Original news and analysis on international IP policy
By Liza Porteus Viana for Intellectual Property Watch The Patent Reform Act of 2007, proposed legislation to modify United States patent law, is a step in the right direction, but in its current form threatens to undermine innovation, the Bush…
Par Kaitlin Mara et William New Un groupe d’experts gouvernementaux et non gouvernementaux a souligné, la semaine dernière, les conséquences importantes que les négociations menées par les principales économies en vue de conclure des accords de libre-échange bilatéraux ont sur…
Por Kaitlin Mara y William New Un panel integrado por expertos en cuestiones de propiedad intelectual y biodiversidad gubernamentales y no gubernamentales destacó la semana pasada el gran impacto que tienen las negociaciones comerciales bilaterales de las principales economías del…
By Kaitlin Mara and William New A panel of government and non-governmental experts on intellectual property and biodiversity issues last week stressed the high impact that leading economies’ bilateral free trade negotiations are having on multilateral policymaking in Geneva. Panellists…
By Monika Ermert for Intellectual Property Watch CANNES – Music industry 1.0 is dead, but 2.0 has not arrived quite yet. New models for making money from music and music rights are being looked for desperately at the world’s largest…
By Kaitlin Mara Intellectual property rights issues have been finding their way into the campaign platforms of candidates vying to become the next president of the United States. The following is a look at IP positions of the candidates so…
By Dugie Standeford for Intellectual Property Watch
The year 2008 could be a turning point for intellectual property policy and law in the United States, with key patent, copyright and enforcement legislation pending, legal decisions unfolding, and high drama in the battle over content online. All of this comes in the context of a national presidential election late in the year.
Par Catherine Saez Plusieurs mois après que le fabricant de produits sanitaires Johnson & Johnson a déposé une plainte civile contre la Croix-Rouge américaine ainsi que ses partenaires de licence commerciaux pour qu’ils cessent d’utiliser l’emblème d’une croix rouge, l’intérêt…
Por Catherine Saez Meses después de que el fabricante de productos de salud Johnson & Johnson presentara una demanda civil contra la Cruz Roja Americana y sus licenciatarios comerciales para que dejen de utilizar el símbolo de una cruz roja,…
Por Catherine Saez Según los oradores en un reciente evento organizado por el Centro del Sur, existen diferencias significativas en la aplicación por parte de países en desarrollo del Acuerdo sobre los Aspectos de los Derechos de la Propiedad Intelectual…
By Steven Seidenberg for Intellectual Property Watch It was a victory for the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), but it may be short-lived. On 7 December, a US federal court threw out a lawsuit that challenged Margaret Peterlin’s appointment…
By Catherine Saez
Months after health products manufacturer Johnson & Johnson filed a civil complaint against the American Red Cross and its commercial licensees to stop using the symbol of a red cross, the public interest it generated seems to have all but subsided. However, questions about the possible consequences of this lawsuit at the international level remain unanswered.
After roughly 100 years of sharing the symbol, the two entities are now fighting over it. The lawsuit filed by US-based Johnson & Johnson (J&J) against the American Red Cross (ARC) and four of its licensing partners on 8 August focused mainly on preventing the ARC and its licensing partners from using the red cross design on commercial products such as first aid kits to prevent unfair competition. The American Red Cross has licensed sale of its kits in large-scale retailers such as Wal-Mart, Target and major drug stores.