11    160   337
year of 2001   1,616    942    680    66   190     6      -     -    102     4     17    17    197   337
% change as compared with2001-16.96% -19.96% -20.44% -19.70% -22.63% 400.00% 100.00% 0.00% -34.31% -100.00% -23.53% -35.29% -18.78% 0.00%IP/C/W/373/Add.1
Page 51Attachment D-III
IPR Infringement Handled in IPR Protection Action Year Jan-Jul 2002
Unit:  Case;  Person;  NT Dollar
The National Police Administration
Directorate General of customs & The Bureau of
Investigation, Ministry of Justice Sum
   Number of Cases Number of Cases 2002
Case Suspect Retail AmountSub
totalTrade
markPa
tentCopy
rightSuspectRetail Amount Sub
totalTrade
markPa
tentCopy
rightSuspectRetail Amount
1/30 152 182 568,100,270 128 12 2 114 147 461,550,270 24 13 2 9 35 106,550,000
2/4~2/10 63 72 281,501,330 60 4    - 56 69 281,198,630 3 3    -      - 3 302,700
2/11~2/17 20 37 25,089,470 20 4    - 16 37 25,089,470  -    -    -      -   -             -
2/18~2/24 101 113 241,480,960 101 15 3 83 113 241,480,960  -    -    -      -   -             -
2/25~3/05 118 123 320,725,789 114 11 2 101 119 320,505,789 4 4    -      - 4 220,000
3/06~3/13 77 99 27,458,924 72 6 4 62 98 27,458,924 5    -    - 5 1             -
3/14~3/20 86 108 336,867,794 82 9    - 73 102 304,058,294 4 1    - 3 6 32,809,500
3/21~3/26 287 307 542,579,783 247 53 3 191 275 442,579,783 40 11 5 24 32 100,000,000
3/27~3/31 112 124 575,445,940 109 18 3 88 121 575,445,940 3    -    - 3 3            -
4/1-4/30 404 2 873,620,000 402 52 8 342 0 873,620,000 2    1    - 1 2            -
5/1-5/31 417 0 1,054,100,000 413 56 13 344 0 1,040,340,000 4    2    - 2 0      760,000
6/1-6/30 425 543 1,178,547,121 385 71 4 310 493 178,547,121 40   11    - 29 50 1,000,000,000
7/1-7/31 455 566 425,000,207 454 61 12 381 565 425,000,207 1 - - 1 1 -
合計
Total2,717 2,276 6,450,517,588 2,587 372 54 2,161 2,139 5,196,875,388 130 46 7 77 137 1,253,642,200IP/C/W/373/Add.1
Page 52 Attachment E-I
IPR Infringement Cases Handled by the National Police Administration Jan-May of 2002
Unit:  Case;  Person;  NT Dollar
SUM TRADEMARK PATENT COPYRIGHT
Case Sus-pect Amount CaseSus-
pectAmount Case Suspect Amount Case Suspect Amount 2002
Jan-May
2,336 2,813 6,177,218,071 378 474 462,953,037 60 80 752,350,821 1,898 2,259 4,961,914,213
20012,101 2,422 4,190,811,300 321 425 2,824,692,305 54 74 39,674,465 1,726 1,923 1,326,444,530
Variation as
compared with
200111.19% 16.14% 47.40%17.76
%11.53% -83.61% 11.11% 8.11% 1796.31% 9.97% 17.47% 274.08%IP/C/W/373/Add.1
Page 53Attachment E-II
IPR Cases Investigated and Concluded by  Prosecution Offices of District Court （Jan-Jun of 2002)
Unit:  Case
Cases of Conclusions
Charge Capacity of Offenders ConclusionsCategoryCase
Received 小計
sub-total Copy
rightTrade
MarkPatentManufactur
ersDistributor
sRetailers Others Prosecuted Summary
ProceedingDismissedChanged to
private
ProsecutionOthers
Jan-Jun to 2002  2,892  2,469  1,758    489    222    409    116    966    978    670    447    752       4    593
year of 2001  3,426  3,349  2,459    641    249    465    171   1,417   1,296   1,197    521    847      22    762
% change as compared with
2001-15.59% -26.28% -32.56% -23.71% -16.17% -12.04% -32.16% -31.83% -24.54% -44.03% -14.20% -11.22% -81.82% -22.18%IP/C/W/373/Add.1
Page 54
Attachment E-III
IPR Cases Where Fina l Judgments Rendered （Jan-Jun of 2002
Unit:  Case;  Person;  NT Dollar
Final judgments and people sentenced Fine
Category Totalsub
total6months or
less6 Months –
1 year1 year-
2 years2 years-3
years3 years- 5
years
over 5
yearsServitudeunder 10
thousands
10-50
thousandsover 50
thousandsnot
guiltyother
Jan-Jun of 2002   1,342    754    541    53    147     12      1     -  67     -     13      11    160   337
year of 2001   1,616    942    680    66   190     6      -     -    102     4     17    17    197   337
% change as compared with
2001-16.96% -19.96% -20.44% -19.70% -22.63% 400.00% 100.00% 0.00% -34.31% -100.00% -23.53% -35.29% -18.78% 0.00%IP/C/W/373/Add.1
Page 55
ATTACHMENT F
Enhancing the protection of Intellectual Property Rights has been our established policy. In
order to crack down on the piracy of optical disks, our government has implemented the Optical Disk
Law since November 16, 2001.  The Ministry of Economic Affairs is mandated by the Statute to
supervise the operations of the Optical Disk producers. "The Optical Disk Management and
Inspection Guidelines" is formulated to serve this purpose. A "Joint OD Inspection Team" is
established to enforce the supervision, which includes the Intellectual Property Office, Board of
Foreign Trade, Industrial Development Bureau, Bureau of Standards, Metrology and Inspection, and
the Anti-counterfeiting Committee. The inspection is conducted on regular basis; however, surpriseraid will be undertaken upon receiving complaint or information. The Joint Team shall conduct the
inspections island-wide frequently and may request assistance from the police authority when
necessary.
From January 15 to August 31 2002, the Joint OD Inspection Team had conducted a total of
113 inspections together with educational campaigns as well as joined police force in raiding four
illegal factories. The MOEA has issued the following orders against four of the illegal factories: first,
to cease manufacturing; second, to authorize the confiscation of optical disks without SID Code and
third, to impose a fine over NT$1,500,000.  Another crackdown action taken by the Team was to
disrupt illegal operation of a factory by removing  those key components of OD injection machines, as
conducted together with public prosecutor and technicians. This quick and decisive sanction has
indeed served an effective warning to deter those rampant piracies.IP/C/W/373/Add.1
Page 56
ATTACHMENT G
ORDER
1. Circulation Date: 2002/9/5
2. Circulation Number: IPO0916000641-0
Attachment:
1. Subparagraph 1, Article 7 bis of Copyright Law that stipulates "a performance by a performer
of a pre-existing work shall be protected as an independent work".  Thus, a performer is an author in
Taiwan and his/her pre-existing performance shall have the equivalent level of protection as that of an
independent work.
2. Subparagraphs 2 of Article 22, Article 24, and Ar ticle 26 of Copyright Law stipulate that a
performer is an author.  With exception of use within reasonable scope as described under Article 44
– 65, the following exploitations shall be authorized by the performer/author of a work:
(a) Reproduction of a live performance/work by means of sound recording, video
recording, or photography;
(b) Reproduction of a reproduction of a live performance/work by means of sound
recording, video recording, or photography;
(c) Public broadcast of a live performance/work;
(d) Public performance of a live performance/work through loudspeakers or other
equipment.
__________