Explore

This law covers the legal protection of intellectual creations in the literary sphere and artistic works. It transposed into Portuguese legislation EU Directive n.º 2004/28/EC of 29 April 2004. For a detailed overview of the Copyright legal framework in Portugal see the chapter on Portugal by D. Moura Vicente in R.M. Hilty and S. Nérisson (eds), Balancing Copyright – A Survey of National Approaches, MPI Studies on Intellectual Property and Competition Law 18, Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012.

(1) The law specified and extended the application of judicial and administrative enforcement mechanisms, earlier introduced by Federal Law No.187-FZ , from movies to all copyright objects, except photographic works and works obtained by processes similar to photography. (2) The law introduced a procedure for “perpetual ban” in relation to sites involved in “repeated” IP infringements, with no right of restatement. (3) The law also introduced a comprehensive notice and take down process that a right holder may, but is not required to, follow before commencing court proceedings. Site owner can elect not to remove infringing content, but in this case must notify the right holder and present respective objections.

(1) The law sought to strengthen the protection of motion pictures online and introduced amendments to the Civil Code, the Civil Procedure Code, the Arbitrazh (Commercial) Procedure Code, and the Federal Law No. 149-FZ of July 27, 2006 “On Information, Information Technologies and Protection of Information.” It also introduced a general framework for intermediary liability for IP infringements (see more on art. 1253.1 of the Civil Code above). (2) Under amended art. 26 of the Civil Procedural Code, the Moscow city court, as a court of first instance, has an exclusive jurisdiction to consider cases related to violation of IP rights to motion pictures on the Internet, and can issue preliminary injunctions at the request of a right holder before a legal suit is filed. (3) Roscomnadzor is mandated to enforce such...

(1) Article 261 provides that any industrial or commercial use of an invention, utility model, industrial design and model, mark or other distinctive sign of business, trade name, geographical indication or layout design integrated circuit, which is the subject of a protection title granted under this law and made by any person other than the owner of the title and without his/her consent, shall constitute an act of forgery. (2) Any infringement of copyrights or related rights protected under this law, committed willfully or by gross negligence, by any third person for profit-making purposes and without owner’s right consent shall constitute an act of forgery. (3) Any third person, who knowingly sells, offers on sale, is making rent, detains or introduces on the territory of the Republic of Rwanda, the alleged...

Article 48 states that any person shall have the right to make a temporary reproduction of a work of authorship without the author’s permission and without paying any remuneration, under the following conditions: reproduction is transient or incidental; reproduction is an integral and essential part of a technological process; purpose of reproduction is to enable a transmission of data in a network between two or more persons through an intermediary, or to enable a lawful use of a work of authorship; and reproduction does not have independent economic significance.

In 1999, Singapore made its first amendments to the Copyright Act to introduce various safe harbor defenses for Internet intermediaries as network service providers. Arising from its obligations under the U.S. Singapore Free Trade Agreement, Singapore further revised in 2004 the safe harbor defenses in the Copyright Act for network service providers. (1) Section 193A of the Copyright Act states that the safe harbor defenses are to apply to “network service providers”, which includes ISPs as intermediaries providing services and connections for data transmission or routing, as well as intermediaries who provide or operate facilities for online services or network access. It would seem that “network service providers” are broadly defined so that most Internet intermediaries would qualify for the safe harbor defenses. In...