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.

Advertisement


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.

How Listing Ukraine As A Priority Foreign Country In Special 301 Violates WTO Agreements

Prof. Sean Flynn asks whether US sanctions of Ukraine under the US Special 301 program violates World Trade Organization rules. He also asks whether the operation of watch lists threatening sanctions for intellectual property matters could be challenged under the WTO even prior to any sanction going into effect.





Latest Comments
  • As it happens, I own and create "intellectual prop... »
  • So long term planning of the UN Development Decade... »

  • 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 >


    Obama Administration Lock(e)s And Loads Against Movie Piracy

    Published on 22 April 2009 @ 12:41 am

    By for Intellectual Property Watch

    WASHINGTON, DC – The Obama administration will fight for the movie industry and work to aggressively enforce its intellectual property protections both at home and abroad, United States Commerce Secretary Gary Locke said here Tuesday.

    Locke offered almost unabashed support for the industry, which, according to a report released Tuesday [pdf] by the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA), created 2.5 million American jobs in 2007, paid an average production worker US$74,700 a year in salary, paid out $41.1 billion in salaries to American workers, paid $13 billion in income and sales tax and was responsible for $13.6 billion in trade surplus.

    Those participating in an MPAA event here stressed that because the movie industry gives back to the economy and movies are such a large American export, it is vital – now more than ever in this tumultuous economic climate – that its intellectual property be protected here and overseas.

    “I see yours as an industry worth fighting for,” said Locke, adding that 95 percent of the world’s consumers live outside of the United States, and there’s a strong international market for that product. “It’s my priority to continue that growth.”

    Locke, who is in his fourth week on the job at Commerce, said trade is the cornerstone of the Obama administration’s economic strategy, and trade agreements that adhere to safety and human rights standards, among other requirements, will be pursued, as will strong intellectual property protections. He specifically cited China as one country where counterfeiting is rampant, and the latest “X-Men” blockbuster as a prime example of how more enforcement is needed.

    Earlier this month, movie production company 20th Century Fox and the MPAA were stunned when a rough and unfinished copy of “X-Men Origins: Wolverine” appeared online – a full month before its scheduled release.

    “Our ability to trade in a rules-based system around the world is critical to your success and our economic success as a nation,” Locke said, stressing that the United States will employ “full and impartial” enforcement of intellectual property policies. The Obama administration is ‘well aware’ of the impact of piracy and counterfeiting on the movie industry and, ‘we’re working hard to combat it,’ he added.

    Commerce has placed IP attachés around world, including in China, India and Brazil. Commerce offers a website with links to executive branch intellectual property rights programs, ways to file IP rights complaints, and patent and trademark experts working a hotline to help businesses secure and enforce their IP rights. Locke said government and industry needs to build international coalitions with “like-minded foreign governments” and industries to combat global internet piracy. “We can do it and we must,” he added.

    President Obama has been vocal about his support for intellectual property protections and the need for increased enforcement. His vice president, former Senator Joseph Biden, a Democrat from Delaware, has in the past been an ardent supporter of content providers, even sponsoring copyright industry-friendly legislation.

    In fact, Biden was the guest speaker at the MPAA dinner Tuesday evening.

    Fred von Lohmann of the Electronic Frontier Foundation downplayed Locke’s strong enforcement message. “We all agree that commercial piracy and counterfeiting are a bad thing and ought to be the subject of enforcement,” he said. “Rather, it’s other aspects of the MPAA agenda, often misleadingly cloaked in ‘piracy’ rhetoric, that have given the public interest community reason for concern.”

    Von Lohmann gave an example of pressuring internet service providers to terminate consumers for noncommercial downloading, which he said raises very different issues from enforcement efforts against commercial DVD counterfeiters. Similarly, the secret negotiations around ACTA may harm global access to knowledge, an issue that is only tangentially related to the fate of Hollywood blockbusters, he said.

    As globalisation increases and intellectual property is exported to more corners of the globe, the copyright industry is hoping for protection from both ends of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

    A total of 41 organisations, including the MPAA, Copyright Alliance, Association of American Publishers, Business Software Alliance, Entertainment Software Association, Magazine Publishers of America, and the Recording Industry Association of America on Monday sent a letter to Obama [pdf], stressing that the livelihood of millions of Americans depends on stronger enforcement.

    “Enforcement of copyrights and patents and protecting the freedom to create and be compensated for it are essential components of promoting the progress of sciences and arts, as articulated so clearly by our Founding Fathers in the US Constitution,” the letter said. “Similarly, enforcement of trademarks protects consumers while providing incentives to create better products.”

    This letter was in response to a 2 April letter [pdf] from 19 groups like Public Knowledge, the American Library Association, Consumer Electronics Association, Center for Democracy and Technology, Computer and Communications Industry Association, and Electronic Frontier Foundation, that called on Obama to appoint people to intellectual property posts at the Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), State Department, Office of the US Trade Representative, and elsewhere, that “reflect the diversity of stakeholders affected by IP policy” and to create posts that encourage freedom of expression and innovation. The group lamented that several people named to formulate IP policy thus far, including two at the Justice Department, have come from the copyright industry.

    The new letter from the content creators’ corner argues that it is not a choice “between safeguarding IP protection on the one hand and promoting innovation no the other.”

    “The hallmarks of your administration’s appointees have been competence, substantive expertise, and a commitment to your administration’s agenda,” it continued.

    Indeed, many eyes in the United States and across the globe are watching the Obama administration to see who the new president selects to head up the USPTO, and who he selects for the new position of IP enforcement “tsar.” Some names that have been floated around industry circles in recent months are music industry lobbyist and former Time Warner and Copyright Office official Shira Perlmutter; Victoria Espinel, former chief policy advisor to the USTR on intellectual property and trade issues;Tom Rubin, Microsoft chief IP counsel; and Jay Monahan, former eBay vice president for IP, former vice president for worldwide piracy for Disney, now general counsel at a startup called Vuze. Other corners say the list is still fluid.

    Paul R. Michel, chief judge of the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington, DC, told Intellectual Property Watch that it’s “critical” this IP enforcement tsar have international experience, and should be somebody “who’s equally strong and reputable on enforcement within the US but equally strong and effective on the world scene.”

    Matthew Bryan, director of the Patent Cooperation Treaty legal division at the World Intellectual Property Organization told Intellectual Property Watch Tuesday that the international community also is watching this appointment with great interest, but many questions remain on what exactly he or she will focus on. “We’re very intrigued at that position. We don’t know much about it,” Bryan said.

    It is not expected that the appointment of IP tsar take place immediately, however. It’s said that the White House needs to determine how the position will fit within the policy structure there (IPW, US Policy, 27 January 2009). A USPTO director should be named much sooner, possibly even this month.

    The administration is said to be in the final vetting stages for four USPTO candidates, including American Intellectual Property Law Association Executive Director Q. Todd Dickinson and former AIPLA executive director, Mike Kirk. Other PTO prospects are said to include IBM Vice President David Kappos, and James Pooley, partner at Morrison Foerster law firm.

    “Any of them we would love to work with … we think all of them are exceptionally well-qualified,” WIPO’s Bryan said of the prospective USPTO candidates. “We look forward to working with anyone the administration has on IP.”

    Liza Porteus Viana may be reached at info@ip-watch.ch.

     

    Comments

    1. China Hearsay: China law, business, and economics commentary says:

      [...] IP Watch, referring to a Washington, D.C. industry meeting: The Obama administration will fight for the [...]

    2. Movies, Anti-Piracy Caucus to World: Stop Stealing Our Stuff | Christopher Howell says:

      [...] on this front. Vice President Joe Biden was the feature dinner speaker at an MPAA event last month, at which Commerce Secretary Gary L ocke said, “I see yours as an industry worth fighting [...]


    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 54.234.67.55