logging in or signing up 07-International IP Rights Enforcement – wnhulsey3 Download Post to : URL : Related Presentations : Let's Connect Share Add to Flag Embed Email Send to Blogs and Networks Add to Channel Copy embed code: Embed: Flash iPad Dynamic Copy Does not support media & animations Automatically changes to Flash or non-Flash embed WordPress Embed Customize Embed URL: Copy Thumbnail: Copy The presentation is successfully added In Your Favorites. Views: 54 Category: Entertainment License: All Rights Reserved Like it (0) Dislike it (0) Added: February 24, 2010 This Presentation is Public Favorites: 0 Presentation Description No description available. Comments Posting comment... Premium member Presentation Transcript Slide 1: International Intellectual Property Protection and Commercialization International IP Rights Enforcement – The Case of Singapore Slide 4: International Intellectual Property Protection and Commercialization International IP Rights Enforcement – The Case of Singapore Introduction : Introduction Criminal enforcement of IPRs available only under the copyright and trade mark legislation Patent infringement does not attract any criminal liability Penalties : Penalties Trade Marks Act : Max. fine - $100,000 per charge or 5 years imprisonment or both Copyright Act: $10,000 for each article or $100,000, whichever is the lower, or imprisonment for max. of 5 years or both Basic Premise : Basic Premise IPR enforcement is both a private issue as well as being one of general public concern. Legislative structure addresses both aspects : allows the task of enforcement to be handled by both private sector and state Sharing of cost and burden State / Police Action : State / Police Action Dedicated unit set up in Police Department - Intellectual Property Rights Branch (IPRB) Independent enforcement actions taken by IPRB: Crippling of Piracy Syndicates “Piracy Icons” IP Rights Owners Role : IP Rights Owners Role Confirm the existence of infringement Needed for the police in order for them to apply for and obtain a search warrant in order to raid the identified premises Identify the infringing articles Articles would be seized by the Police and arrests made of the offenders Conduct examination of the seized products and provide a technical report to the Police which would then be used when the Offenders are prosecuted in court Prosecution would be undertaken by the state Private Action : Private Action Taken by the IP rights owners: attacking piracy at the retail level, i.e. the retail shops selling pirated products Criminal Procedure Code : Criminal Procedure Code Section 342 (CPC) Whenever the Public Prosecutor is of opinion that a criminal offence is disclosed by the record and that further proceedings should be taken against the accused person and that the evidence taken is sufficient to afford a foundation for a full and proper trial, he shall, by his fiat in writing signed by himself, designate the court, whether High Court, District Court or Magistrate’s Court, before which the case shall be placed for trial and shall order the record of the case to be transmitted to the court so designated. S 336(4) Of The CPC : S 336(4) Of The CPC The Public Prosecutor or the Solicitor-General … may authorize any advocate to act for him as Public Prosecutor in the conduct of any case or prosecution in court or in any part of such conduct. Effect: Criminal enforcement of IP Rights offences, if initiated by the IP rights owner will be prosecuted by way of private prosecution and handled by attorneys acting for an behalf of IP Rights holders themselves. Costs incurred will be borne by the IP rights holder. Typical Procedure : Typical Procedure IP rights owners would engage private investigators Once infringing activity detected, the IP rights owner’s solicitor would apply for a search warrant Contact IPRB Search warrant executed by police and IP rights holders Typical Procedure : Typical Procedure IP rights owners – examine articles found to ensure they are infringing articles; the police officers seize articles Prosecution of the offender thereafter is carried out by the IP rights owner’s solicitor upon authority of a fiat issued by the Attorney General’s Chambers. Flow Chart Of Private Action : Flow Chart Of Private Action Factors Affecting Sentencing : Factors Affecting Sentencing Scale (quantity of infringing items) Value of items Sophistication of operation Involvement of syndicate Major role (e.g. sole managing director/partner or main person involved) Duration of operation Slide 17: International Intellectual Property Protection and Commercialization International IP Rights Enforcement – The Case of Singapore www.HULSEYIPLaw.com : www.HULSEYIPLaw.com You do not have the permission to view this presentation. In order to view it, please contact the author of the presentation.