22
Sweden: Swedish law permits official institutions such as Government Ministries and the Parliament to provide copies to the public of documents that are filed with them, even though such documents may be unpublished and protected by copyright law. Despite the leadership demonstrated by certain concerned government officials who have attempted to address the situation in a mutually satisfactory manner, ultimate resolution of U.S. concerns continues to be frustrated. We look to the Government of Sweden to take the steps necessary resolve this bilateral irritant without further delay. In contrast, significant progress has been made toward resolving the WTO dispute settlement case initiated by the United States in 1997 regarding provisional relief in civil enforcement proceedings. The Government of Sweden recently published amendments to the copyright law which may address U.S. concerns. The United States looks to Sweden to make substantial progress in the near term toward resolving both of these issues and will review Sweden's Special 301 status in that context.
Thailand: Thailand has taken a number of positive actions over the past year — in particular, establishment of a IP court and strengthening of their enforcement system. Nonetheless, significant deficiencies remain in Thailand's intellectual property regime. Piracy rates — particularly for videos and software — remain unacceptably high. We will monitor the decisions of the newly-established intellectual property court to see if sentences are sufficient to reduce piracy rates. Thailand also needs to pass a TRIPS-consistent patent law (including abolition of the Patent Review Board), and to take steps to ensure that all Government offices use only legitimate software.
Ukraine needs to strengthen its IPR regime and enforcement. Copyright piracy is extensive and enforcement against pirates of U.S. copyrighted works is minimal. Piracy of audiovisual, broadcast, software and music and sound recordings are causing substantial losses to U.S. industry. Ukraine does not grant protection to U.S. works created prior to 1973, and it does not provide retroactive protection for sound recordings, both of which are required by our 1992 bilateral trade agreement. Ukraine does not provide adequate criminal penalties, including prison terms, for piracy, and apparently no criminal penalties for copyright infringements involving sound recordings, performers or broadcasters. We will look for Ukraine to take the steps necessary to bring its intellectual property laws into full compliance with TRIPS no later than the date of its accession to the World Trade Organization.
The United Arab Emirates has made significant strides in reducing copyright piracy and some progress toward tightening trademark protection. However, there is still little progress toward enacting a new patent law, and the need for "pipeline protection" of new products in the research and development cycle is critical. An adverse court ruling in Dubai in October 1997 leaves in doubt the applicability of the copyright protection for foreign works. We urge the United Arab Emirates to move quickly to enact TRIPS-consistent copyright and patent laws, to clarify that U.S. copyrighted works are protected, and to provide patent protection for pharmaceutical products. We also urge the U.A.E. to ensure that its entire intellectual property regime is TRIPS-consistent before the end of the transition period for developing countries.
