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

Advertisement


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.

Occupy IP: New Economy Businesses Clash With Old

It may be too much, too late for content providers finally trying to tame the internet, and a fresh approach is needed, writes Bruce Berman.




Special Reports

Non-Communicable Diseases Issue Energises Public Health Policymakers Read More >


Latest Comments
  • This is certainly a good move, but perhaps this is... »
  • Copyrights are unique works set in a concrete mode... »

  • 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 >


    Quiet TRIPS Council Meeting Expected; Enforcement Push Continues

    Published on 1 June 2007 @ 6:31 pm

    Intellectual Property Watch

    By Tove Iren S. Gerhardsen
    Next week’s meeting of the World Trade Organization’s intellectual property committee is expected to be “business as usual,” continuing work on difficult topics, including the committee’s role in the enforcement of intellectual property rights. On this, Switzerland has introduced a new document, according to officials.

    The WTO Council on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) will meet on 5-6 June. “The TRIPS Council is looking like it will be fairly quiet next week,” a developed country official told Intellectual Property Watch.

    The TRIPS Council typically meets three times a year and many agenda items are viewed as “housekeeping,” continuing from meeting to meeting, though some are potentially explosive such as enforcement or a proposed amendment on biodiversity. Members are free to propose new items as well.

    For the meeting, Switzerland has submitted a written request to WTO to add the agenda item, “Enforcement of intellectual property rights (part III of the TRIPS agreement) – communication from Switzerland,” according to a source. The communication was not available at press time. The agenda is tentative and must be approved at the meeting.

    In the communication, Switzerland addressed the issue of border measures related to the enforcement of IP, sources said. Proposing enforcement as a separate agenda item could cause discussions as some members argue the issue does not belong in the TRIPS Council at all, which mainly deals with setting up rules for IP. They say, for instance, that questions of failure to adhere to WTO agreements should be left to the WTO dispute settlement mechanism. These countries, mainly developing countries, also fear that this could affect the overall balance or rights and obligations under the TRIPS agreement.

    Many developed countries, on the other hand, argue that the TRIPS provisions on ensuring adequate enforcement of IP are a council topic. These countries have been helpful to each other by reintroducing the issue on the agenda, despite strong protests from developing countries when the European Union first proposed it at the October 2006 TRIPS Council meeting (IPW, WTO/TRIPS, 27 October 2007).

    At the last meeting, the United States proposed the agenda item, also related to border measures (taken by the US), and Switzerland asked questions in order to see whether these could be used in Switzerland (IPW, WTO/TRIPS, 14 February 2007). A developed country official told Intellectual Property Watch on 1 June that Switzerland at this meeting wants to briefly present the paper, which is consistent with its previous positions.

    Since June 2005, there have been at least five enforcement documents introduced in the TRIPS Council, including the communication from Switzerland, one from the United States (IP/C/W/488), from the EU, Japan, Switzerland and US (IP/C/W/485), and two from the EU (IP/C/W/468 and 448), a source said. They are available at WTO’s website.

    CBD and GIs Continued

    The TRIPS Council has for several years reviewed TRIPS Article 27.3(b) on whether plants and animal inventions other than micro-organisms may be patented (TRIPS says members may exclude these from patentability), and on the protection of plant varieties, a source said.

    Article 27.3(b) is as usual a separate agenda item at this meeting. As stated in the Doha Declaration from the 2001 WTO ministerial meeting, this will include a review of the relationship between the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and TRIPS, and the protection of traditional knowledge and folklore, the source said. The CBD, which is non-binding [Correction: the agreement is binding on countries that sign it, according to the CBD website], goes further than TRIPS in ensuring that the owners of genetic resources are informed, give consent, and benefit from possible developments. Genetic resources may be used for developing medicines, for example.

    On these issues, Peru is expected to answer questions about its latest paper (IP/C/W/484), sources said. (IPW, WTO/TRIPS, 1 November 2006).

    A group of developing countries proposed in June 2006 (IPW, Biodiversity, 7 June 2006) to amend TRIPS to make prior informed consent and benefit-sharing schemes mandatory for patent applications. An official from this group told Intellectual Property Watch on 1 June that “the discussion is going on,” including in smaller group meetings.

    There were previous documents on biodiversity, including from the European Union, Japan and Switzerland not proposing changes to TRIPS, and from Norway (IPW, WTO/TRIPS, 15 June 2006), which proposes to change TRIPS but with fewer binding requirements in the area of sanctions. Separate discussions on biodiversity are being held under the WTO Deputy Director General Rufus Yerxa, a source said.

    Geographical indications (GIs), names derived from geographical locations, will also be reviewed (TRIPS Article 24.2). This deals with higher level of protection for wines and spirits, such as champagne. These names are protected today but members are mandated (Article 23.4) to negotiate a register for wines (“multilateral system of notification and registration of geographical indications”), but cannot agree on how this should work. Separately, the question of extending this higher level of protection to other products than wines and spirits, such as Parma ham, continues outside the council in consultations organised by the Director General Pascal Lamy, via WTO officials (Doha Declaration Paragraph 39).

    Also on the agenda is a TRIPS provision requiring developed countries to provide incentives for technology transfer to least-developed countries, and a long-standing item that would allow WTO dispute complaints even if countries did not violate a WTO agreement.

    This will be the first TRIPS Council that Ambassador Yonov Frederick Agah of Nigeria will lead. He took over after the February meeting.

    Tove Gerhardsen may be reached at tgerhardsen@ip-watch.ch.

     

    Comments

    1. Tim Roberts says:

      The CBD does not give rights to the ‘owners’ of genetic resources (GR). Rather, it deals with the rights and duties of ‘countries of origin’ of GR. ‘Countries of origin’ have the right to control access to GR within their borders, and undertake to give access to such GRs, subject (primarily) to Prior Informed Consent and benefit-sharing. However, ‘countries of origin’ do not have any rights in GRs that have legitimately passed beyond their borders without specific agreement.

    2. Ruchi says:

      The issue of country of origin should not be complicated,from where the party in question has obtained the genetic resource and declares as such along with the provider should be accepted as lawful.


    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.