Page:Special 301 Report 2001.pdf/8

 passage of this legislation before the August implementation deadline.

 USTR announced in its 1997 Special 301 report that it would launch a WTO dispute settlement case against Ireland because of Ireland's failure to implement a fully TRIPS-consistent copyright law. Deficiencies included the absence of rental rights for sound recordings, inadequate protection for pre-existing works, absence of clear civil "anti-bootlegging" remedies, and criminal penalties so low that they failed to deter piracy. After numerous consultations with the United States, Ireland committed in February 1998 to accelerate its implementation of copyright reform legislation by initially passing a bill on an expedited basis to address two particularly pressing enforcement issues, which included the need to raise criminal penalties for copyright infringement. This legislation – the Intellectual Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1998 {28 of 1998} – was enacted in July 1998. Subsequently, on July 10, 2000, Ireland passed the comprehensive Copyright and Related Rights Act 2000 {28 of 2000}, thus resolving the remainder of the U.S. concerns. This new Irish copyright law, among other things, simplifies the procedure necessary to bring a copyright lawsuit, and allows courts to order infringers to pay punitive as well as compensatory damages to copyright owners. The new law provides maximum penalties of a five-year prison sentence and fines of up to IR£100,000 for infringing copyrights. It also makes bootlegging an offense. The United States and Ireland formally notified the settlement of the WTO dispute on November 6, 2000, and the new law became effective on January 1, 2001.

 In 1998, USTR announced in its Special 301 report the initiation of WTO dispute settlement proceedings against Greece concerning the Greek Government's failure to enforce its intellectual property laws effectively against television stations that broadcast U.S. copyrighted works without authorization. Prior to the initiation of this case, the high rate of television piracy in Greece had been a contentious bilateral issue between the United States and Greece for a number of years. Notwithstanding the existence of Greek laws prohibiting broadcast piracy, a large number oflocal and regional television stations in Greece had regularly broadcast U.S. copyrighted motion pictures and television programs without authorization of the U.S. copyright owners. No television station had ever been held criminally liable for copyright infringement, no station had ever been closed by regulatory authorities for copyright violations, and TV piracy cases languished in the Greek courts for years without resolution. The TRIPS Agreement, however, requires WTO Members to provide effective enforcement remedies that "constitute a deterrent to further infringement." After initiating this WTO case, the United States and Greece held several rounds of consultations in both Geneva and Athens. On March 22, 2001, the United States and Greece formally notified the WTO of the resolution of this dispute. This resolution was possible due to the improved situation in Greece, specifically: the sharp decline in the level of television piracy in Greece over the past years; the passage of new legislation providing for the immediate closure of television stations that infringe upon intellectual property rights; the actual closure, based on complaints by U.S. right holders, of several stations that had pirated U.S. films; the issuance of the first criminal convictions for television piracy in Greece; the Greek