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

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.

Call For Transparency In The Trans-Pacific Partnership Negotiation

In this post, three US law professors explain a recent call by over 30 legal scholars for the US Trade Representative to increase transparency for the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement intellectual property chapter, and their response to Ambassador Kirk’s response that he is “strongly offended” by the suggestion that the negotiation is not adequately transparent already.





Latest Comments
  • David, thank you for the note. It appears there is... »
  • The link to the US proposal seems to be broken, an... »

  • 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 >


    US Supreme Court Review Of Bilski

    The US Supreme Court ruled on In re Bilski, a case considered pivotal to the patenting of business methods. Below is list of articles on the case appearing in Intellectual Property Watch, as well as a non-exhaustive list of briefs filed by interested parties.

    IPW Coverage, 2010

    28 July USPTO Seeks Comments On Post-Bilski Guidelines

    29 June In Bilski Decision, US Supreme Court Adopts Tough But Vague Test for Business Method Patents

    12 February Year Ahead: Reforming Global IP Systems – Trends In A2K In 2010

    11 January Year Ahead: Five Key IP Cases To Watch In The United States In 2010

    IPW Coverage, 2009

    14 December US Government, Industry De-Emphasise Multilateral System In Enforcement Push

    24 November
    Bilski Decision Likely To Narrow Patentable Subject Matter In US, Panel Says

    29 October
    Bilski Impact On Biotech Seen As Minimal; Experts See Court Shift

    23 October
    US Federal Circuit May Offer Patent, Tech Policy Guidance For High Court

    16 October
    Inside Views: How The “Machine-Or-Transformation” Test In Bilski Is Failing

    19 August
    IP Burble: Law Professors Debate Bilski

    31 July
    Special Report: US Supreme Court Review Of Bilski Could Reverberate Through Patent System

    31 July
    Financial Services, Patent Experts Seek More Certainty On Business-Method Patents, Bilski Case

    3 June
    IP Burble: US Supreme Court To Rule On Business Method Patents

    30 January
    Year Ahead: IP Owners Face Tough Legal Issues In United States In 2009

    IPW Coverage, 2008

    6 November
    Bilski Ruling Moves US Closer To Global Norms For Patenting

    15 May
    High US Court Reconsiders Policy Of Patenting Business Methods

    From the Blogs …
    The blogosphere has also closely tracked developments in the Bilski case. Here is a growing list of commentary that Intellectual Property Watch has come across:

    … from Groklaw:

    All Groklaw Bilski coverage

    … from Holman’s Biotech IP Blog:

    27 August: A Review of Some of the Amici Briefs Filed in Bilski

    … from Patent Baristas:

    11 November: Poll: What’s Your Favorite Quote from Bilski?

    10 November: Supreme Court Ponders Hypotheticals In Bilski

    16 September: Patented Methods Can Include Mental Steps

    … from PatentlyO:

    17 November: Patent on Tax Refund System Deemed Invalid under Section 101

    10 August: Bilski Briefs

    1 July: Bilski v. Doll: Reconsidering Patentable Subject Matter

    Amicus Briefs

    American Bar Association list of briefs for the case is here.

    Biotechnology Industry Organization

    Business Software Alliance

    Computer & Communications Industry Association

    Knowledge Ecology International


    Print This Page Print This Page