WTO Dispute Settlement Proceeding Regarding China-Measures Affecting the Protection and Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights, 57608-57609 [07-5000]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
57608
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 195 / Wednesday, October 10, 2007 / Notices
recommendations within approximately
nine months after it is established.
OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES
TRADE REPRESENTATIVE
[Docket No. WTO/DS–362]
WTO Dispute Settlement Proceeding
Regarding China—Measures Affecting
the Protection and Enforcement of
Intellectual Property Rights
Office of the United States
Trade Representative.
ACTION: Notice; request for comments.
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Office of the United
States Trade Representative (USTR) is
providing notice that in accordance
with the Marrakesh Agreement
Establishing the World Trade
Organization (‘‘WTO Agreement’’), at
the request of the United States the
WTO Dispute Settlement Body has
established a dispute settlement panel
to review the U.S. claims concerning
certain measures pertaining to the
protection and enforcement of
intellectual property rights in China.
The panel request may be found at
https://www.wto.org contained in a
document designated as WT/DS362/7.
USTR invites written comments from
the public concerning the issues raised
in this dispute.
DATES: Although USTR will accept any
comments received during the course of
the dispute, comments should be
submitted on or before November 16,
2007, to be assured of timely
consideration by USTR.
ADDRESSES: Comments should be
submitted (i) Electronically, to
FR0707@ustr.eop.gov, with ‘‘China IPR
Protection and Enforcement (DS362)’’ in
the subject line, or (ii) by fax, to Sandy
McKinzy at (202) 395–3640, with a
confirmation copy sent electronically to
the electronic mail address above, in
accordance with the requirements for
submission set out below.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Steven F. Fabry, Associate General
Counsel, Office of the United States
Trade Representative, 600 17th Street,
NW., Washington, DC, (202) 395–3150.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant
to section 127(b) of the Uruguay Round
Agreements Act (URAA) (19 U.S.C.
3537(b)(1)), USTR is providing notice
that at the request of the United States
the WTO Dispute Settlement Body on
September 25, 2007, established a
dispute settlement panel pursuant to the
WTO Understanding on Rules and
Procedures Governing the Settlement of
Disputes (‘‘DSU’’). Such panel, which
would hold its meetings in Geneva,
Switzerland, would be expected to issue
a report on its findings and
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:08 Oct 09, 2007
Jkt 214001
Major Issues Raised by the United
States
The first matter on which the United
States has requested the establishment
of a WTO dispute settlement panel
concerns the thresholds that must be
met in order for certain acts of
trademark counterfeiting and copyright
piracy to be subject to criminal
procedures and penalties. China has
established these thresholds through the
following measures, as well as any
amendments and related or
implementing measures: the Criminal
Law of the People’s Republic of China,
in particular Articles 213, 214, 215, 217,
218, and 220; and two interpretations by
the Supreme People’s Court and the
Supreme People’s Procuratorate on
several issues of concrete application of
law in handling criminal cases of
infringing intellectual property (one
adopted on November 2, 2004, and the
other adopted on April 4, 2007). It
appears that certain acts of trademark
counterfeiting and copyright piracy
occurring on a commercial scale in
China are not subject to criminal
procedures and penalties in China.
China’s measures appear to be
inconsistent with China’s obligations
under Articles 41.1 and 61 of the
Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of
Intellectual Property Rights (‘‘TRIPS
Agreement’’).
The second matter on which the
United States has requested the
establishment of a WTO dispute
settlement panel concerns goods that
infringe intellectual property rights that
are confiscated by Chinese customs
authorities, in particular the disposal of
such goods following removal of their
infringing features. In this regard, the
measures at issue include the following,
as well as any amendments and related
or implementing measures: the
Regulations of the People’s Republic of
China for Customs Protection of
Intellectual Property Rights, in
particular Chapter 4 thereof, the
Implementing Measures of Customs of
the People’s Republic of China for the
Regulations of the People’s Republic of
China on Customs Protection of
Intellectual Property Rights, in
particular Chapter 5 thereof, and the
General Administration of Customs
Announcement No. 16 (April 2, 2007).
It appears that, because of these
measures, the customs authorities
appear to be required to give priority to
options for disposal of goods that
infringe intellectual property rights that
would allow such goods to enter the
channels of commerce (for instance,
PO 00000
Frm 00096
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
through auctioning the goods after
removing their infringing features). The
requirement that infringing goods be
released into the channels of commerce
under the circumstances set forth in the
measures at issue appears to be
inconsistent with China’s obligations
under Article 59 of the TRIPS
Agreement.
The third matter on which the United
States has requested the establishment
of a WTO dispute settlement panel
concerns China’s denial of the
protection of its Copyright Law to
creative works of authorship (and, to the
extent Article 4 of the Copyright Law
applies to them, sound recordings and
performances) that have not been
authorized for, or are otherwise
prohibited from, publication or
distribution within China. For example,
it appears that works that are required
to undergo censorship review (or other
forms of pre-publication or predistribution review) before entering the
Chinese market are not protected by
copyright before the review is complete
and publication and distribution within
China has been authorized. In this
regard, the measures at issue include the
following, as well as any amendments
and related or implementing measures:
• The Copyright Law, in particular Article
4;
• the Criminal Law, the Regulations on the
Administration of Publishing Industry, the
Regulations on the Administration of
Broadcasting, the Regulations on the
Administration of Audiovisual Products, the
Regulations on the Administration of Films,
and the Regulations on the Administration of
Telecommunication;
• the Regulations on Administration of the
Films Industry
• the Administrative Regulations on
Audiovisual Products;
• the Administrative Regulation on
Publishing;
• the Administrative Regulations on
Electronic Publications;
• the Measures for the Administration of
Import of Audio and Video Products;
• the Procedures for Examination and
Approval for Publishing Finished Electronic
Publication Items Licensed by a Foreign
Copyright Owner;
• the Procedures for Examination and
Approval of Importation of Finished
Electronic Publication Items by Electronic
Publication Importation Entities;
• the Procedures for Recording of Imported
Publications;
• the Interim Regulations on Internet
Culture Administration; and
• the Several Opinions on the
Development and Regulation of Network
Music.
It appears that, because of the
Copyright Law, authors of works whose
publication or distribution has not been
authorized or is otherwise prohibited
E:\FR\FM\10OCN1.SGM
10OCN1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 195 / Wednesday, October 10, 2007 / Notices
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES
appear not to enjoy the minimum
standards of protection specially
granted by the Berne Convention for the
Protection of Literary and Artistic Works
(1971) (the ‘‘Berne Convention’’) in
respect of those works (and may never
enjoy such protection if the work is not
authorized, or is not authorized for
distribution or publication in the form
as submitted for review). In addition,
the rights of authors of works whose
publication or distribution is required to
undergo pre-publication or predistribution review appear to be subject
to the formality of successful conclusion
of such review. The foregoing appears to
be inconsistent with China’s obligations
under Articles 9.1, 41.1 and 61 of the
TRIPS Agreement. Furthermore, to the
extent that the Copyright Law also
denies the protection of certain rights to
performers and producers of sound
recordings during the period of any prepublication or pre-distribution
prohibition, the Copyright Law appears
to be inconsistent with China’s
obligations under Articles 14, 41.1 and
61 of the TRIPS Agreement.
In addition, it appears that the
measures at issue provide different predistribution and pre-authorization
review processes for Chinese nationals’
works, performances (or their fixations)
and sound recordings than for foreign
nationals’ works, performances (or their
fixations) and sound recordings. To the
extent that these different processes,
taken together with Article 4 of the
Copyright Law, result in earlier or
otherwise more favorable protection or
enforcement of copyright or related
rights for Chinese authors’ works,
Chinese performers’ performances (or
their fixations) and Chinese producers’
sound recordings than for foreign
authors’ works, foreign performers’
performances (or their fixations) and
foreign producers’ sound recordings, the
measures at issue appear to be
inconsistent with China’s obligations
under TRIPS Agreement Articles 3.1,
9.1, 41.1 and 61.
Public Comment: Requirements for
Submissions
Interested persons are invited to
submit written comments concerning
the issues raised in the dispute.
Comments should be submitted (i)
Electronically, to FR0707@ustr.eop.gov,
with ‘‘China IPR Protection and
Enforcement (DS362)’’ in the subject
line, or (ii) by fax, to Sandy McKinzy at
(202) 395–3640, with a confirmation
copy sent electronically to the electronic
mail address above.
USTR encourages the submission of
documents in Adobe PDF format as
attachments to an electronic mail.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:08 Oct 09, 2007
Jkt 214001
Interested persons who make
submissions by electronic mail should
not provide separate cover letters;
information that might appear in a cover
letter should be included in the
submission itself. Similarly, to the
extent possible, any attachments to the
submission should be included in the
same file as the submission itself, and
not as separate files.
Comments must be in English. A
person requesting that information
contained in a comment submitted by
that person be treated as confidential
business information must certify that
such information is business
confidential and would not customarily
be released to the public by the
commenter. Confidential business
information must be clearly designated
as such and ‘‘BUSINESS
CONFIDENTIAL’’ must be marked at the
top and bottom of the cover page and
each succeeding page. Persons who
submit confidential business
information are encouraged also to
provide a non-confidential summary of
the information.
Information or advice contained in a
comment submitted, other than business
confidential information, may be
determined by USTR to be confidential
in accordance with section 135(g)(2) of
the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C.
2155(g)(2)). If the submitter believes that
information or advice may qualify as
such, the submitter—
(1) Must clearly so designate the
information or advice;
(2) Must clearly mark the material as
‘‘SUBMITTED IN CONFIDENCE’’ at the
top and bottom of the cover page and
each succeeding page; and
(3) Is encouraged to provide a nonconfidential summary of the
information or advice.
Pursuant to section 127(e) of the
URAA (19 U.S.C. 3537(e)), USTR will
maintain a file on this dispute
settlement proceeding, accessible to the
public, in the USTR Reading Room,
which is located at 1724 F Street, NW.,
Washington, DC 20508. The public file
will include non-confidential comments
received by USTR from the public with
respect to the dispute; if a dispute
settlement panel is convened or in the
event of an appeal from such a panel,
the U.S. submissions; the submissions,
or non-confidential summaries of
submissions, received from other
participants in the dispute; the report of
the panel; and, if applicable, the report
of the Appellate Body. The USTR
Reading Room is open to the public, by
appointment only, from 10 a.m. to noon
and 1 p.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through
Friday. An appointment to review the
public file (Docket WTO/DS–362, China
PO 00000
Frm 00097
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
57609
IPR Protection and Enforcement
Dispute) may be made by calling the
USTR Reading Room at (202) 395–6186.
Daniel Brinza,
Assistant United States Trade Representative
for Monitoring and Enforcement.
[FR Doc. 07–5000 Filed 10–9–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3190–W8–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
Proposed Collection; Comment
Request
Upon Written Request, Copies Available
From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of Investor
Education and Advocacy,
Washington, DC 20549–0213.
Extension:
Rule 204–3, SEC File No. 270–42, OMB
Control No. 3235–0047.
Notice is hereby given that pursuant
to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) the Securities
and Exchange Commission
(‘‘Commission’’) is soliciting comments
on the collection of information
summarized below. The Commission
plans to submit this existing collection
of information to the Office of
Management and Budget for extension
and approval.
The title for the collection of
information is ‘‘Rule 204–3 (17 CFR
275.204–3) under the Investment
Advisers Act of 1940’’ (15 U.S.C. 80b).
Rule 204–3, the ‘‘brochure rule,’’
requires an investment adviser to
deliver their brochure to their new
clients or prospective clients before or at
the start of the advisory relationship.
The brochure assists the client in
determining whether to retain, or
continue employing, the adviser. Rule
204–3 also requires that an investment
adviser deliver, or offer in writing to
deliver upon written request, the
brochure to their existing clients
annually in order to provide them with
current information about the adviser.
Under rule 204–3, the investment
adviser must furnish the required
information to clients and prospective
clients by providing either a copy of
Part II of Form ADV, the investment
adviser registration form, or a written
document containing at least the
information required by Part II of Form
ADV. This collection of information is
found at 17 CFR 275.204–3 and is
mandatory.
The respondents to this information
collection are investment advisers
registered with the Commission. Our
latest data indicate that there were
E:\FR\FM\10OCN1.SGM
10OCN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 195 (Wednesday, October 10, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 57608-57609]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-5000]
[[Page 57608]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE
[Docket No. WTO/DS-362]
WTO Dispute Settlement Proceeding Regarding China--Measures
Affecting the Protection and Enforcement of Intellectual Property
Rights
AGENCY: Office of the United States Trade Representative.
ACTION: Notice; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) is
providing notice that in accordance with the Marrakesh Agreement
Establishing the World Trade Organization (``WTO Agreement''), at the
request of the United States the WTO Dispute Settlement Body has
established a dispute settlement panel to review the U.S. claims
concerning certain measures pertaining to the protection and
enforcement of intellectual property rights in China. The panel request
may be found at https://www.wto.org contained in a document designated
as WT/DS362/7. USTR invites written comments from the public concerning
the issues raised in this dispute.
DATES: Although USTR will accept any comments received during the
course of the dispute, comments should be submitted on or before
November 16, 2007, to be assured of timely consideration by USTR.
ADDRESSES: Comments should be submitted (i) Electronically, to
FR0707@ustr.eop.gov, with ``China IPR Protection and Enforcement
(DS362)'' in the subject line, or (ii) by fax, to Sandy McKinzy at
(202) 395-3640, with a confirmation copy sent electronically to the
electronic mail address above, in accordance with the requirements for
submission set out below.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steven F. Fabry, Associate General
Counsel, Office of the United States Trade Representative, 600 17th
Street, NW., Washington, DC, (202) 395-3150.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to section 127(b) of the Uruguay
Round Agreements Act (URAA) (19 U.S.C. 3537(b)(1)), USTR is providing
notice that at the request of the United States the WTO Dispute
Settlement Body on September 25, 2007, established a dispute settlement
panel pursuant to the WTO Understanding on Rules and Procedures
Governing the Settlement of Disputes (``DSU''). Such panel, which would
hold its meetings in Geneva, Switzerland, would be expected to issue a
report on its findings and recommendations within approximately nine
months after it is established.
Major Issues Raised by the United States
The first matter on which the United States has requested the
establishment of a WTO dispute settlement panel concerns the thresholds
that must be met in order for certain acts of trademark counterfeiting
and copyright piracy to be subject to criminal procedures and
penalties. China has established these thresholds through the following
measures, as well as any amendments and related or implementing
measures: the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China, in
particular Articles 213, 214, 215, 217, 218, and 220; and two
interpretations by the Supreme People's Court and the Supreme People's
Procuratorate on several issues of concrete application of law in
handling criminal cases of infringing intellectual property (one
adopted on November 2, 2004, and the other adopted on April 4, 2007).
It appears that certain acts of trademark counterfeiting and copyright
piracy occurring on a commercial scale in China are not subject to
criminal procedures and penalties in China. China's measures appear to
be inconsistent with China's obligations under Articles 41.1 and 61 of
the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights
(``TRIPS Agreement'').
The second matter on which the United States has requested the
establishment of a WTO dispute settlement panel concerns goods that
infringe intellectual property rights that are confiscated by Chinese
customs authorities, in particular the disposal of such goods following
removal of their infringing features. In this regard, the measures at
issue include the following, as well as any amendments and related or
implementing measures: the Regulations of the People's Republic of
China for Customs Protection of Intellectual Property Rights, in
particular Chapter 4 thereof, the Implementing Measures of Customs of
the People's Republic of China for the Regulations of the People's
Republic of China on Customs Protection of Intellectual Property
Rights, in particular Chapter 5 thereof, and the General Administration
of Customs Announcement No. 16 (April 2, 2007). It appears that,
because of these measures, the customs authorities appear to be
required to give priority to options for disposal of goods that
infringe intellectual property rights that would allow such goods to
enter the channels of commerce (for instance, through auctioning the
goods after removing their infringing features). The requirement that
infringing goods be released into the channels of commerce under the
circumstances set forth in the measures at issue appears to be
inconsistent with China's obligations under Article 59 of the TRIPS
Agreement.
The third matter on which the United States has requested the
establishment of a WTO dispute settlement panel concerns China's denial
of the protection of its Copyright Law to creative works of authorship
(and, to the extent Article 4 of the Copyright Law applies to them,
sound recordings and performances) that have not been authorized for,
or are otherwise prohibited from, publication or distribution within
China. For example, it appears that works that are required to undergo
censorship review (or other forms of pre-publication or pre-
distribution review) before entering the Chinese market are not
protected by copyright before the review is complete and publication
and distribution within China has been authorized. In this regard, the
measures at issue include the following, as well as any amendments and
related or implementing measures:
The Copyright Law, in particular Article 4;
the Criminal Law, the Regulations on the Administration
of Publishing Industry, the Regulations on the Administration of
Broadcasting, the Regulations on the Administration of Audiovisual
Products, the Regulations on the Administration of Films, and the
Regulations on the Administration of Telecommunication;
the Regulations on Administration of the Films Industry
the Administrative Regulations on Audiovisual Products;
the Administrative Regulation on Publishing;
the Administrative Regulations on Electronic
Publications;
the Measures for the Administration of Import of Audio
and Video Products;
the Procedures for Examination and Approval for
Publishing Finished Electronic Publication Items Licensed by a
Foreign Copyright Owner;
the Procedures for Examination and Approval of
Importation of Finished Electronic Publication Items by Electronic
Publication Importation Entities;
the Procedures for Recording of Imported Publications;
the Interim Regulations on Internet Culture
Administration; and
the Several Opinions on the Development and Regulation
of Network Music.
It appears that, because of the Copyright Law, authors of works
whose publication or distribution has not been authorized or is
otherwise prohibited
[[Page 57609]]
appear not to enjoy the minimum standards of protection specially
granted by the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and
Artistic Works (1971) (the ``Berne Convention'') in respect of those
works (and may never enjoy such protection if the work is not
authorized, or is not authorized for distribution or publication in the
form as submitted for review). In addition, the rights of authors of
works whose publication or distribution is required to undergo pre-
publication or pre-distribution review appear to be subject to the
formality of successful conclusion of such review. The foregoing
appears to be inconsistent with China's obligations under Articles 9.1,
41.1 and 61 of the TRIPS Agreement. Furthermore, to the extent that the
Copyright Law also denies the protection of certain rights to
performers and producers of sound recordings during the period of any
pre-publication or pre-distribution prohibition, the Copyright Law
appears to be inconsistent with China's obligations under Articles 14,
41.1 and 61 of the TRIPS Agreement.
In addition, it appears that the measures at issue provide
different pre-distribution and pre-authorization review processes for
Chinese nationals' works, performances (or their fixations) and sound
recordings than for foreign nationals' works, performances (or their
fixations) and sound recordings. To the extent that these different
processes, taken together with Article 4 of the Copyright Law, result
in earlier or otherwise more favorable protection or enforcement of
copyright or related rights for Chinese authors' works, Chinese
performers' performances (or their fixations) and Chinese producers'
sound recordings than for foreign authors' works, foreign performers'
performances (or their fixations) and foreign producers' sound
recordings, the measures at issue appear to be inconsistent with
China's obligations under TRIPS Agreement Articles 3.1, 9.1, 41.1 and
61.
Public Comment: Requirements for Submissions
Interested persons are invited to submit written comments
concerning the issues raised in the dispute. Comments should be
submitted (i) Electronically, to FR0707@ustr.eop.gov, with ``China IPR
Protection and Enforcement (DS362)'' in the subject line, or (ii) by
fax, to Sandy McKinzy at (202) 395-3640, with a confirmation copy sent
electronically to the electronic mail address above.
USTR encourages the submission of documents in Adobe PDF format as
attachments to an electronic mail. Interested persons who make
submissions by electronic mail should not provide separate cover
letters; information that might appear in a cover letter should be
included in the submission itself. Similarly, to the extent possible,
any attachments to the submission should be included in the same file
as the submission itself, and not as separate files.
Comments must be in English. A person requesting that information
contained in a comment submitted by that person be treated as
confidential business information must certify that such information is
business confidential and would not customarily be released to the
public by the commenter. Confidential business information must be
clearly designated as such and ``BUSINESS CONFIDENTIAL'' must be marked
at the top and bottom of the cover page and each succeeding page.
Persons who submit confidential business information are encouraged
also to provide a non-confidential summary of the information.
Information or advice contained in a comment submitted, other than
business confidential information, may be determined by USTR to be
confidential in accordance with section 135(g)(2) of the Trade Act of
1974 (19 U.S.C. 2155(g)(2)). If the submitter believes that information
or advice may qualify as such, the submitter--
(1) Must clearly so designate the information or advice;
(2) Must clearly mark the material as ``SUBMITTED IN CONFIDENCE''
at the top and bottom of the cover page and each succeeding page; and
(3) Is encouraged to provide a non-confidential summary of the
information or advice.
Pursuant to section 127(e) of the URAA (19 U.S.C. 3537(e)), USTR
will maintain a file on this dispute settlement proceeding, accessible
to the public, in the USTR Reading Room, which is located at 1724 F
Street, NW., Washington, DC 20508. The public file will include non-
confidential comments received by USTR from the public with respect to
the dispute; if a dispute settlement panel is convened or in the event
of an appeal from such a panel, the U.S. submissions; the submissions,
or non-confidential summaries of submissions, received from other
participants in the dispute; the report of the panel; and, if
applicable, the report of the Appellate Body. The USTR Reading Room is
open to the public, by appointment only, from 10 a.m. to noon and 1
p.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday. An appointment to review the
public file (Docket WTO/DS-362, China IPR Protection and Enforcement
Dispute) may be made by calling the USTR Reading Room at (202) 395-
6186.
Daniel Brinza,
Assistant United States Trade Representative for Monitoring and
Enforcement.
[FR Doc. 07-5000 Filed 10-9-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3190-W8-P
