Showing posts with label section 110. Show all posts
Showing posts with label section 110. Show all posts
Monday, July 27, 2009
The US Copyright Glass House cont'd
The European Commission has released a document entitled the UNITED STATES BARRIERS TO TRADE AND INVESTMENT REPORT 2008.
On the copyright front:
1. It notes the continued failure by the USA to address the violations adjudicated by the WTO in 2001 in the “Irish Music” case, which I've mentioned many times in this blog, e.g. here.
2. It notes the continued failure of the US to provide broadcasting and or public performance rights to performers and producers and its failure to join the Rome Convention of 1961.
3. It notes the “very limited extent” of moral rights in the USA, despite US accession to the Berne Convention in 1989.
The Report also notes the US multilateralism and unilateralism, as exemplified particularly in the notorious annual “301" exercise, which has been rendered “ineffective against WTO members” as a result of an EU challenge and 1999 WTO ruling.
Of course, the silly politics of the “301" exercise remain, and we hear much the same recycled disinformation about Canada each year.
HT to IP-Watch.
HK
Labels:
eu,
irish music,
section 110,
US trade barriers
Monday, January 26, 2009
US - China WTO Dispute Continues
The final panel report in the US - CHINA WTO dispute has been released, confirming mixed results in which both sides can claim victory. The IP-Kat has a playful score card on the outcome.
The USA will not likely be thrilled and possibly rather dismayed that the WTO panel ruled that "the United States has not established that the criminal thresholds are inconsistent with China's obligations under the first sentence of Article 61 of the TRIPS Agreement."
Both sides can appeal.
Meanwhile, the USA remains the most egregious copyright scofflaw in the WTO with its longstanding failure to pay for public performance of music in smaller establishments (the "Section 110" dispute). The US gets away with this by paying a truly token amount of compensation to get itself off the hook.
As I said almost two years ago in this space:
It will be very interesting to see how the Obama administration proceeds from here. Presumably, it will be aware of the adage about living in glass houses.
HK
The USA will not likely be thrilled and possibly rather dismayed that the WTO panel ruled that "the United States has not established that the criminal thresholds are inconsistent with China's obligations under the first sentence of Article 61 of the TRIPS Agreement."
Both sides can appeal.
Meanwhile, the USA remains the most egregious copyright scofflaw in the WTO with its longstanding failure to pay for public performance of music in smaller establishments (the "Section 110" dispute). The US gets away with this by paying a truly token amount of compensation to get itself off the hook.
As I said almost two years ago in this space:
The most flagrant adjudicated flouter of international copyright law is the USA. The WTO has long ago finally concluded that the USA fails to provide royalties for performing rights in many instances as a result of s. 110 of its Copyright Act. This is the most serious copyright dispute to date in the WTO and the USA is clearly unwilling or unable to do anything about coming into compliance. It has bought its way out of this violation with a paltry payment fixed by arbitration of about Euro 1,219,900 per year - a fraction of what the royalties ought to be.The late great Sir Hugh Laddie rarely missed an opportunity to point out that counterfeit and pirated products were readily available on the streets in New York and Washington. No need to travel to Beijing.
It will be very interesting to see how the Obama administration proceeds from here. Presumably, it will be aware of the adage about living in glass houses.
HK
Labels:
canada usa relations,
china,
s. 110,
section 110,
WTO
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)


