. /.   WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  IP/C/W/487 
18 December 2006 
 
 (06-6050) 
Council for Trade-Related Aspects 
of Intellectual Property Rights Original:   English 
 
 
REVIEW OF LEGISLATION 
 
Questions posed by the United States  
  
 By means of a communication from the Delega tion of the United States, dated 15 December 
2006, the Secretariat has received a copy of th e following questions that the United States has 
communicated to Saudi Arabia.  
_______________ 
 
 
SAUDI ARABIA 
 A. C
OPYRIGHT  
1. It appears that a provision that formerly appeared at Article 12, Third , of the Copyright 
Implementing Regulations has been deleted from the regulations.  (See IP/N/1/SAU/C/2 at 7.)  That 
provision read, "Reproducing the work to make c opies available for commercial exploitation or for 
selling them to students, to educational institution s or to others is deemed an infringement of 
copyright."  Please explain why this provision was deleted. 
2. It appears that a provision that formerly appeared at Article 12, Fourth , of the Copyright 
Implementing Regulations has been deleted from the regulations.  (See IP/N/1/SAU/C/2 at 7.)  That 
provision read, "An employer's ownership of the or iginal copy of the work does not grant him the 
right to reproduce and distribute it among his empl oyees, under the pretext of personal use."  Please 
explain why this provision was deleted. 
3. Article 32 (3) of the Copyright Implementing Regulations (see IP/N/1/SAU/C/2 at 15) refers 
to "related rights stated in this article" but Article  32 relates to scope of protection and not related 
rights per se .  Please comment on whether this provision should  instead make reference to Article 7 of 
the Copyright Regulations, the related rights article. 
4. Copyright Implementing Regulations Article 3 (3):  Please provide an explanation on the 
import ban against Saudi folklore  works without prior approval. 
B. PATENTS  
5. The new Law on Patents, Layout Designs of Integrated Circuits, Plant Varieties, and 
Industrial Designs requires absolute novelty for pate ntability, in contrast to the previous law which 
provided for a one year grace period for novelty.  Moreove r, Article 64 states that the new law is to be 
applied retroactively to pending patent applications .  This appears to create a new requirement for 
inventors who in good faith applied for patent protec tion under the previous law with a one year grace 
period for novelty.  How do you plan to address the concerns of inventors who were eligible for 
patentability under the previous law? IP/C/W/487 
Page 2  
 
  C. E
NFORCEMENT  
6. Please cite the provisions of your law and/or regulations that implement the requirement in 
TRIPS Article 45.2 that the judicial authorities have the authority to order an infringer to pay the right holder's expenses, specifically with reference to  the provision that such expenses "may include 
appropriate attorney's fees". 
7. Please describe any efforts that are being made to  improve the transparency of the Violations 
Review Committee litigation process for IP cases, including any efforts to notify parties about 
committee decisions or efforts to publish committee decisions. 
8. What information is needed by the Ministry of Information to bring a case before the 
Violations Review Committee? 
9. Under what circumstances may the Violations  Review Committee refer a serious case to the 
Board of Grievances?  May a party to a case present an argument to move a case from the Violations Review Committee to the Board of Grievances?  Copyright Implementing Regulation Article 25 (7) 
states that grave violations punishable by impris onment or fines exceeding one hundred thousand riyal 
are the basis for referring a case to the Board of Grie vances.  What other considerations/conditions are 
required? 
10. Please confirm the type of information that is needed before an IP enforcement raid can be 
initiated.  For example, is it sufficient for the right  holder to file a simple complaint naming the target 
infringer shop and alleging that the right holder re presentative believes there is pirate product there? 
11. Under what circumstances may the Violations  Review Committee publish the punishment of 
defamation against an individual convicted of IP  infringement? (Copyright Law Article 22 (4).) 
12. Copyright Law Article 23 provides for the possibilit y of the right holder to appeal a decision 
of the Violations Review Committee within sixty days from the date of the notification of the 
Committee's decision.  First, please describe the pr ocess for making public the Committee's decision.  
Second, on what grounds may the right holder appeal the decision, and what standard of review does 
the Board of Grievances apply to appeals? 
13. Copyright Implementing Regulations Article 23 (10):  Please describe the special register 
where information regarding copyright infringemen t is contained.  Is the information publicly 
available? 
14. Please provide statistical or descriptive info rmation about recent and/or aggregate law 
enforcement activities taken against the manufacturers, distributors, ve ndors, importers, and exporters 
of counterfeit and pirated goods.  We would also  appreciate information on the prosecution of 
individuals and organizations charged with IP infri nging activities and the disposition of IP infringing 
goods that have been seized in raids. 
15. How does your government publish enforcement act ions adjudicated by Saudi courts against 
IP offenders?  In the absence of official publi cation of court cases, how is information about 
enforcement judgments made known? 
__________