Original news and analysis on international IP policy
Cynthia Ho writes: In the first known investment dispute regarding patents, Eli Lilly & Co v. Canada, Canada recently prevailed over the pharmaceutical giant Eli Lilly. Although Canada won in a unanimous decision, the ruling does not, however, guarantee domestic discretion going forward, contrary to the suggestion of some.
Parminder Jeet Singh writes: The World Wide Web today stands at a crossroads, as its standards body, the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), considers the demand of big content providers to provide them with the facility to be able to control user devices for ensuring that their content is not copied. This facility is called the Encrypted Media Extension (EME), which enables these companies to put digital rights management (DRM) into the user's browser, whether the user wants it or not, and whether such restrictions are as per the user's local national laws or not.
David I. Berl and Christopher A. Suarez write: The estoppel provision of the America Invents Act, 35 U.S.C. 315(e), was touted originally as a check against patent challengers using inter partes review (“IPR”) proceedings to attack patents serially on the same or similar grounds. That provision precludes an IPR petitioner, or the real party in interest or privy of the petitioner, from asserting invalidity challenges in subsequent IPR, district court, or International Trade Commission (“ITC”) proceedings “on any ground that the petitioner raised or reasonably could have raised during” an IPR that resulted “in a final written decision.” Given the frequency of IPR and associated district court challenges, the scope of the AIA’s estoppel provision, with respect to the parties and arguments it estops, has become and will continue to be a critical and frequently contested issue for litigants.
As negotiations take place this week, an evaluation of the impact of one of the TRIPS-plus measures of the Mercosur/EU FTA on the prices of medicines in Brazil has been released. Based on the draft of the agreement, by their calculations, an additional USD 444 million would be necessary to be spent by the public health system for the purchase of six medicines alone, write Marcela Fogaça Vieira and Gabriela Costa Chaves.
The innovative advertisements of famous trademarks we come across remind us of the image they have created in our minds and the quality of the respective products or services they reflect. Millions are spent by the owners of such marks to build their reputation and maintain their popularity in this competitive globalised world.
The Polish Ministry of Health has commenced consultations on an amendment to the act on reimbursements for drugs, foods intended for particular nutritional uses and medical devices. This bill envisions an entirely new system of refunds (full and partial), fixed maximum prices and fixed maximum margins for medical devices based partly on HTA, similar to the system currently in place for pharmaceuticals. The current wording leads one to believe that gradually all groups of medical devices could be introduced into this system. If the amendment is passed in the current shape, it has the potential to transform the medical devices market in Poland.
Danny Friedmann writes: When the holder of a medical patent finds herself on the patent cliff, staring into the abyss of a patentless and incomeless future, she will become very ingenious in applying for new uses, new pathways of delivery and new doses of the known substance. Painting a new layer of green over the patent that must give the impression of a new invention. It is the duty of the legislator to limit this kind of behavior if it stifles access to generic medicines. How can the interests of patent holders and patients be reconciled?
By Roya Ghafele, OxFirst - Dieter Ernst’s study is one of the few, if not the only one, to thoroughly examine the role, function and effects of Standard Essential Patents from a developing country’s perspective. As such, the study is a refreshing read, given that the discourse on Standard Essential Patents and the FRAND (fair reasonable and non-discriminatory) regime is pretty much driven from a developed country’s point of view.
Sirena Rubinoff writes: What if there was a crystal ball that could tell you where and when to invest your money? It sounds like science fiction, but engineers at MIT have actually developed a formula that can predict future events in tech development. The formula is based on a combination of big data from patent applications and smart analytics which, when put together, can estimate how fast a technology is advancing.
On 12 December, the Argentinian Copyright Office and the Ministry of Culture invited a group of stakeholders, among which was this author, to discuss the final draft of the Exceptions and Limitations Bill (Proyecto de Ley de Excepciones) to modify current Copyright Act no.11.723 of 1933. One wonders whether it would be better to draft from scratch a modern Copyright Act instead of patching up the old 1933 Act. Nevertheless, the bill is welcomed. Argentina, as this author has already expressed, has one of the most restrictive copyright laws in the world (see Propuestas para ampliar el acceso a los bienes públicos en Argentina – Estableciendo el necesario balance entre derechos de propiedad intelectual y dominio público, Maximiliano Marzetti, Buenos Aires, 2013).