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 Interns Summer 2013

IP-Watch interns Brittany Ngo (Yale Graduate School of Public Health) and Caitlin McGivern (University of Law, London) talk about their Geneva experience in summer 2013. 2:42.

Inside Views

Submit ideas 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.

Quantitative Analysis Of Contributions To NETMundial Meeting

A quantitative analysis of the 187 submissions to the April NETmundial conference on the future of internet governance shows broad support for improving security, ensuring respect for privacy, ensuring freedom of expression, and globalizing the IANA function, analyst Richard Hill writes.


Latest Comments
  • Why should anyone care what James Anaya thinks? In... »
  • If this goes ahead, as the EU will "speak" for all... »

  • For IPW Subscribers

    A directory of IP delegates in Geneva. Read more>

    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 >

    La crisis económica incita a los titulares de PI (y a sus abogados) a buscar protección

    Published on 9 October 2008 @ 9:07 pm

    Intellectual Property Watch

    Por Liza Porteus Viana para Intellectual Property Watch
    NUEVA YORK – A medida que aumenta el valor de la propiedad intelectual en la economía de innovación, son cada vez más numerosos los titulares de PI (propiedad intelectual) que están tratando de proteger sus ideas e innovaciones mediante patentes sobre métodos de negocios, acuerdos internacionales de comercio, patentes relativas a una materia biológica y otros medios de protección.

    Pero en medio de la crisis económica que está sacudiendo a los mercados financieros de todo el mundo y golpeando a la clase media, los titulares de PI a menudo deben ponderar los costos y beneficios que implica el hecho de recurrir a la litigación para proteger sus activos de PI. Para muchas empresas, los tiempos difíciles como los actuales son los que hacen que la protección de sus derechos de PI sea aun más clave.

    “La propiedad intelectual es nuestro negocio. Si no tenemos PI para conceder a la gente, no tenemos actividad comercial”, explicó el lunes pasado Alexander Arato, abogado general de Computer Associates (CA), durante la conferencia “The Changing Face of IP” (las diferentes facetas de la PI) que celebró el bufete de abogados Foley & Lardner en Nueva York. “No es un lujo, es cuestión de saber cuánto uno está dispuesto a investir”.

    Los litigios que tratan reivindicaciones de patentes y demás asuntos de PI son costosos, por eso varias empresas como CA despliegan una estrategia defensiva: sólo participan en la lucha jurídica si se las demanda, lo cual le sucede muy a menudo a una gran empresa de software como ésta en los Estados Unidos.

    En materia de rastreo de ciberocupas, a las empresas, en particular las pequeñas, les resulta casi imposible perseguir a cada ocupa que usa su nombre en Internet. Numerosas empresas de marca registrada intentan determinar el alcance de los efectos negativos que un ocupa puede causarle a la marca, si los hay, antes de decidir si utilizan los fondos para combatirlo.

    “Dependerá además de cómo el nombre de dominio incorpora la marca”, señaló Sarah Crispi, directora de asuntos jurídicos en Discovery Communications. Si el nombre de dominio sólo está mal escrito o parece bastante inofensivo, es probable que Discovery lo ignore. Pero si parece que el nombre de dominio pretende dirigir el tráfico hacia otro sitio web o perjudicar la marca “seguramente lo perseguiríamos”, añadió.

    Asimismo, muchas entidades se encuentran en una situación en la que tienen que defenderse contra los llamados “patent trolls” –gente o empresas que hacen respetar su patente a presuntos infractores de una forma que se puede percibir como excesivamente oportunista–. También se los conoce en inglés como “non-practicing entities” (NPE) –titulares de patentes que no elaboran o utilizan la invención patentada–.

    Ciertas críticas ponen de relieve que es demasiado fácil utilizar los derechos de PI con propósitos contrarios a las normas de competencia, como por ejemplo dejar a otra entidad fuera del mercado aun si se considera que la persona titular de la patente es una entidad NPE.

    No obstante, F. Kinsey Haffner, vicepresidente de propiedad intelectual y licencias en la empresa de armamentos estadounidense Raytheon Company, explicó que un gran número de patentes de empresas no se utilizan necesariamente con regularidad pero esto no quiere decir que no tienen valor.

    “No me parece razonable que cualquiera pueda simplemente pisotear esas patentes” y utilizar las invenciones de Raytheon sin indemnizar a la empresa, aunque la empresa esté o no usando esas patentes en ese momento, opinó Haffner.

    A menudo las empresas dedican tiempo y dinero para intentar determinar si la utilización de sus derechos de autor o marcas de comercio por parte de otros consiste en un uso legítimo, en particular si un posible infractor emplea la designación comercial con propósitos poco deseados o parodias. Como hoy en día todo pasa por Internet, cualquier carta de “cese y desista” enviada al autor de la parodia de una marca seguramente será publicada, lo que significa que la identidad de la empresa también se dará a conocer.

    “Además del coste, el tiempo y el esfuerzo empleados para asegurar la aplicación, las empresas deben considerar el aspecto publicitario puesto que pueden verse perjudicadas”, explicó Andrea Baum, asociada en Foley and Lardner en materia de marca de comercio, derechos de autor y publicidad.

    El uso legítimo es el “aspecto más difícil e impredecible de las leyes sobre derechos de autor”, agregó Baum.

    Además, con la llegada del tan popular contenido generado por los usuarios, con sitios como YouTube de Google, Facebook y varios otros que los usuarios usan como plataformas para poner en línea cualquier tipo de contenido, las empresas como Viacom están tratando constantemente de evitar que en dichos sitios se use su material protegido por derechos de autor sin permiso. Dichas empresas quieren poder controlar de manera más estricta la forma en que se usan sus contenidos.

    “Lo que nos impulsa es llamar la atención a través de nuestro sitio, presentar nuestro contenido como queremos hacérselo llegar a nuestros consumidores”, afirmó Stanley Pierre-Louis, abogado general de Viacom.

    Sin embargo, otras empresas dicen que podrían cerrar los ojos ante las partes que pueden violar los derechos siempre y cuando dichas partes estén promocionando su marca de manera positiva.

    A título de ejemplo, Labatt Brewing Company, propiedad de InBev y segunda cervecería más grande de Canada, hicieron mensajes publicitarios sobre cervezas en 1988 que están cobrando vida por segunda o tercera vez a través del sitio de videos en línea YouTube.

    “Es genial dado que se vuelve viral mucho tiempo después de que lo hayamos pagado, mucho después de que hayamos obtenido el beneficio comercial. Para nosotros se trata de una comercialización gratis”, comentó Keith Hunt, consejero jurídico en Labatt.

    “No lo impedimos, no lo promocionamos –seguro que me entiende– pero es una forma de obtener algo de todas maneras”, agregó Hunt.

    Traducido del inglés por Analín Pedroni

     


    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.

     

     
    Your IP address is 54.196.206.80