The
Patent
13
Office
Да
A J Seaton Esq
Far Eastern Department
Foreign & Commonwealth Office
LONDON SW1A 2AH
Direct line 071-438
4782
Our ref
Your ref
Date
7 August 1991
HKC031/19
"expyright law
65148
Industrial Property and Copyright Department
Hazlitt House
45 Southampton Buildings London WC2A 1AR United Kingdom
Enquiries
071-438 4777
Telex 498086 PATNPT G
Fax 071-438 4780
Dear Andrew
CHINA: COPYRIGHT LAW
Thank you for your letter of 23 July.
I have not yet received any comments from the Embassy on the course of action proposed in my letter of 9 July, and am of course awaiting these before preparing any note intended to form the basis for a bilateral. I would only say that we should not delay an intitiative very much longer if we are to get the Chinese to consider our concerns alongside those of the US.
On your other points, I would very much support flagging up this issue at Prime Ministerial level. I will write to the publishers and record producers enquiring whether they have investment plans which are being inhibited by the lack of adequate copyright protection (without of course mentioning the possibility of any Prime Ministerial initiative at this stage) and no doubt you will give us an opportunity to supply a brief at the appropriate time.
Finally, the suggestion that we ask Peking's honorary legal adviser to assess the adequacy of the new copyright law from a UK/Hong Kong perspective leaves me a little puzzled, no doubt through ignorance of the functions of that honorary office. In any event I would have thought that any assessment of the new law itself can best be done here, given our own expertise and the fact that we can draw upon the very detailed analysis produced by Denis de Freitas who is an acknowledged international expert in this field and is acting as advisor to the two industries most directly
BRIAAD
An Executive Agency of the Department of Trade and Industry
I
The
Patent Office
affected. It is more for OT to comment on whether it would be useful to have a complementary assessment of the investment opportunities available to UK and Hong Kong investors in this area. Meanwhile, I am enclosing with Miss Barrett's copy of this letter, copies of the new copyright law, the implementing regulations and my and Denis de Freitas' comments on these. We do not yet have an English translation of the implementing regulations relating to computer software.
Jours
anceres
Petr Butto
སྐྱ་
JP BRITTON
CC: Mr Sugden
Mr Knights
Mr Murray
Ms Life
Mr Madelin Mr Ellis
Mr Sainty
Miss Barrett
Mr Kerfoot
Mr Collard
Mr Edwards
IPCD/DTI
IPCD/DTI OT2/DTI
ECD (E) /FCO
UKREP Brussels British Council
HKD/FCO
Legal Advisers/FCO
BE Peking
BE Peking
British Council, Peking
TICS MARS
BRIAAD
An Executive Agency of the Department of Trade and Industry
Davo 10
age Tv
CONFIDENTIAL
FM HONG KONG
TO ROUTINE FCO
TELNO 2745
OF 03075OZ SEPTEMBER 91
INFO ROUTINE PEKING
Doco
Dago 10
CONFIDENTIAL
Ar Riordon's ??
нис
HAC031/19
SEP 1991
plx
(12)
061523
MDLIAN 7021
TOP COPY Q DIST?
esaka
YOUR TELNO 1200: PRC COPYRIGHT PROTECTION.
1. PRC'S ACCESSION TO THE BERNE CONVENTION WOULD OBVIATE THE NEED FOR OTHER CONVENTION COUNTRIES (LIKE UK AND USA) TO PURSUE BILATERAL AGREEMENTS WITH PRC. HONG KONG IS IN A MORE COMPLICATED SITUATION. AS FAR AS RECIPROCITY BETWEEN PRC AND HONG KONG IS CONCERNED, BERNE ONLY OFFERS A PARTIAL SOLUTION THROUGH UK BEFORE 1997. ON 1 JULY 1997 WHEN HONG KONG BECOMES PART OF CHINA, BERNE CEASE TO BE A VEHICLE OF RECIPROCITY. IT WOULD THEN BE NECESSARY FOR SOME OTHER MECHANISM TO ENABLE BERNE OBLIGATIONS TO APPLY OR CONTINUE TO BE APPLIED BETWEEN PRC AND HONG KONG.
2. WHILE WE ACCEPT YOUR VIEW THAT THE PRC ARE UNLIKELY TO ACCEPT EXTENSION OF A UK/PRC BILATERAL AGREEMENT TO COVER HONG KONG, WE DO NOT WISH TO ENTIRELY DISMISS THIS ROUTE YET. WE CAN THINK OF NO EXAMPLES OF SUCH AGREEMENTS, BUT IT IS JUST POSSIBLE THAT THEY MAY ACCEPT ONE IN THIS CASE AS A STOPGAP IF THEY SAW SUFFICIENT BENEFIT IN TERMS OF PROTECTION FOR PRC WORKS IN HONG KONG AND IN THE ABSENCE OF OTHER ARRANGEMENTS. THE BILATERAL ROUTE OF COURSE HAS THE SAME DRAWBACK AS BERNE IN THAT IT WOULD PROVIDE NO
SOLUTION AFTER 1997.
3. ONE ALTERNATIVE OPTION WE ARE NOW CONSIDERING IS MAKING PRACTICAL ARRANGEMENTS WITH THE PRC ON RECIPROCAL COPYRIGHT PROTECTION UNDER RESPECTIVE DOMESTIC LEGISLATION. IF THIS COULD BE ACHIEVED IT WOULD ENABLE US TO ENJOY COPYRIGHT PROTECTION IN CHINA AT A REASONABLY EARLY STAGE AND WOULD RESULT IN RECIPROCITY CONTINUING AFTER 1997. A FORMAL BILATERAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN PRC AND HONG KONG IS UNFORTUNATELY NOT AN OPTION GIVEN THAT PRC'S COPYRIGHT LAW ONLY CONTEMPLATES BILATERAL AGREEMENTS WITH OTHER STATES AS A MEANS OF ACHIEVING RECIPROCITY. HOWEVER, WHAT MIGHT BE POSSIBLE IS PERHAPS A RECORD OF DISCUSSION SETTING OUT THE UNDERSTANDING REACHED WITH THE CHINESE SIDE.
4. THE COMMENTS IN YOUR PARA. 3 ON DIFFERENT STANDARDS OF PROTECTION ARE VALID. HOWEVER, WE BELIEVE THAT ANY PRACTICAL
1
PAGE CONFIDENTIAL