The Facts Speak04/11/2004 by Isabelle Scherer for Intellectual Property Watch Leave a CommentShare this Story:Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)Click to share on Google+ (Opens in new window)Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)Click to print (Opens in new window)IP-Watch is a non-profit independent news service, and subscribing to our service helps support our goals of bringing more transparency to global IP and innovation policies. To access all of our content, please subscribe now. You also have the opportunity to offer additional support to your subscription, or to donate.This table provides a sample of the recommendations offered by three of the major U.S. industry associations regarding the placement of countries in the Office of the United States Trade Representative’s (USTR) 2004 ‘Special 301’ Report. The far right-hand column lists the final USTR decision.CountryPharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA)RecommendationsInternational Intellectual Property Alliance (IIPA)RecommendationsBiotech Industries Organization (BIO)Recommendations2004 USTR Special 301 PlacementsArgentinaPriority Watch ListPriority Watch ListPriority Watch ListPriority Watch ListBrazilPriority Watch ListPriority Watch ListPriority Watch ListPriority Watch ListChinaSection 306 MonitoringSection 306 MonitoringPriority Watch ListSection 306 MonitoringEgyptPriority Watch ListPriority Watch ListPriority Watch ListPriority Watch ListIndiaPriority Watch ListPriority Watch ListPriority Watch ListPriority Watch ListIndonesiaWatch ListPriority Watch List Priority Watch ListKoreaPriority Watch List Priority Watch ListKuwait Priority Watch List Priority Watch ListLebanonPriority Watch ListPriority Watch List Priority Watch ListPakistantPriority Watch ListPriority Watch List Priority Watch ListPhilippines Priority Watch List + Out-of-cycle USTR Review Priority Watch ListRussian Fed.Watch ListPriority Watch List + Out-of-cycle USTR Review Priority Watch ListTaiwanPriority Watch ListPriority Watch List + Out-of-cycle USTR Review Priority Watch ListTurkeyPriority Foreign CountryWatch List Priority Watch ListeUkraine Priority Foreign Country Priority Foreign CountryIIPA’s members are the Association of American Publishers (AAP), Business Software Alliance (BSA), The Entertainment Software Association (ESA), The Independent Film & Television Alliance (IFTA.), The Motion Picture Association of America, and the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA).PhRMA groups some 50 leading research-based pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies in the United States.BIO is a membership association of over 1,000 companies, academic institutions and biotechnology centres from around the world.What is Special 301?The ‘Special 301’ provisions of the U.S. Trade Act of 1974, as amended, require USTR to conduct an annual review of the IP practices of US trading partners, identifying countries which fail to provide adequate and effective levels of intellectual property protection or market access for U.S. persons relying on intellectual property.In its Annual ‘Special 301’ report, USTR designates countries according to its assessment of how damaging their apparent malfeasances are to U.S. commercial interests:Priority Foreign Countries: those countries that USTR believes have the most onerous or egregious policies with the greatest adverse impact on U.S. right holders or products. These countries are subject to accelerated investigations and possible sanctions.Priority Watch List: those countries which do not to provide adequate IP protection and enforcement or market access for U.S. persons relying on intellectual property protection.Watch List: those countries USTR believes merit bilateral attention to address the underlying IPR problems.Section 306 Monitoring: those countries with which the United States has bilateral agreements to address specific problems raised in earlier reports.Out-of-cycle Review: those countries that require further monitoring in addition to the annual review cycle.The U.S. government’s deliberations in this respect are based on information obtained from a range of government agencies, the private sector, U.S. embassies and trading partners, and the National Trade Estimates report. No formal mechanism exists for soliciting direct input into the Special 301 decisions from non-business public interest groups within or outside the United States.Share this Story:Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)Click to share on Google+ (Opens in new window)Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)Click to print (Opens in new window)Related"The Facts Speak" by Intellectual Property Watch is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.