Original news and analysis on international IP policy
The patent wars have produced many casualties around the world. Companies that make and sell smartphones and tablet computers, courts, consumers and the economy - all have suffered, according to many experts.
“I couldn’t come up with a worse system” for handling patent disputes, said Erich Spangenberg, chairman of IP Navigation Group, a consultancy. But significant reforms may be on the way, thanks to the US government and a United Nations agency.
NEW DELHI - In this month, there have been two court orders in India that underscore the complexities underlying the country’s intellectual property regime. Last Friday (14 September), the Chennai-based Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB) which is responsible for hearing appeals on patent applications, rejected a petition by German pharma major Bayer AG, seeking a stay on an order of India’s Controller of Patents granting a compulsory licence (CL) to Indian generic drug maker Natco Pharma Limited, for a drug used to treat liver and kidney cancer.
The responsibility of internet intermediaries in cases of intellectual property rights infringement has long been debated. Wedged between rights holders and internet users, intermediaries are asked to provide surveillance from the first and to preserve an open internet by the second. An information meeting organised by the World Intellectual Property Organization tried to gather different points of view on the role and responsibility of internet intermediaries in the area of trademarks.
A quiet and little-publicised ratification process might be the last hope for those pushing for international adoption of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA). But while the Japanese legislature managed to finalise their ratification recently, processes in several ACTA signatory states seem to be stalled. Some may ask whether ACTA will ever become an international treaty.
With talks on the controversial Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) agreement about to resume, members of Congress are putting pressure on the Obama administration to disclose what it's seeking on intellectual property rights. And civil society groups say that even more worrying than the closed-door nature of the TPP negotiations is the United States' increasing use of bilateral meetings to sway other countries.
At least a dozen non-governmental groups from several continents have issued a joint statement opposing apparent copyright language proposed by the United States in the ongoing Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) agreement negotiations. The groups said the draft language, aimed at curbing copyright infringement, could undermine critical copyright exceptions, which are built into laws in order to protect society's access to public knowledge.
Continuing the revolving door tradition between the United States government intellectual property and trade officials and the industries they represent, David Carson, general counsel of the US Copyright Office, will join the top international music industry association in September. Carson will assume a role of influencing policymakers in drafting legislation to protect and promote copyright. His is latest in a series of moves blurring US industry and government lines, and extending to the UN.
Seldom does a fact bear repeating as frequently as the maxim, “There is no copyright in ideas”. And despite the regularity with which this fundamental principle of copyright law is cited, its application remains a bone of contention, Cobus Jooste writes.
Two very different views of copyright reform emerged this week, one from a report commissioned by the UK government, the other from a French citizens' advocacy group. The former envisions an intricately linked system of digital rights exchanges and databases to streamline copyright licensing, the latter broad, “non-market” sharing of protected works between individuals, among other things. Whether either approach is feasible remains to be seen, and, as always, the devil's in the details, lawyers say.
Mapping out intellectual property issues related to the Olympic Games may itself constitute an engaging exercise: trademark and design protection of the Olympic indicia; data protection of Games results; personality and publicity rights associated with sports celebrities; character rights subsisting in the Olympic mascots; unfair competition law and other legislative means to address ambush marketing and secure the interests of the Games’ exclusive sponsors. The latter appears essential for the purpose of securing the means for staging the Games and sustaining the Olympic Movement.
Intellectual property promotion is at the heart of a new campaign launched yesterday by the United States Chamber of Commerce with the aim of convincing decision-makers and the public at large of the value of IP in economic and social terms, and dissipate some misconceptions.
Theft of trade secrets, or “confidential business information,” has reached such an appalling level that legislative action is needed, industry groups say. They're pushing the European Union and United States to get involved, and may be making headway.