Original news and analysis on international IP policy
By Tatum Anderson for Intellectual Property Watch The latest chapter in the Swiss pharmaceutical company Novartis’ challenge to the Indian intellectual property system begins on 18 June when the Indian Patent and Trademark Appellate Board (IPAB) is scheduled to hold…
By David Cronin for Intellectual Property Watch BRUSSELS – The European Union should stop demanding that poor countries apply its intellectual property rules to medicines through trade negotiations with the African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) bloc, legal experts argued at…
By Dugie Standeford for Intellectual Property Watch A ruling by the Helsinki, Finland, District Court could have far-reaching implications for the use of technical protection measures (TPMs) in Europe, according to legal experts. The 25 May decision held that the…
By Dugie Standeford for Intellectual Property Watch
While the direct impact of the recent landmark US Supreme Court decision in Teleflex v. KSR on patent law and practice will be felt only in the United States, the case could indirectly spark changes to European patent processes, experts said. Its focus on the troublesome question of when an invention is "obvious," however, means it probably will not help global efforts to harmonise national patent systems, they said.
By Steve Seidenberg for Intellectual Property Watch
As more and more commerce crosses national borders, so do more and more items seen as infringing on patents. And patent holders are making a case for stronger international rules on enforcement to protect themselves.
International intellectual property treaties enable an inventor to file one patent application and obtain patent rights in multiple countries, but the treaties do not provide similar mechanisms for multinational enforcement. A patentee can sue in each country where infringement occurs, but this is often prohibitively expensive, they say.
By Dugie Standeford for Intellectual Property Watch The United States government and the US creative industries last week signalled a new crackdown on intellectual property (IP) infringement at home and abroad. In a flurry of activity, the Bush administration proposed…
By Drew Clark for Intellectual Property Watch WASHINGTON, DC – Practically no one participating in a recent government forum here liked the proposed broadcaster protection treaty under negotiation at the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) in Geneva. Computer companies didn’t…
By Monika Ermert for Intellectual Property Watch German public broadcasters at a recent hearing of Germany’s Supreme Court warned against state interference with the funding of their programmes. The appeal by Germany’s large public broadcasting organisations ARD, ZDF and radio…
By Martin Vaughan for Intellectual Property Watch WASHINGTON – The White House has agreed to loosen restrictions on clinical test data and patent safeguards for pharmaceuticals in bilateral trade agreements between the United States and Peru, Panama, and Colombia as…
By Sarah Lai Stirland for Intellectual Property Watch
The United States Supreme Court in late April reined in another patent appeals court ruling it deemed overly-expansive. The high court ruled that software companies liable for infringing a patent in the United States cannot at the same time be held liable by American courts for the same activities outside of US borders.
"Foreign law alone, not United States law, currently governs the manufacture and sale of components of patented inventions in foreign countries," wrote Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg on behalf of three of her colleagues, Justices Anthony Kennedy, Antonin Scalia and David Souter.