• Home
  • About Us
    • About Us
    • Subscribe
    • Privacy Policy
  • Advertise
    • Advertise On IP Watch
    • Editorial Calendar
  • Videos
  • Links
  • Help

Intellectual Property Watch

Original news and analysis on international IP policy

  • Copyright
  • Patents
  • Trademarks
  • Opinions
  • People News
  • Venues
    • Bilateral/Regional Negotiations
    • ITU/ICANN
    • United Nations – other
    • WHO
    • WIPO
    • WTO/TRIPS
    • Africa
    • Asia/Pacific
    • Europe
    • Latin America/Caribbean
    • North America
  • Themes
    • Access to Knowledge/ Open Innovation & Science
    • Food Security/ Agriculture/ Genetic Resources
    • Finance
    • Health & IP
    • Human Rights
    • Internet Governance/ Digital Economy/ Cyberspace
    • Lobbying
    • Technical Cooperation/ Technology Transfer
  • Health Policy Watch

Alleged Leaked EU Analysis Sheds Light On TTIP Negotiations On IP

28/03/2014 by William New, Intellectual Property Watch 2 Comments

Share this:

  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)
  • Click to print (Opens in new window)

An alleged leaked analysis by the European Union provides insight into the intellectual property section of the draft Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) with the United States. And separately, the US International Trade Commission released a report on trade barriers that US small businesses perceive in exporting to Europe.

The two-page text is an excerpt from a 20 March EU analysis, according to Knowledge Ecology International (KEI), which posted and wrote about the document here.

The leaked document is a summary report on the latest negotiations on a full range of IP rights that might be included in the bilateral agreement, including the difficult issue of geographical indications (GIs).

“The main achievement of the fourth round is the agreement of both sides to continue further work on the basis of a US proposal for the architecture of the IPR Chapter,” the document states. “The idea is to have 4 sections: 1) list of international agreements; 2) general principles stressing the importance of IP as a tool for growth, jobs, and innovation, 3) binding commitments on a limited number of significant IP issues, and 4) cooperation on issues of common interest.”

But it notes: “All discussion remained purely exploratory and do not signal a commitment to negotiate on any of the topics discussed.”

In its assessment, KEI said there clearly are elements kept secret but that “there are some new insights” in the leaked document.

Among the new insights, KEI said, are: “the US resistance to provisions on unregistered designs for apparel, the US ‘stakeholder’ concerns about pharmaceutical test data, which probably concerns EU proposals for greater transparency of such data, the fact some ‘relevant sectors of the [Obama] administration’ are supportive of EU proposals on broadcaster rights, public performance and resale rights (all of which would require changes in US copyright laws), proposals for joint US/EU ‘country reports on enforcement’ in third countries, and norms for trade secrets that will involve new US legislation. The discussion on GIs took up a half day, and appeared to cover familiar ground and no movement on either side.”

USITC Report on TTIP and Small Business

Separately, the USITC has issued a 168-page report [pdf] on the trade barriers US small and medium businesses perceive in exporting to the EU.

“Respondents reported that numerous EU trade barriers, particularly standards-related measures, limit SMEs’ exports to the EU more than those of large exporters,” the report summary states. “They explained that while complying with standards, technical regulations, and conformity assessment procedures is costly for larger firms, it is potentially prohibitive for SMEs because many costs are fixed regardless of a firm’s size or revenue. Respondents also cited difficulties involving trade secrets, patenting costs, and logistics challenges, especially customs requirements, Harmonized System classifications, and the EU’s value-added tax system. Trade financing in the EU was reported to be a lesser problem. It also cites industry-specific barriers.

 

Share this:

  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)
  • Click to print (Opens in new window)

Related

William New may be reached at wnew@ip-watch.ch.

Creative Commons License"Alleged Leaked EU Analysis Sheds Light On TTIP Negotiations On IP" by Intellectual Property Watch is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Filed Under: IP Policies, Language, Themes, Venues, Access to Knowledge/ Education, Bilateral/Regional Negotiations, Copyright Policy, Enforcement, English, Europe, Lobbying, North America, Patents/Designs/Trade Secrets, Regional Policy, Trademarks/Geographical Indications/Domains

Comments

  1. mcjwelles says

    23/04/2014 at 4:08 pm

    These obscured negotiations appear to this reader as a means of insuring a formal euro and pound subjugation to the $, a legal means to expedite the shifting of Western fuel sourcing from Russia to the US and US/ Mid East (Israel) pipeline to W Ukraine. US apparently predicts the Latin American market is in the bag, has relinquished the Stans finally- and Asia. Africa looms as the next ‘Risk” strategy.

    In short I am suspecting that we are witnessing the economic WWlll, as predicted, outbreak as the Hemispheres are being renegotiated. The Ukraine drama is not more than a seminal detail?

    Reply
  2. Rebentisch says

    25/04/2014 at 3:26 pm

    Why can’t the US simply harmonise with European GI protection and move on?

    Regarding patents a EU substantive patent law is unfortunately not existing in the Acqui Communautaire, so how could they negotiate “grace period” with the US?

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  • Email
  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • Vimeo
My Tweets

IPW News Briefs

Saudis Seek Alternative Energy Partners Through WIPO Green Program

Chinese IP Officials Complete Study Of UK, European IP Law

Perspectives on the US

In US, No Remedies For Growing IP Infringements

US IP Law – Big Developments On The Horizon In 2019

More perspectives on the US...

Supported Series: Civil Society And TRIPS Flexibilities

Civil Society And TRIPS Flexibilities Series – Translations Now Available

The Myth Of IP Incentives For All Nations – Q&A With Carlos Correa

Read the TRIPS flexibilities series...

Paid Content

Interview With Peter Vanderheyden, CEO Of Article One Partners

More paid content...

IP Delegates in Geneva

  • IP Delegates in Geneva
  • Guide to Geneva-based Public Health and IP Organisations

All Story Categories

Other Languages

  • Français
  • Español
  • 中文
  • اللغة العربية

Archives

  • Archives
  • Monthly Reporter

Staff Access

  • Writers

Sign up for free news alerts

This site uses cookies to help give you the best experience on our website. Cookies enable us to collect information that helps us personalise your experience and improve the functionality and performance of our site. By continuing to read our website, we assume you agree to this, otherwise you can adjust your browser settings. Please read our cookie and Privacy Policy. Our Cookies and Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2022 · Global Policy Reporting

loading Cancel
Post was not sent - check your email addresses!
Email check failed, please try again
Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email.