Curran Clare: Trade Marks (International Treaties and Enforcement) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Curran Clare: Trade Marks (International Treaties and Enforcement) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:653;Page:2481] 
CLARE CURRAN (Labour—Dunedin South) 
: 
 I rise to support the Trade Marks (International Treaties and Enforcement) Amendment Bill at its first reading. Labour supports this bill. It is another Labour initiative. The bill is underpinned by some important principles—namely to deter counterfeiting of registered trademarks and to prevent piracy of copyright-protected works both of which are essential to protect legitimate business in this country. 
The bill has three main purposes: firstly to allow New Zealand to join three international trademark treaties; secondly to enhance the existing enforcement provisions in the Trade Marks Act and the Copyright Act in order to further deter counterfeiting of registered trademarks and piracy of copyright-protected works; and thirdly to address several minor and technical issues within the Copyright Act the Trade Marks Act and the Trans-Tasman Mutual Recognition Act 1997. This bill is an omnibus bill that will amend the Trade Marks Act 2002 and the Copyright Act 1994. I understand that it is intended to be divided into two separate bills at the Committee of the whole House stage. 
In 2006 the Government agreed to pursue accession to the Singapore Treaty on the Law of Trademarks known as the Singapore treaty; the Nice Agreement Concerning the International Classification of Goods and Services for the Purposes of the Registration of Marks known as the Nice agreement; and the Protocol Relating to the Madrid Agreement Concerning the International Registration of Marks or the Madrid protocol. The treaties and their accompanying national interest analyses were examined by the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee. The committee reported back in November 2006 and did not identify any matters to bring to the attention of the House. I will talk just a bit about those three treaties. 
The Singapore treaty aims to make the national trademark registration systems more user-friendly and to reduce business compliance costs for trademark owners through the simplification and international harmonisation of national registration procedures. Accordingly the bill provides more flexible arrangements for recording changes in registration of trademark ownership. It repeals provisions that concern registration of a person as a licensee of a registered trademark and it allows for the division of registration of a trademark. 
The Nice agreement provides a classification system for goods and services for the purposes of registering trademarks known as the Nice classification. The bill clarifies that the latest addition of the Nice classification must be used with all new applications for the registration of a trademark under the Trade Marks Act thereby facilitating accession to the Nice agreement. 
The Madrid protocol provides a system that allows a trademark owner to have a trademark protected in up to 76 member countries by filing one application for the registration of a trademark through the local trademarks office and designating one or more member countries where protection is sought. The Madrid system also allows an owner to effect subsequent changes to the trademark in each registered country through a single procedural step. The bill introduces amendments to the Trade Marks Act to allow the Madrid system to be implemented in New Zealand through regulations. 
Currently there is a growing problem around the world relating to the manufacture distribution and sale of counterfeits. Rigorous enforcement of the criminal offences under the Trade Marks Act and the Copyright Act is essential to protect the interests of New Zealand rights-holders—something that Labour holds very dear. The second purpose of the bill is to empower the Ministry of Economic Development and the Customs Service to play an active role in enforcing these criminal provisions alongside and in cooperation with other enforcement agencies and rights-holders. The bill provides the Ministry of Economic Development with enforcement powers which include the ability to apply for and execute search warrants and also to share information with the police and the Customs Service to assist in identifying persons who are involved in committing criminal offences. It also provides non-warranted powers to search and seize counterfeit goods and pirated works for evidential purposes for a prosecution but only where works are being offered for sale in public places and where entry is made when they are open to the public; in places of business and entry is made when they are open for carrying on business and only those parts that are open to the public; and also places where the occupier of the place consents to the entry and examination. 
The bill proposes to give the Customs Service the ability to seize without a warrant counterfeit goods and pirated works that are subject to the control of customs. That is in accordance with section 20 of the Customs and Excise Act 1996 and includes for example goods in a customs-controlled area. It also gives the power to require an importer or agent to provide information about those goods to require an importer or agent to appear to answer questions to apply for a judicial order that authorises the production of documents and other recorded information by any person and also to apply for and execute search warrants. 
The bill also includes protection for the Ministry of Economic Development the Customs Service and police staff and persons who assist them from liability for reasonable actions that are taken in good faith during a criminal investigation into the manufacture distribution and sale of counterfeit goods and pirated works. These moves to enhance the enforcement of the criminal offence provisions have been welcomed by trademark and copyright owners and their representatives. 
It also should be noted that the provisions in the bill reflect Government decisions in 2006 and 2007 to amend our domestic legislation to enhance the enforcement of criminal provisions in the Copyright Act and the Trade Marks Act. The bill should not be confused with the Government’s recent decision to participate in the development of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement otherwise known as ACTA. The aim of that agreement is to provide an international framework to deal with large-scale counterfeiting and piracy activities. 
I will speak just a little bit about the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement because it is quite important. It is a cooperative effort by Governments to respond to the increase in global trade of counterfeit goods and pirated copyright-protected works. Its goal is to establish a common standard for intellectual property rights and enforcement to combat global infringements of those rights particularly counterfeiting and piracy on a commercial scale. Why develop it? Well counterfeiting and piracy are a global problem and that is why a global solution is needed. There has been a lack of progress in various international multilateral areas such as the World Trade Organization in tackling the problem. The aim is essentially to develop new international standards and to develop enforcement that is combined with global cooperation. Multilateral agreement is desired but it is not always achievable. It is about combining action by a small number of like-minded countries to develop an enforcement agreement that most buy into. 
The Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement is about international cooperation establishing best practices for enforcement and strengthening the legal framework to combat breaches of intellectual copyright especially copyright and trademarks infringement. A lot of countries are involved and they include Australia Canada the European Union Japan Korea Mexico Morocco New Zealand Singapore Switzerland and the United States. New Zealand is participating because we recognised that strong intellectual property rights make an important contribution to our economic development and that our geographic isolation does not protect us from the effects and consequences of counterfeiting and piracy. New Zealand businesses are targeted by counterfeiters and pirates and New Zealand cannot afford not to participate. 
I come back to the Trade Marks (International Treaties and Enforcement) Amendment Bill. It contains a number of minor technical amendments to the Copyright Act the Trade Marks Act and the Trans-Tasman Mutual Recognition Act 1997. It is a Labour bill and therefore we support it.