SUBSCRIBE TODAY!
Subscribing entitles a reader to complete stories on all topics released as they happen, special features, confidential documents and access to the complete, searchable story archive online back to 2004.
IP-Watch Briefs

Inside Views

Contribute your views! Submit an Inside Views idea to info [at] ip-watch [dot] ch.

We welcome your participation in article and blog comment threads, and other discussion forums, where we encourage you to analyse and react to the content available on the Intellectual Property Watch website.

By participating in discussions or reader forums, or by submitting opinion pieces or comments to articles, blogs, reviews or multimedia features, you are consenting to these rules.

1. You agree that you are fully responsible for the content that you post. You will not knowingly post content that violates the copyright, trademark, patent or other intellectual property right of any third party or which you know is under a confidentiality obligation preventing its publication and that you will request removal of the same should you discover that you have violated this provision. Likewise, you may not post content that is libelous, defamatory, obscene, abusive, that violates a third party's right to privacy, that otherwise violates any applicable local, state, national or international law, that amounts to spamming or that is otherwise inappropriate. You may not post content that degrades others on the basis of gender, race, class, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual preference, disability or other classification. Epithets and other language intended to intimidate or to incite violence are also prohibited. Furthermore, you may not impersonate others.

2. You understand and agree that Intellectual Property Watch is not responsible for any content posted by you or third parties. You further understand that IP Watch does not monitor the content posted. Nevertheless, IP Watch may monitor the any user-generated content as it chooses and reserves the right to remove, edit or otherwise alter content that it deems inappropriate for any reason whatever without consent nor notice. We further reserve the right, in our sole discretion, to remove a user's privilege to post content on our site. IP Watch is not in any manner endorsing the content of the discussion forums and cannot and will not vouch for its reliability or otherwise accept liability for it.

3. By submitting any contribution to IP Watch, you warrant that your contribution is your own original work and that you have the right to make it available to IP Watch for all purposes and you agree to indemnify IP Watch, its directors, employees and agents against all damages, legal fees and others expenses that may be incurred by IP Watch as a result of your breach of warranty or of these terms.

4. You further agree not to publish any personal information about yourself or anyone else (for example telephone number or home address). If you add a comment to a blog, be aware that your email address will be apparent.

5. IP Watch will not be liable for any loss including but not limited to the following (whether such losses are foreseen, known or otherwise): loss of data, loss of revenue or anticipated profit, loss of business, loss of opportunity, loss of goodwill or injury to reputation, losses suffered by third parties, any indirect, consequential or exemplary damages.

6. You understand and agree that the discussion forums are to be used only for non-commercial purposes. You may not solicit funds, promote commercial entities or otherwise engage in commercial activity in our discussion forums.

7. You acknowledge and agree that you use and/or rely on any information obtained through the discussion forums at your own risk.

8. For any content that you post, you hereby grant to IP Watch the royalty-free, irrevocable, perpetual, exclusive and fully sub-licensable license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform and display such content in whole or in part, world-wide and to incorporate it in other works, in any form, media or technology now known or later developed.

9. These terms and your posts and contributions shall be governed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of Switzerland (without giving effect to conflict of laws principles thereof) and any dispute exclusively settled by the Courts of the Canton of Geneva.

Call For Transparency In The Trans-Pacific Partnership Negotiation

In this post, three US law professors explain a recent call by over 30 legal scholars for the US Trade Representative to increase transparency for the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement intellectual property chapter, and their response to Ambassador Kirk’s response that he is “strongly offended” by the suggestion that the negotiation is not adequately transparent already.





Latest Comments
  • Congratulations upon re-election;-WHO chief.Priori... »
  • Great article. Ms. Chan may want to read our book ... »

  • For IPW Subscribers
    A guide to Geneva-based public health and intellectual property organisations. Read More >

    Monthly Reporter

    The Intellectual Property Watch Monthly Reporter, published from 2004 to January 2011, is a 16-page monthly selection of the most important, updated stories and features, plus the People and News Briefs columns.

    The Intellectual Property Watch Monthly Reporter is available in an online archive on the IP-Watch website, available for IP-Watch Subscribers.

    Access the Monthly Reporter Archive >


    Global Industry Leaders Cite Survey In Quest For A Counterfeit/Piracy-Free World

    Published on 30 January 2007 @ 11:11 pm

    Intellectual Property Watch

    By Catherine Saez
    Counterfeiting and piracy are inflicting an uncomfortable bite on profits for businesses and tax revenues for states, and also raise health and safety risks, say businesses and governments. The global business community is determined to fight back through The International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) and its striking arm launched in 2005: BASCAP (Business Action to Stop Counterfeiting and Piracy).

    A global leadership group bringing together CEOs from leading global companies such as Vivendi Universal, Nestlé, Sanofi-Aventis, EMI and NBC will try to build awareness and strengthen the lobbying effort to reduce what BASCAP describes as a drain on businesses and on the global economy resulting in a widespread loss of lawful employment, and plundering the creative community’s reward for effort and innovation.

    A meeting was organised in Geneva on 29 January to present the results of a global survey on counterfeiting and piracy undertaken by ICC in cooperation with the Cass Business School of the City University of London and to deliver a plan to tackle what Jean-René Fourtou, BASCAP co-chair and chairman of the supervisory board of Vivendi Universal, labels as a “huge hidden economy” and “the biggest economic problem of the century.” The CEO event was followed on 30 January with a separate, two-day multistakeholder meeting hosted by the World Intellectual Property Organization and others.

    A Top Ten and Bottom Ten List

    The business survey reports that leading emerging markets such as China (in the lead), Russia, India or Brazil have the worst environments for intellectual property protection, while the United States got the top position ahead of the United Kingdom, Germany and France for the most favourable IP environments.

    Raising the awareness of the public and the people working with government has been presented as the main target, followed by a strong focus on governments to set a legislative framework and, more importantly, to enforce it. The business leaders all agreed that the education of the public was essential.

    The report states that most firms were in favour of enforcement. It also details slightly different approaches to confronting the problem depending on the field of the 48 companies from approximately 27 industries that were surveyed. Those relying on mass production (e.g. music, CDs) favoured a strengthened IP legislation and were more inclined to spend on IP-related public education than batch production industries (e.g. aircraft).

    Numbers Elusive on the Volume of Counterfeit Goods

    The CEOs in the press conference agreed it is difficult to specifically identify the impact on business. “We lack real figures” said Fourtou. But Bob Wright, vice chairman and executive officer at General Electric and chairman and CEO of NBC Universal, said, “In many countries we are unable to do any business because of counterfeiting. In the last two to three years, 10 or 12 percent [of revenue] has been affected.”

    Jean-François Dehecq, CEO and president of Sanofi-Aventis, said, “in the pharma business, there are many parallel trades, it is difficult to evaluate but the affected volume is estimated between 5 and 10 percent of our sales and the trend is increasing in the North.”

    Tarik Rangoonwala, CEO of Forhans in Pakistan, said that the biggest problem is in developing countries. “Piracy is a worldwide phenomenon,” he said. “We are working on this matter and want the world to know it.”

    Guy Sebban, ICC secretary general, said an earlier study estimated the amount at 600 billion dollars but has been challenged. Recent lower numbers are based on custom seizures at the border and do not include the domestic counterfeit market or intangible items. Last week a new bigger figure was issued. “It is growing dramatically” he said.

    Speakers’ Paint Grim Presentation of Collateral Damage

    In the their awareness initiative, the CEO group presented a grim picture of the consequences on the global economy but also of collateral damage inflicted on populations, such as dangerous counterfeit drugs and faulty car parts spilling into the world wide market including the Northern hemisphere.

    “We spend billions of dollars on research, studying the drug and its side effects and we find the product on parallel markets without the right ingredients,” said Dehecq. “we have to bring better information to the public.” He added that it would be better to have low-priced generic pharmaceuticals in developing countries than counterfeit products and keep the price up in developed countries where people can afford to pay more for drugs.

    Fourtou also indicated that counterfeiting and piracy were linked with international crime and terrorism.

    The industry leaders warned that low protection against counterfeiting and piracy influences direct investment and business decision by global firms, like the decision to base product development in a given country.

    Free Trade, Doha Round and Enforcement as Useful Tools

    For Fourtou, free trade is part of the solution for a piracy and counterfeiting-free world. “Wealth and development are proportionate to trade. People have to go beyond their own interest and conclude the Doha Round” of trade negotiations at the World Trade Organization, he said, adding that the WTO Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) is a good basis for balanced protection.

    Wright said a “big part” of the group’s agenda is to get countries to put resources into fighting the problems. The key issue remaining, according to Fourtou, is the enforcement by governments of existing IP protection rules. “Legislation could be improved,” but “the main issue is enforcement,” said Fourtou. “There is a huge lack of efficiency and willingness” at the national level.

    Whether counterfeiting and piracy are the biggest problem of the century or not, it is clearly drawing attention and action from the global industry leaders wary of seeing their benefits eroded and concerned about the consequences for the general public. Whether those considerations can win the public opinion or the attention of governments remains an open question.

    Catherine Saez may be reached at csaez@ip-watch.ch.

     


    Leave a Reply

    We welcome your participation in article and blog comment threads, and other discussion forums, where we encourage you to analyse and react to the content available on the Intellectual Property Watch website. By participating in discussions or reader forums, or by submitting opinion pieces or comments to articles, blogs, reviews or multimedia features, you are consenting to these rules.

    We welcome your participation in article and blog comment threads, and other discussion forums, where we encourage you to analyse and react to the content available on the Intellectual Property Watch website.

    By participating in discussions or reader forums, or by submitting opinion pieces or comments to articles, blogs, reviews or multimedia features, you are consenting to these rules.

    1. You agree that you are fully responsible for the content that you post. You will not knowingly post content that violates the copyright, trademark, patent or other intellectual property right of any third party or which you know is under a confidentiality obligation preventing its publication and that you will request removal of the same should you discover that you have violated this provision. Likewise, you may not post content that is libelous, defamatory, obscene, abusive, that violates a third party's right to privacy, that otherwise violates any applicable local, state, national or international law, that amounts to spamming or that is otherwise inappropriate. You may not post content that degrades others on the basis of gender, race, class, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual preference, disability or other classification. Epithets and other language intended to intimidate or to incite violence are also prohibited. Furthermore, you may not impersonate others.

    2. You understand and agree that Intellectual Property Watch is not responsible for any content posted by you or third parties. You further understand that IP Watch does not monitor the content posted. Nevertheless, IP Watch may monitor the any user-generated content as it chooses and reserves the right to remove, edit or otherwise alter content that it deems inappropriate for any reason whatever without consent nor notice. We further reserve the right, in our sole discretion, to remove a user's privilege to post content on our site. IP Watch is not in any manner endorsing the content of the discussion forums and cannot and will not vouch for its reliability or otherwise accept liability for it.

    3. By submitting any contribution to IP Watch, you warrant that your contribution is your own original work and that you have the right to make it available to IP Watch for all purposes and you agree to indemnify IP Watch, its directors, employees and agents against all damages, legal fees and others expenses that may be incurred by IP Watch as a result of your breach of warranty or of these terms.

    4. You further agree not to publish any personal information about yourself or anyone else (for example telephone number or home address). If you add a comment to a blog, be aware that your email address will be apparent.

    5. IP Watch will not be liable for any loss including but not limited to the following (whether such losses are foreseen, known or otherwise): loss of data, loss of revenue or anticipated profit, loss of business, loss of opportunity, loss of goodwill or injury to reputation, losses suffered by third parties, any indirect, consequential or exemplary damages.

    6. You understand and agree that the discussion forums are to be used only for non-commercial purposes. You may not solicit funds, promote commercial entities or otherwise engage in commercial activity in our discussion forums.

    7. You acknowledge and agree that you use and/or rely on any information obtained through the discussion forums at your own risk.

    8. For any content that you post, you hereby grant to IP Watch the royalty-free, irrevocable, perpetual, exclusive and fully sub-licensable license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform and display such content in whole or in part, world-wide and to incorporate it in other works, in any form, media or technology now known or later developed.

    9. These terms and your posts and contributions shall be governed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of Switzerland (without giving effect to conflict of laws principles thereof) and any dispute exclusively settled by the Courts of the Canton of Geneva.