本　期　提　要　HEADLINES

 1.著作權仲介團體條例修正草案初稿

經濟部智慧財產局為配合業經九十年十一月十二日　總統令公布之著作權法修正案，及九十年一月一日施行之行政程序法，於日前擬具「著作權仲介團體條例部分條文修正草案」，並於本(九十一)年六月二十四日召開第二次公聽會，以博徵建言。茲將是項修正草案，其修正重點及理由分述如次：

一、將主管機關修正為經濟部並由著作權專責機關辦理相關業務

緣八十七年十一月四日經濟部智慧財產局組織條例公布施行後，經濟部智慧財產局於八十八年一月二十六日成立，著作權業務依前開條例第二條規定改隸該局。

二、擴大著作權仲介團體會員資格，使專屬授權之被授權人亦得加入著作權仲介團體

按前揭著作權法修正案第八十一條第二項規定「專屬授權之被授權人，亦得加入著作權仲介團體。」，爰擴大仲介團體之會員資格，包括專屬授權之被授權人。

三、明定仲介團體之設立應由著作財產權人為發起人，並提高發起人人數限制

現行前揭條例第四條規定「仲介團體之設立，應由發起人檢具申請書，…向主管機關申請許可。」，至於發起人之資格依第四條第一項第一款規定係以著作財產權人為限。惟據前揭著作權法修正案，專屬授權之被授權人，得加入著作權仲介團體。為免專屬授權之被授權人亦得為發起人之誤會，爰將現行條文「應由發起人檢具申請書」之規定，修正為「應由著作財產權人為發起人」，以資明確。

另有鑑於近年國內經許可設立之著作權仲介團體數量過多，往往造成利用人須面對二個以上之仲介團體，造成洽談授權之困擾，為緩和上述情形，仲介團體之設立，爰提高其發起人人數為二百人之門檻限制。

四、刪除本條例所訂使用報酬率審議之規定

緣前揭著作權法修正案第八十二條第一項第一款，已刪除著作權審議及調解委員會審議仲介團體所訂定使用報酬率之規定，有關使用報酬率提交審議之規定，爰配合刪除。

五、增訂仲介團體章程應載明之事項以符合團體之需要

基於團體自治及著作權審議及調解委員會已不審議仲介團體所訂定使用報酬率之規定，現行條文第十五條第三項第二款至第四款所定使用報酬之收受及分配方法、使用報酬率及管理費之費率或金額、個別授權契約、概括授權契約或管理契約範本之變更等程序，攸關會員之基本權益，實屬章程中應載明之事項。為應仲介團體實務運作之需要，爰修正移列為仲介團體章程應載明之事項。

六、配合訴願法、行政訴訟法及行政程序法之施行修正本條例相關規定

按八十七年十月二十八日公布新修訂之訴願法及行政訴訟法，業已刪除再訴願制度，現行條文第三十六條第二項之「再訴願」等文字，爰配合刪除。另依據行政程序法規定，使合法行政處分失其效力，以「廢止」處分為之；使違法行政處分失其效力，以「撤銷」處分為之。

若仲介團體有現行條文第八條自許可設立後六個月內未辦理法人登記之情事、或有現行條文第四十條第一項第二款至第四款之情事者，核其性質，應以廢止處分為之。又對於仲介團體經許可設立後始發現有第七條第一項各款之情事時，依現行條文第四十條第一項第一款規定為屬主管機關應命其解散之事由。核其性質，應以撤銷處分為之。是本條例有關涉及行政處分之用語，爰配合修正。

七、修正本條例第十三條第二項，放寬禁止會員平行授權之限制

按仲介團體成立之目的即在於為會員管理著作財產權，如會員於入會後，得再自行授權或另委託第三人代其授權，則利用人無法明確判別究應向何人商洽授權利用事宜，勢將導致著作權市場秩序之混亂。

惟若於著作財產權人參加仲介團體後，即喪失平行授權之權利，則將造成仲介團體擴大其市場力，僵固其議價彈性，容易引起紛爭，對於著作權人與利用人而言，均不利益。

基以上理由，爰增訂但書規定，若管理契約另有約定者，著作財產權人不因加入著作權仲介團體而喪失平行授權之權利。

八、修訂著作財產權目錄查閱方式及內容備查之規定

為利外界瞭解仲介團體所管理之著作財產權範圍，便於利用人與仲介團體洽談授權契約及約定使用報酬，宜明文規定仲介團體應編造著作財產權人清冊或著作財產權目錄及使用報酬收費表，且應以書面或網際網路之方式供公眾查閱並應隨時更新其資料。

另配合增訂前揭編造內容之相關規定及送著作權專責機關備查之行政監督等配套措施，俾確保其記載之內容與實際管理之情形相符。

九、強化仲介團體與利用人間之調解功能

當利用人與仲介團體無法達成協議時，任一方原得依著作權法第八十二條向著作權專責機關申請調解，惟上述調解係採任意制，須雙方當事人同意始得進行，無法充分發揮解決紛爭之目的，爰增訂「利用人要求與仲介團體訂立個別授權契約或概括授權契約，經仲介團體拒絕或無法協議訂立時，任一方均得向權責機關申請調解，他方不得拒絕。」。

又為充分發揮調解功能，爰明定一旦進入調解程序，即凍結雙方進行訴訟之權利。

十、刪除利用人應定期提供使用清單予仲介團體之規定

現行法雖規定利用人應定期提供使用清單，惟並無罰則，基於著作權屬私權本質，宜回歸市場本質，有關使用清單之提供，宜由利用人與仲介團體雙方以契約約定之，爰刪除之。

十一、增訂仲介團體違反資訊公開之規定

為有效監督仲介團體業務之執行，課以仲介團體應隨時注意所管理供公眾查閱之著作財產權目錄內容之正確性，以避免民眾利用時發生糾紛，引起爭端。爰明定仲介團體違反修正修文第二十三條第一項或第三項有關公開管理著作財產權目錄資料規定時，著作權專責機關應限期命其改正，併得科以行政罰鍰。屆期仍未改正者，得連續處罰至改正為止。

十二、就現行條文第四十一條之刑事責任予以除罪化，改科以行政罰：

按違反現行法第九條第一項之規定者，其不法內涵、罪責內涵尚未達有處以刑罰之必要，基於刑罰之謙抑思想，經檢討後，爰修正為科以行政罰。又為與修正條文第四十二條連續處罰之規定相區別，爰將現行條文第四十二條第一項第二款及同條第二項移列至本條，以玆明確。

First Draft of Amendments to Copyright Intermediary Organization Regulations

In line with the amended Copyright Law (promulgated November 12, 2001 by order of the President) and the new Law of Administrative Procedures (effective January 1, 2001), the IPO has proposed "Partial Amendments to the Copyright Intermediary Organization Regulations" and held a second public hearing on June 24, 2002 to solicit public comments.  Main points of and reasons for the amendments are set out below:

1.Change the competent authority to the Ministry of Economic Affairs, and the copyright authority will be specifically responsible for related matters;

Pursuant to the Intellectual Property Office Organization Regulations (effective November 4, 1998), the IPO was formed on January 26, 1999.  Accordingly matters related to copyright fall within jurisdiction of the IPO.

2.Expand criteria for members to copyright intermediary organizations, so that exclusive licensees may also be members;

Pursuant to Article 81, Paragraph 2 of the amendments to Copyright Law, "Exclusive licensees may also become members of copyright intermediary organizations."  Therefore, membership criteria for such organizations are expanded to include exclusive licensees.

3.Copyright intermediary organization should be founded by copyright owners, and the threshold for number of founders has been raised;

Article 4 of the Copyright Intermediary Organization Regulations currently provides that: "In respect of establishment of intermediary organizations, founders shall submit application forms to the competent authorities for approval."  Only copyright owners may become a founder, pursuant to Article 4, Paragraph 1, Subparagraph 1 of the. Regulations  However, the amendments propose that exclusive licensees may also be members of a copyright intermediary organization.  In order to ensure that exclusive licensees will not be misconstrued as also qualifying for becoming founders of such an organization, the provision "founders shall submit application forms" is amended to become "copyright owners shall be founders", so as to avoid misunderstandings.

In addition, as there is an excessive number of approved copyright intermediary organizations in Taiwan, users often have to negotiate with two or more organizations, resulting in difficulties in negotiating usage rights.  In order to avoid this situation, the threshold for number of founders has been raised to 200.

4.Delete provisions in these Regulations as to assessment of license fees;

Pursuant to Article 82, Paragraph 1, Subparagraph 1 of the Copyright Law amendments, provisions related to assessment of license fees by the Copyright Examination & Mediation Committee are deleted.  Accordingly provisions related to submitting license fees for assessment are also deleted.

5.Insert provisions related to matters that shall be stipulated in articles of association of an intermediary organizations, in order to meet the needs of the organization;

Given principles of self-regulation and the fact that the Copyright Examination & Mediation Committee will no longer assess license fees determined by intermediary organizations, matters set out in Article 15, Paragraph 3, Subparagraphs 2 to 4 of the current Copyright Intermediary Organization Regulations (being related to payment and apportionment of license fees, rate of the fees, rate or amount of management fees, amendments to individual license agreements or general license agreements or  forms of management agreements) should be stipulated in the articles of association, as they relate to basic rights of members of the organization.  Accordingly these matters have been restated as being matters that should be provided in articles of association of intermediary organizations.

6.Amendments related to the Appeals Law, Law of Administrative Litigation, and Law of Administrative Procedures;

Pursuant to the newly amended Appeals Law and Law of Administrative Litigation (promulgated October 28, 1998), the re-appeals system has been abolished.  Accordingly, the word "re-appeal" has also been deleted from Article 36, Paragraph 2 of the Copyright Intermediary Organization Regulations.  In addition, in line with the Law of Administrative Procedures, an invalidation of a legal administrative decision should be a "revocation", while the invalidation of an illegal administrative decision should be a "cancellation".

Where a intermediary organization fails to register as a juridical person within 6 months after receiving approval for establishment (present Article 8), or falls within any of the circumstances set out in Article 40, Paragraph 1, Subparagraphs 2 to 4 of the current Copyright Intermediary Organization Regulations, a revocation should be imposed depending on the nature of the violation.  Where any of the circumstances set out in Article 7, Paragraph 1 applies after approved establishment, the competent authorities should order dissolution of the organization pursuant to Article 40, Paragraph 1, Subparagraph 1 of the current Copyright Intermediary Organization Regulations.  Depending on the nature of the violation, a cancellation should be imposed.  These terms related to administrative decisions have been amended in line with the main administrative laws.

7.Article 13, Paragraph 2 is amended so as to relax prohibitions on parallel licensing by members;

The purpose for establishment of intermediary organizations is to manage copyright matters for their members.  If after joining an organization, a member is permitted to further license his/her copyright or authorize a third person to handle such matters, users will not be certain with whom they should negotiate.  This will result in disorder in the copyright market.

However, if copyright owners lose the right for parallel licensing after joining an intermediary organization, it will result in intermediary organizations possessing too much market power and will cause price negotiations to become inflexible.  Disputes are more likely to occur, which is detrimental to the interests of both copyright owners and users.

In light of these concerns, a proviso is inserted to Article 13, stating that a copyright owner does not lose the right for parallel licensing upon joining a copyright intermediary organization, if the management agreement separately provides for such a right.

8.Amend provisions related to review of copyright catalogues and filing of contents for inspection;

In order to ensure the public is aware of the scope of copyright under management by intermediary organizations, and to facilitate contract and pricing negotiations between users and intermediary organizations, intermediary organizations are expressly required to prepare copyright catalogues or copyright indices, as well as table of usage rates.  Such information should also be made available for public viewing in writing or via the Internet, and should be updated regularly.

Provisions related to contents of such information, as well as administrative supervision by the competent copyright authorities have also been inserted, so as to ensure contents provided to the public are consistent with the actual matters under management.

9.Enhance mediation functions between intermediary organizations and users;

Where user and intermediary organization are unable to reach an agreement, either party may apply to the competent copyright authority for mediation, pursuant to Article 82 of the Copyright Intermediary Organization Regulations.  However, the said mediation is purely on a voluntary basis, and requires the agreement of both parties.  Therefore so far it has not been fully effective in resolving copyright disputes.  Accordingly, a provision is inserted to state: "Where a user seeks to enter into an individual or general license agreement with an intermediary organization but such request is rejected by the organization, or the parties are unable to reach an agreement, either party may apply to the competent authorities for mediation, and the other party may not refuse."

Further, in order to ensure the mediation function is fully effective, it is provided that once the parties enter into mediation proceedings, the parties may not exercise their litigation rights.

10.Delete requirement that users must regularly provide intermediary organizations with inventories of usage;

Although the current Copyright Intermediary Organization Regulations provides that users must regularly produce inventories of usage, there are no penalties for failure to do so.  As copyright is a private right, the Law should return to market principles.  Accordingly, production of inventories should be governed by contract between user and intermediary organization, and should be deleted from the legal provisions.

11.Insert provisions related to violation of information publication regulations by intermediary organizations;

In order to effectively supervise carrying out of business by copyright intermediary organizations, such organizations are required to ensure at all times that copyright catalogues made available to the public are accurate, so as not to cause copyright disputes when the public relies on such information.  Where an intermediary organization violates Article 23, Paragraph 1 or 3 of the amendments concerning public management of copyright catalogues, the competent authorities shall prescribe a period of rectification of such violation, and may also impose an administrative fine.  If rectification were not made within the prescribed period, consecutive fines may be imposed until rectification is made.

12.Article 41 of the present Copyright Intermediary Organization Regulations is de-criminalized and replaced with administrative penalties;

Violations of Article 9, Paragraph 1 are not considered to warrant criminal sanctions, giving the nature of the illegality and offense.  Based on considerations of hierarchy of crimes, these violations are revised to be subject to administrative penalties.  In order to differentiate from the consecutive penalties imposed in Article 42 of the amendments, Paragraph 1, Subparagraph 2 of Article 42, and Paragraph 2 of the same Article under the current Copyright Intermediary Organization Regulations have been shifted to the revised Article 41.

2.有關專利申請之微生物寄存辦法

緣九十年十月二十四日修正公布之專利法第二十六條第四項規定，就微生物寄存之受理要件、種類、型式、數量、收費費率及其他寄存執行等事項，專利專責機關應訂定辦法；經濟部智慧財產局爰參考「財團法人食品工業發展研究所」專利微生物寄存辦法及實施要領、及布達佩斯條約及其細則等規定，研商「有關專利申請之微生物寄存辦法」，並於本(91)年6月21日發布是項辦法。是項辦法共27條，自發布日施行，全文資料及相關寄存附表，可至該局如下網址瀏覽：

http://www.moeaipo.gov.tw/news/ShowNewsContent.asp?otype=1&postnum=1529&from=board

Regulations for Deposit of Patented Microorganisms

Paragraph 4, Article 26 of the Patent Law, which was revised on October 24, 2001, provided that the competent patent authority shall stipulate regulations concerning the acceptance criteria, types, forms, quantity, fees and other relevant matters for deposit of microorganisms.  Accordingly, the IPO has drafted the Regulations for Deposit of Patent Microorganisms, with reference to the "Guidelines and Enforcement for Deposit of Patent Microorganism" of the Food Industry Research & Development Institute, the Budapest Agreement, and its complementary regulations, and the Regulations for Deposit of Patent Microorganisms were promulgated on June 21, 2002.  These Regulations contain 27 articles, which take effect on the promulgation date.  The full Regulations and related tables can be found at the IPO's website at: http://www.moeaipo.gov.tw/news/ShowNewsContent.asp?otype=1&postnum=1529&from=board.

3.近兩年台灣向大陸申請專利案件統計情形

據大陸永新專利商標代理有限公司王允方顧問提供之資料披露，台灣地區自然人及法人於民國90年向大陸申請專利案共15075件，分別為發明專利3612件(24%)、實用新型專利9486件(63%)及外觀設計專利1977件(13%)；89年專利申請案則計10766件，各別為發明專利1811件(16.8%)、實用新型專利7388件(68.6%)及外觀設計專利1567件(14.6%)；而90年專利申請量較89年鉅增近四成。

Taiwanese Applications for Patents in Mainland China

According to statistics provided by Mr. Wang Yun-fang, consultant of Mainland China's Yunhsing Patent & Trademark Agents Ltd. (永新專利商標代理公司), a total of 15,075 applications were filed in Mainland China by Taiwanese natural and juridical persons in 2001.  Amongst these, 3,612 (24%) were invention patents, 9,486 (63%) were utility model patents, and 1,977 (13%) were appearance & design patents.  In 2000 a total of 10,766 patent applications were filed, consisting of 1,811 (16.8%) invention patents, 7,388 (68.6%) utility model patents, and 1,567 (14.6%) appearance & design patents.  The number of 2001 applications represents a 40% increase on that of the previous year.