Qatar Intellectual Property Law

Last Saturday morning I listened to a report on BBC Radio 4 by Razia Iqbal about the Qatar Philharmonic. This is the first and so far only symphony orchestra in the Gulf and it is developing an enviable reputation.  The great American conductor Lorin Maazel is said to have rated it among the great orchestras of the world.  Certainly they seem to have been very received in London as this YouTube clip from their performance of Marcel Khalife’s Arabian Concerto at the Royal Albert Hall, London, on 8 April 2010.shows.

The Qatar Philharmonic is just one of a number of cultural initiatives in this tiny kingdom. In her programme Iqbal discussed several of the others grouped in the Katara Cultural Village, a complex of museums, theatres, academies and auditoriums just outside Doha.   The cultural village is itself one of a number of other initiatives to transform Qatar's society and economy.   Others include the Qatar Financial Centre, the educational cluster with local campuses of no less than 8 first rate universities including University College London and the Qatar Science and Technology Park.  

These initiatives complement an active foreign policy and, of course, the international broadcasting service, Al-Jazeera which, together, have contributed greatly to political change throughout the Middle East and North Africa. With a land area slightly smaller than that of Yorkshire and less than half that county's population, Qatar punches well above its weight.

The cultural, educational, scientific and technical initiatives discussed above will flourish only with a strong intellectual property base.  Qatar has been a member of the World Trade Organization and hence party to TRIPS since 1 Jan 1996. It is party to the Berne and Paris Conventions though not to Rome but it has signed up to the WIPO Phonograms and Performances Treaty as well as to the WIPO Copyright Treaty. In accordance with TRIPS Qatar has enacted:

• Law No. 7 of 2002 on the Protection of Copyright and Related Rights;
• Law No. 9 of 2002 on Trade Marks, Trade Names, Geographical Indications and Industrial Designs the text of which is available only in Arabic; and
• Decree Law No. 30 for the year 2006 To Issue Patents Law.

Qatar is, of course, party to the Gulf Co-operation Council and enforces patents issued by the the GCC Patent Office in its territories. Patents, copyrights and semiconductor topographies  appear to be the responsibility of the Ministry of Justice while trade marks, designs and geographical indications are the responsibility of the Ministry of Business and Trade.

Should anyone wish to discuss this topic further he or she can call me on +44 161 850 0080 or fill in my contact form. He or she can also contact me through Facebook, Linkedin, Xing or twitter.

Why has no IP case come before the DIFC Courts?

In the 6 years of their existence the DIFC (Dubai International Financial Centre) courts have never actually had an intellectual property case. That is not because intellectual property falls outside their jurisdiction.  Arts 37 and 38 of the Centre's Law of Obligations (Law No 5 of 2005) codify the common law rules of confidence and passing off (see "The DIFC Law of Confidence" of 27 Jan 2011 and "The DIFC Law of Passing Off" 7 April 2011).

One possible reason why there have been no intellectual property cases in the DIFC courts is that patents and designs are about goods rather than services   There have been a few IP cases involving financial institutions in the UK such as HFC Bank plc v Midland Bank plc [2000] FSR 176 and  Cantor Fitzgerald International v Tradition (UK) Ltd  (2001) 24(9) IPD 24057, [2001] EWCA Civ 942 but they have been about branding and computer software. Another possible reason is that piracy and counterfeiting are dealt with by customs or other autoritties in the UAE.

There may be more scope for intellectual property litigation as a result of the DIFC Court of Appeal's decisions in Corinth Pipeworks SA v Barclays Bank Plc and Al Khorafi and Others v Bank Sarasin-Alpen (ME) Limited and Another and Law No 16 of 2011.   These cases were about torts that occurred outside the DIFC where the defendant was a "Centre Establishment".  If a business established or carrying on business within the DIFC infringes an intellectual property right anywhere in the UAE it should be possible to sue it in the Centre.  If the parties to a licence or other agreement relating to intellectual property rights can be sure of an English speaking common law forum (as they now can thanks to Law No 16 of 2011) they may well be tempted to choose DIFC law and the DIFC courts in their choice of law and jurisdiction clauses.

Part 25 of the  Rules of the DIFC Courts provide all the interim remedies that are available under the Civil Procedure Rules including search orders and freezing injunctions. The forms and procedure are very similar to those of the Chancery Division in England.

Should anyone wish to discuss this topic further he or she can call me on +44 161 850 0080 or fill in my contact form. He or she can also contact me through Facebook, Linkedin, Xing or twitter.

DIFC Courts' Jurisdiction: Corinth Pipeworks Appeal Allowed

In CFI 024/2010 Corinth Pipeworks S.A. v Barclays Bank PLC Sir Anthony Colman, Deputy Chief Justice of the DIFC struck out Corinth Pipeworks SA's claim for damages for statements allegedly made by one of the employees of the defendant's Jebel Ali branch on the grounds that the DIFC courts had no jurisdiction to hear a claim for wrongdoing outside the Centre even though the defendant bank carried on business within the Centre. I discussed that case in DIFC Court: Corinth Pipeworks SA v Barclays Bank Plc on 11 March 2011. The claimant appealed.   In CA 002/2011 Corinth Pipeworks SA v Barclays Bank Plc the Court (Chief Justice Michael Hwang SC and Justices Sir John Chadwick and His Excellency Ali Al Madhani) allowed the appeal.

The DIFC Courts' jurisdiction derives from Law No.12 of 2004 in respect of The Judicial Authority at Dubai International Financial Centre.  Art 5 (1) (a) of that law confers exclusive jurisdiction on the Court of First Instance in respect of "civil or commercial disputes civil or commercial cases and disputes involving the Centre or any of the Centre’s Bodies or any of the Centre’s Establishments."  Art 2 defined "Centre Establishments" as

"Any entity or business duly established or carrying on business in the Centre, including any Licensed Centre Establishments."

The same article defined "Licensed Centre Establishments" as "Any entity licensed, registered or otherwise authorised to carry on financial or banking business."  Sir Anthony had held that the branch of the defendant company that carried on business in the DIFC was a "Centre Establishment" but not the bank as a whole.

The Court of Appeal disagreed with Sir Anthony's "reasoning that a "Centre Establishment" can be identified as an unincorporated entity which is permitted to conduct business within the DIFC in accordance with the terms of its license and registration with the DIFC."   In the words of the Chief Justice at paragraph [59]:

"Centre Establishment" must be a legal entity because that is the only way in which the term "entity" used in Article 2 of Law No. 12 can be understood. Where a bank is licensed to carry on business in a place outside its country of incorporation, it is necessary for that bank to carry on business either through an unincorporated branch of the bank or through a separate legal entity which is a subsidiary of the bank. Bank regulators frequently, if not typically, require foreign banks to carry on mainstream banking business through a branch rather than a local subsidiary. However, it would be uncommon for an unincorporated branch of a foreign bank to be treated under local law as a legal entity separate and distinct from its head office unless it has been separately incorporated as a subsidiary. I cannot therefore accept the proposition advanced by the Deputy Chief Justice that a "Centre Establishment" can be an entity which may be (to use the learned Judge's words) "within the corporation". A branch is no different in law from a division, and a division of a corporation is part of that corporation, and has no legal entity of its own (although it may be treated as an accounting entity for certain purposes)."

Having found that an unincorporated DIFC branch of a foreign bank cannot be regarded as an independent entity for purposes of qualifying as a "Centre Establishment", it followed that this term had to be interpreted to mean the defendant bank and its various branches, wherever located. Accordingly, the DIFC Courts had jurisdiction over the conduct of the branch where the alleged wrongdoing took place.

While sharing Sir Anthony's concern as to the limits of the DIFC courts' jurisdiction, the Chief Justice noted at paragraph [68] that:

"(a)    It is entirely within the control of banks and other enterprises carrying on business in the DIFC and the wider Emirate of Dubai as to whether they choose to subject their business within the wider Emirate to the jurisdiction of the DIFC Courts — if they do not wish to do so, they can either trade through separate corporate vehicles in the DIFC and the wider Emirate or (even more simply) include jurisdiction clauses in their contracts choosing where they allocate jurisdiction over any disputes.
(b)    There may well be good reasons why banks and other enterprises carrying on business in both the DIFC and the wider Emirate of Dubai should choose to subject their business within the wider Emirate to the jurisdiction of the DIFC Courts — their business may (as in the present case) be carried on in the English language, and/or their transactions may be subject to a substantive law other than that of the Emirate.
(c)   The situation under consideration will clearly not arise where the "Centre Establishment" is a company incorporated and carrying on business in the UAE outside the Emirate of Dubai or elsewhere. The principles of private international law limit the powers and discretion of the DIFC Courts so as to prevent the exercise of exorbitant jurisdiction, and the DIFC Courts possess the discretion to decline jurisdiction on grounds of forum non conveniens."

Sir John Chadwick and His Excellency Ali Al Madhani delivered concurring judgments.

The Court of Appeal's decision in Corinth Pipeworks follows hot on the heels of the decree of 31 Oct 2011 which extended the DIFC courts' jurisdiction to cover any business dispute from any part of the world.     I commented on the extension of the Court's judgment in "DIFC Courts Spread Their Wings" on 7 Dec 2011.   The combined effect of the decree and appeal is to enhance considerably the convenience of the court for determining all manner of commercial disputes including those relating to intellectual property.

Though an IP case is yet to come before the DIFC courts there is no reason why it should not handle one effectively.   Sir John Chadwick heard plenty such cases when he sat in the Chancery Division in London.   Part 25 of the Rules of the DIFC Courts enable those courts to grant interim injunctive relief as quickly and effectively as any court in the world. 

Should anyone wish to discuss this topic further he or she can call me on +44 161 850 0080 or fill in my contact form. He or she can also contact me through Facebook, Linkedin, Xing or twitter.

Doing Business in Dubai

Yesterday afternoon I attended the seminar on Doing Business in Dubai that I announced on 24 Jan 2012.. Shortly before the event I was advised that it had been moved from Knowles Warwick's offices to the Double Tree Hilton Hotel.  As you can see, the hotel's website is not particularly informative and nobody in the area seemed to have heard of an hotel by that name (though they had heard of a Moat House which had been there some years earlier).   There was not even a "Double Tree Hilton" sign outside the hotel.   As a result I missed Steve Knowles's speech altogether and the start of Zayd Maniar's.  However, I did get the slides for both presentations.

According to the slides, Steve dealt with two issues:

• the benefits of people from the UK doing business abroad; and
• how doing business abroad can actually reduce risk.

He also chaired the meeting.

The benefits that he identified were as follows:

• Tax Incentives: some countries offer lower tax rates or other concessions which enable businesses to retain a bigger share of the profits and reduce their costs;
• Cost Advantages: lower labour and raw materials costs;
• Enhancing Brand Value: brands gain prestige if they are used outside the UK;
• Diversification: new ides and technologies;
• Economies of scale: and 
• Enhanced competitiveness.

Doing business abroad reduced risk by enabling businesses to reducing exposure to the adverse economic conditions prevailing in the UK.

Zayd is the international liaison partner for Horwath MAK, Crowe Horwath's office in Dubai.  He read economics at Reading and qualified as a chartered accountant in England and Wales..   His background appears on the "Our Partners" page of the firm's website.  The slides that I missed were about Horwath MAK which has carried on business in Dubai for the last 30 years and an overview of the economic situation in Dubai.   According to the slides, the UAE had experienced a period of high inflation as a result of a property boom but that has now come to an end and the country expected strong and stable growth from tourism, transport, manufacturing and services as well as energy.

I joined the presentation as Zayd outlined the constitutional structure of the UAE (a topic that I had discussed  in "The Legal Order of the United Arab Emirates" on 11 Nov 2011) and profiled the emirates of Dubai and the federal capital, Abu Dhabi.  The economy of the Union has been boosted by the establishment of a number of free zones where foreign owned businesses could operate without a local partner and repatriate their profits as and when they wished.  Some of these zones were located around ports but others are specialist zones such as the Commodities Centre, the Knowledge Village and, of course, the Dubai International Financial Centre.  Zayd said Horwath MAK were in several of those zones.

Zayd outlined the types of businesses entity that can be established in the UAE. These are very much the same as everywhere else, namely public and private limited companies, general and limited partnerships and "partnerships limited with shares" which I took to be limited liability partnerships.  Except for businesses in the free zones, it is necessary to incorporate in the UAE with a local partner.  There is no federal income tax on salaries or wages but the federal government is thinking of introducing VAT and there are high import duties on certain goods.   

At this point, Steve chipped in to point out the absence of income tax meant that there was nothing against which one could get tax relief.  If losses were to be expected in the early stages of an enterprise it could be better to bear those losses here or some other country and somehow export the business to the UAE.  However, that will require a lot of thought and some care because Steve and Zayd also warned in a later discussion that tax is levied in the UK on earnings of businesses that are managed from this country wherever the income is generated.   Zayd told a very sad tale about one small business which was landed with a £400,000 tax bill because it failed to heed Zayd's advice to get tax advice from the UK as well as the UAE. It is worth mentioning that Steve's nickname is "tax champion".

Knowles Warwick had asked for questions to be submitted in advance and I had asked two to which I already knew the answers.   My first question was on the nature and extent of IP protection in the UAE. Zayd confirmed that the authorities took a dim view of counterfeiting and piracy. He mentioned a case in which he had been involved where Burgerking had moved against a fast food restaurant whose proprietor's surname was the Arabic word for King.  IP infringements can often be resolved without recourse to litigation because customs officers intercept infringing goods at the border or other administrative action can be taken. The penal code of the UAE is as tough as Texas's in that almost any offence is punished with a custodial sentence and/or deportation. There are, however, lacunae in that the emirates have their own laws which sometimes allow anomalies.   My second question was on the DIFC court which Zayd thought was a good thing.  He went into some detail about its small claims jurisdiction.  I made a few supplemental observations about the recent extension of jurisdiction and that the court was an English speaking, common law enclave with English and Commonwealth judges and counsel in a civil law federation.

Other questions covered setting up branches and businesses, restrictions on the import of goods such as medicines and medical devices, market research and making contacts.   We were told to familiarize ourselves with different business norms and customs.  Initial connections can be made through UK Trade and Investment and occasionally through the British consulate.

Altogether, we had a very good afternoon.  I already knew Steve quite well and I was pleased to meet Zayd. I had already worked with a forensic accountant in one of a Horwath's British offices in several cases and got to know several others over the last 20 years.   Should anyone wish to follow up this discussion, he or she can call me on +44 161 850 0080 or fill in my contact form. He or she can also contact me through Facebook, Linkedin, Xing or twitter.

Copyright and Related Rights in the United Arab Emirates: Part II

This article continues and concludes my introduction to copyright and related rights in the United Arab Emirates ("UAE"). In Part I I discussed the treaties and conventions to which the UAE is party, the implementing legislation, copyright works and performances, economic and moral rights and the term. In this Part I consider subsistence, licensing and assignment, regulation of collecting societies, infringement and remedies.

Federal Copyright Copyright Law
The basic copyright law statute is Federal Law No. (7) of the Year 2002 Concerning Copyrights and Neighbouring Rights ("FL7"). An English translation appears on the WIPO website.

Subsistence
Art 2 of FL7 confers upon owners of copyright and neighbouring rights the protection of this law against an aggression against their rights. Art 4 establishes a system for the registration and deposit of copyright works.According to the WIPO website, the copyright office for the UAE is the Ministry of Publishing and Copyright Department, P.O. Box 901, Abu Dhabi Tel +971 506 162 120, Fax +971 262 62 867. The Director of the authority is Fawzi Abdel Aziz Algabri.

Transfer of Rights
Subject to art 15, art 9 of FL7 permits a copyright owner to transfer all or part of his economic rights provided that he does so in writing and specifies the right, purpose, duration and place of exploitation.  Art 10 permits such transfer to be in consideration of money or moneysworth provided that the fairness of the transfer may later be reviewed by the courts under art 11. Art 15 prohibits the alienation of all or more than 5 prospective works.

Compulsory Licensing
Art 21 of FL7 permits any person to apply to the Ministry of Information and Culture for a compulsory licence for the translation or reproduction of a copyright work. The Ministry sets the terms of such licence.

Exceptions to Copyright
Copyright is not infringed by any of the following acts:

• making a single copy of a copyright work (other than a work of fine or applied art, work of architecture of computer program except as otherwise provided) for personal and non-commercial or professional but personal use of the copier under art 22 (1);
• making a single copy of a computer program for back-up purposes by a licensed user for so long as the licence subsists under art 22 (2);
• use in judicial proceedings under art 22 (3);
• making a single copy subject to acknowledgements for the purpose of preserving the original or research or private study if not otherwise licensed under art 22 (4);
• quotation of short passages for the purposes of criticism, discussion or review provided that the extract is accompanied by a proper acknowledgement under art 22 (5);
• performing a work in private to a domestic or academic audience without remuneration under art 22 (6);
• including publicly available fine arts, applied or plastic works of art or works of architecture in a broadcast under art 22 (7); and
• reproduction of extracts from written works, sound recordings or audio-visual performances for cultural, educational, religious or vocational training provided that no more is taken than is reasonably necessary for the purpose, the author is mentioned, no profit is intended and it is not possible to obtain a licence by other means under art 22 (8).

Art 23 permits newspapers, periodicals and broadcasters to copy excepts from published works and speeches for reporting news and current affairs upon the conditions specified in the article.

Regulation of Collecting Societies

Collecting societies have to be licensed annually by the Minister of Information and Culture pursuant to art 32 of FL7.They are required to keep records of their members and finances which may be inspected by the Ministry. Licences may be withdrawn at any time.

Remedies

Copyright infringement is an offence punishable by fine or imprisonment under art 37 of FL7.  Allegedly infringing copies of copyright works may be impounded by customs under art 36.  There is also a right of pre-emptive seizure under art 34 provided that proceedings are instituted within 15 days (art 34 (6) FL7).

Further Information
Should anybody wish to discuss this topic further, he or she can call me on +44 161 850 0080 or fill in my contact form. He or she can also contact me through Facebook, Linkedin, Xing or twitter.  

Sheffield Seminar on Doing Business in Dubai

Sheffield accountants Knowles Warwick plan a free seminar on "Doing Business in Dubai" at their offices at 183 Fraser Road, Sheffield, S8 0JP on Monday, 20 Feb 2012 between 14:30 and 16:00.


The speakers will be Steve Knowles, President at Sheffield & District Society of Chartered Accountants and Managing Director of Warwick Knowles, and Zaid Maniar, International Liaison Partner of Crowe Horwath's office in the United Arab Emirates.

Topics for discussion will include:

• the benefits and pitfalls of establishing a business in Dubai
• what are free zones and how do they work
• international tax planning advice, and
• local business rules and customs.

I shall be there with lots of questions about the Dubai International Financial Centre and its courts.

Places at the seminar are likely to go quickly so call Sarah Whiteley on 0114 285 0165 if you want to attend.

Copyright and Related Rights in the United Arab Emirates: Part I

Because of the complexity of the topic I shall discuss it in two separate articles.   In this article I shall deal with the Treaties and Conventions to which the United Arab Emirates ("UAE") is party, the applicable domestic legislation, the works that are protected, economic and moral rights and the term of subsistence of these rights.  In Part II I shall discuss exceptions to copyright and rights in performances, collecting societies, infringement and remedies.


International Agreements
The UAE was one of the first members of the World Trade Organization and is party to the Berne Convention, the WIPO Copyright Treaty, the Rome Convention and the WIPO Performers and Phonograms Treaty. Those conventions and treaties require the UAE to protect the works of art and literature of its nationals and those of nationals of other contracting parties.

Implementing Legislation
The legislation that implements the UAE's obligations under those instruments is Federal Law No. 7 of the Year 2002 Concerning Copyrights and Neighbouring Rights ("FL7").   It is available in Arabic and English on the WIPO Collection of Laws for Electronic Access.  FL7 was issued on 1 July 2002 by the President of the Union with the consent of the Council of Ministers and the Principal of the Supreme Council of the Union.

Overview
FL7 codifies the law of copyright and rights in performances. Compared to the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 of the United Kingdom it is a very short instrument consisting of 50 articles in 8 sections over 16 pages including contents and recitals.

Copyright Works
Art 2 of FL7 lists the following:

1. Books, pamphlets, essays and other written works;
2. Computer programs and applications, databases and analogous works;
3. Lectures, addresses, sermons and other works of similar nature;
4. Dramatic works and mine,
5. Musical compositions with or without words,
6. Sound and audiovisual works,
7. Architectural works, engineering plans and layouts,
8. Drawings, paintings, sculptures, lithographs, engravings and similar works,
9. Photographic and analogous works,
10. Works of applied and plastic art,
11. Illustrations, geographical maps, sketches, three-dimensional works relative to geography, topography and architecture (art 2).

Copyright does not extend to Ideas
Art 3 makes clear that "protection does not extend to mere ideas, procedures, methods of work, mathematical understandings, principles, and abstract facts, but extend to creative expression in any of them."

Exceptions
Art 3 also provides that protection does not extend to:
(1) official documents such as laws, regulations, decisions, international agreements, judgments, arbitrators’ awards and the decisions of the administrative committees having judicial competence;
(2) news, events and the current affairs which constitute merely media news, or
(3) works in the public domain.
However, copyright can subsist in compilations of such materials.

Authors' Economic Rights
Art 7 reserves to the author (or persons deriving title through the author) the right to exploit the work by any means including copying, "electronic loading or storing, acting a play by any means, broadcasting, re-broadcasting, transmission, performance, public communication, translation, modification, alteration, rental, lending or publication by any means including provision of publication through computers or information nets or communication nets or other means." These rights can be assigned, licensed or seized by creditors in contrast to moral rights which are inalienable.


Authors' Moral Rights
Art 5 confers the following moral rights upon an author:

"1. The right to determine first publication of the work;
2. The right of writing the work in his name;
3. The right to protest against alteration of the work if the alteration leads to distortion,
mutation or causing derogation to the author.
4. The right to withdraw his work from circulation in case of serious reasons justifying
such an act."

Rights in Performances
Section 3 of FL7 confers economic rights on performers, "producers of phonograms" and broadcasters.   In addition, performers enjoy moral rights in their performances.

Performers
Performers are defined in art 1 of FL7 as:

"The actors, singers, musicians, dancers and other persons who recite, chant, play or perform by any way literary or artistic works or others protected according to the provisions of this law or inclusive within the public property."

Art 17 confers the following economic rights on performers

"1. The right to transmit their unfixed performance and communicating it to the public.
2. The right to fix their performance on a phonogram.
3. The right to reproduce their fixed performance on a phonogram."

Their moral rights are as follows:

"(i) The right of having the performance in their names whether live or recorded.
(ii) The right to suspend any distortion, mutilation, modification or derogation action, which would be prejudicial to their status."

Producers of Phonograms
A phonogram is defined by art 1 as "any fixation of certain performed sounds addressing the hearing irrespective of the mode of fixation or the used device." The definition also includes "sounds fixation with picture in order to prepare audiovisual work unless agreed otherwise." A "producer of a phonogram" is defined by the same article as "the natural or legal person who records for the first time sounds of a performer or other sounds."

Art 18 confers the following rights upon producers of phonograms:

"1. The right to prohibit any exploitation of their phonograms by any means without their authorization. Copying, rental, broadcasting, re-broadcasting, availability to the public via computer or other media is an exploitation prohibited to be used by third parties.
2. The right to disseminate their recordings via wire, wireless, computer or other means."

Broadcasters
Art 19 confers the following rights upon broadcasters:

1. The right to grant licenses for exploitation of their recordings and broadcasting programmes.
2. The right to prohibit any communication of their programmes or recordings to the public without their authorization. Recording of such programmes, copying or re-copying their recordings, rental, re-broadcasting, and communication to the public by any means are prohibited to the third parties in particular.

Term
Copyright subsists for the following terms in respect of the following categories of rights:

• Authors' Economic Rights: the life of the author or in the case of a joint work the life of the last surviving author plus 50 years (art 20 (1) and (2));
• Economic Rights in Applied Arts: 25 years from first publication (art 20 (5));
• Economic Rights of Performers: 50 years from the beginning of the calendar year after the performance (art 20 (7));
• Economic Rights of Producers of Phonograms: 50 years from the beginning of the calendar year after the publication of the phonogram (art 20 (8)); 
• Economic Rights of Broadcasters: 20 years fro the beginning of the year of first transmission (art 20 (9)).

Further Information
Should anybody wish to discuss this topic further, he or she can call me on +44 161 850 0080 or fill in my contact form. He or she can also contact me through Facebook, Linkedin, Xing or twitter.
Modified 11 Feb 2012