Page:Special 301 Report 2000.pdf/24

 necessary to implement a comprehensive regime regulating the production of optical disks. While section 42 legislation was passed by the lower house, that body adjourned before acting on the centerpiece optical disk legislation. Malaysia also continues to work closely with U.S. companies to deter unlicenced use of software by end-users. However, there is a substantial backlog of IPR cases in the Malaysia courts, and when penalties are imposed they are often insufficient to deter future or repeat offenses. While the number of raids initiated by government authorities increased during 1999, more needs to be done to address general nationwide enforcement. Legislation to implement TRIPS Agreement obligations, which needs to be enacted expeditiously, also was passed by the lower house of Parliament and, like the section 42 legislation, is now pending before the upper house. The United States will closely monitor progress to evaluate Malaysia's concrete efforts on enactment and implementation of legislation as well as enforcement.


 * The Government of Peru has put in place an ambitious plan to strengthen IPR enforcement during 2000. We are encouraged by the initial steps already taken by the government to implement the plan by bolstering its inter-agency coordination and by collaborating more actively with key private sector interests. For instance, the software industry and Peru's Institute for the Defense of Competition and Protection of Intellectual Property (INDECOPI) have cooperated in creating a joint campaign of education, training and enforcement regarding software legalization by organizations in Peru through June of this year. U.S. industry continues to express concern about decisions by the INDECOPI Tribunal that are not adequate to deter piracy. We look forward to seeing more complete results from these efforts by late 2000. With respect to patents, the provisions of the revised Andean Community Decision 344 have not yet been brought into conformity with the TRIPS Agreement. We will continue to consult informally with Andean Community governments in an effort to encourage them to resolve the outstanding TRIPS compliance concerns as soon as possible in the coming months.


 * Poland has not yet brought its copyright regime into line with its obligations under the TRIPS Agreement. The Copyright Law currently does not cover pre-1974 sound recordings. The parliament has made significant progress in preparing amendments to the Copyright Law that would provide for the TRIPS-mandated 50-year retroactive protection of sound recordings and would clarify the point of attachment for sound recordings. We urge the Government of Poland to pass these amendments quickly. The amendments would significantly strengthen Poland's regime for the protection of intellectual property, and passage would trigger a review of Poland's Special 301 status. With respect to enforcement, prosecutors and judicial authorities have not vigorously protected intellectual property rights. This inadequate enforcement has allowed unauthorized copies of videos and sound recordings (tapes, cassettes and optical media) and computer software products to saturate the Polish market. A three-year period of exclusive protection for test data now in place in Poland, coupled with weak protection of process patents, leaves research-based pharmaceutical companies vulnerable to rival firms appropriating valuable products that are still under process patents. We will continue to consult informally with the Government of Poland in an effort to encourage it to resolve outstanding TRIPS compliance concerns as soon as possible in the coming months.