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
  • I deeply apprecite the initiative to combat agains... »
  • 1. Cuál es el problema principal que se plantea en... »

  • 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 >


    As WTO Reviews China, EU, US Criticise Its Policy On Innovation, IP Rights

    Published on 3 June 2010 @ 5:42 pm

    By , Intellectual Property Watch

    In the past two years, China has acted to improve the protection of intellectual property rights with a need for continuing effort, a World Trade Organization report has found, but the country came under criticism this week from key trading partners such as the United States and the European Union for not providing adequate enforcement and for self-serving innovation practices.

    On 31 May and 2 June the World Trade Organization undertook China’s third Trade Policy Review (TPR). The last China’s TPR took place in 2008. According to the WTO report, China “has become increasingly aware of the importance of intellectual property rights protection in facilitating innovation in the economy.” For example, China’s revised patent law “raised fines and legal compensation for cases of misleading assertion of patent rights,” and “the increase in innovation will undoubtedly contribute to increased awareness of the need to protect IP rights,” according to the report.

    Trade policy reviews are cyclical assessments of WTO member countries’ trade and related policies. For each review, a policy statement is provided by the government of the member under review, and a detailed report written by the WTO secretariat.

    In China’s opening statement, Yi Xiaozhun, Chinese vice minister of commerce, said that his country had received 1,508 questions from 27 members in preparation of its third review. According to the statement, each year from 2006 to 2009, China issued action plans on IP rights protection. In addition, in 2008, “China formulated the outline of the National Intellectual Property Strategy, specifying the objectives, priorities and measures of its national IPR strategy.”

    China also supports multilateralism and “believes that a successful Doha Round [of negotiations] is of great significance” to achieve the rebound of the global economy and resist trade protectionism. The WTO Doha Development Agenda on trade liberalisation proposed in 2001 has met almost a decade of dissenting discussions between member countries and has not yet been completed.

    In its TPR report, China said over the past two years “a number of laws and regulations convening IP rights were improved with new amendments, including for example the Patent Law and its implementation regulations, and the efforts of law enforcement to protect IP rights were also further strengthened.”

    Nonetheless, the European Union although acknowledging China’s efforts to effectively protect IP rights, said they “remained concerned that enforcement remains insufficient, notably in regional and local levels, and deficiencies and obstacles in solving complaints persist,” according to the opening statement delivered by John Clarke, EU head of delegation.

    According to the US statement, China, which acceded to the WTO in 2001, “became responsible for full adherence to WTO rules nearly 4 years ago, when all of the transition periods that China had been allowed as a new member of the WTO expired.”

    The US urged China to participate in the Doha Round as a major emerging economy, and to “accept the responsibility that goes along with its power and influence.” One main area of concern, according to the statement delivered by Michael Punke, new US ambassador to the WTO, is what the US sees as China’s inadequate enforcement of IP rights.

    Although the US acknowledges that China has taken numerous actions to improve the enforcement of IP rights, “these efforts have still not significantly reduced the unacceptably high infringement levels in China,” he said.

    The US is working bilaterally with China, through bilateral talks and collaborations such as the US-China Joint Commission on Commerce and Trade, and the newly signed Memorandum of Understanding between the US Patent and Trademark Office and the China’s State Intellectual Property Office (SIPO) (IPW, WTO/TRIPS, 1 June 2010).

    Of the 1,508 questions received by China – a staggering number according to WTO officials – about 230 came from the EU, 140 from the US, and 150 from Japan. Two-thirds of the questions have been answered by China, which according to the procedure has another month to answer the remaining questions, and some outstanding questions from its second review in 2008.

    The EU and the US were the most critical of China, developing countries appeared more supportive, said the WTO officials.

    According to a WTO press release, the TPR covered all aspects of China’s trade policies and practices. There was recognition that China had pursued the liberalisation of its trade and investment regimes, although some members said they had notice a slowdown in the process.

    Some of the issues covered during the review meeting were the need for the Chinese government to “continue reducing regulatory and other barriers to trade,” by, for example, adopting more international standards in banking, insurance, telecommunications and postal services. Less than half of China’s national standards correspond to international standards, according to the WTO.

    The Chinese government was asked by members to accelerate its accession to the WTO Agreement on Government Procurement. Members were also concerned about “China’s indigenous innovation initiative and ‘buy China’ policies in the government procurement framework.”

    “Many expressed their willingness to work with China to facilitate its accession to the WTO Agreement on Government Procurement,” according to the TPR chairperson’s concluding remarks. China’s indigenous innovation initiative is seen as discriminatory to foreign products, foreign investments, foreign technology, and foreign intellectual property, according to the US statement on the China review.

    Also during the review meeting, members encouraged China to speed its progress toward the country’s goal of “comparatively high standards” for IP rights by 2020.

    The concluding remarks by the chair, the WTO and the government reports are available from the WTO here.

    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.