Brazil’s Internet Legal Framework Regulation And Draft Bill For Privacy Law Public Consultation

Flavia Rebello

On 28 January 2015, the Brazilian Ministry of Justice launched public consultations involving two key pieces of legislation, namely: the decree that will regulate the Marco Civil da Internet or the Brazilian Civil Rights Framework for the Internet (the “Internet Legal Framework”); and the Draft Bill for the Protection of Personal Data (“Draft Bill”). A consultation period is being conducted in relation to these two laws via online platforms set up by the government.

The Legal Implications Of Medicinal Marijuana As A Geographical Indication For Jamaica

Cannabis_sativa_Koehler_drawing

Although there are ongoing negotiations to revise the Lisbon Agreement for the international recognition of GIs, there is currently no uniform reciprocal legal recognition for non-wine and spirit GIs in international jurisdictions. Jamaica’s Cannabis (hereafter marijuana), is identified by its government as one of the country’s products which is domestically GI registrable, writes Marsha Cadogan.

Why The Request By Least Developed Countries For An Extension Of The Transitional Period For Granting And Enforcing Medicines Patents Needs To Be Supported

Ellen 't Hoen

Ellen ‘t Hoen writes: On 24 February 2015 Bangladesh on behalf of the 34 Least Developed Country members (LDCs) of the World Trade Organization (WTO) submitted a request for an extension of the transitional period under article 66.1 TRIPS with respect to pharmaceutical products until the country is no longer classified as LDC.[1] The original extension, set to expire on 1st January 2016, specifically removes the obligation for LDCs to comply with Section 5 (Patents) and Section 7 (Protection of Undisclosed Information) of Part II of TRIPS, including any obligation to enforce rights under these provisions.

It is a little known fact that since the adoption of the 2001 Doha Declaration on TRIPS and Public Health, LDCs have frequently used the extension in day-to-day procurement of low cost generic medicines, in particular to access medicines needed for the treatment of HIV.

Copyright Policy And The Right To Science And Culture

OHCHR-logo

Reposted from Afro-IP and infojustice.org: A report entitled ‘Copyright policy and the right to science and culture’ authored by the UN Special Rapporteur in the field of cultural rights, Farida Shaheed, has been released, writes Prof. Carolyn Ncube.

South Africa Supreme Court Of Appeal Losing Its Shape

CIP-logo-300x300

South Africa’s Supreme Court of Appeal has been blessed for the past few decades by having in its ranks judges who have experience and expertise in the field of Intellectual Property Law, writes law professor Owen Dean. With the recent retirement of Louis Harms, the bench at the Supreme Court of Appeal has been denuded of judges who can be regarded as IP experts. The paucity of IP experience on the bench is regrettably beginning to show.

In recent times the Supreme Court of Appeal has given three IP judgments in trade mark cases which, it is respectfully submitted, have been wrongly decided and are not in harmony with the principles of trade mark law and practice, Dean argues.

Questions About Funding, Text Of Tufts Study On Drug Costs

UACT-300dpi-small

The Union for Affordable Cancer Treatment has sent a letter to the author of a much-noted Tufts University (US) study that found high development costs for medicines, with copies to the university administration. The letter requests transparency on the funding of the study and the press conference announcing the results, as well as copies of the study itself, which the group says was not made public, along with details to justify the result.

Looking Behind The Different Invalidation Rates Of Oppositions And IPRs

Janice Vatland

Opposition proceedings in Europe have long served as a powerful tool for third parties to challenge the validity of a patent before the European Patent Office (EPO). Now, under the America Invents Act (effective September 2012), the United States (US) has two new procedures for challenging the validity of a patent before the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO): inter partes review (IPR) and post-grant review. Current statistics indicate a higher invalidation rate for IPRs as compared to EPO oppositions.

The Copyright Manifesto: How The EU Should Support Innovation And Creativity Through Copyright Reform

The author outside the European Commission

Teresa Hackett writes: “Copyright divide in numbers”, the graph on the first page of the newly launched ‘The Copyright Manifesto. How the European Union should Support Innovation and Creativity through Copyright Reform’ tells a story. In an illustration of the results of the European Union’s (EU) 2014 consultation on copyright, publishers, authors and collective management organizations express strong support for the current system, while end users and institutional users (such as libraries) are strongly in favour of copyright reform. So if copyright is supposed to benefit everyone, the copyright system sure isn’t working for everyone.

CARICOM, Trans-Pacific Partnership, And IP Law & Policy: What Next?

CARICOM logo

The year 2015 has dawned as usual with the fanfare of greater things to come. Caribbean projects are in the pipeline, along with activities to enhance competitiveness and many gallant efforts by well- meaning non-governmental and International organizations. The research has shown, however, that without the impetus of effort that originates from amongst the local innovators, there is no real change and no great advancement.

Recent Cases Warn Of Dangers Of Trying For Second Bite At The IPR Apple

apple second bite

The American Invents Act of 2011 (AIA) created inter partes review (IPR), a new opposition-like proceeding conducted at the US Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) in the US Patent and Trademark Office to challenge the validity of patent claims based on prior art patents and printed publications. Since then, conventional wisdom has advised filing a petition for IPR quickly after being sued for patent infringement, because any deficiencies or mistakes the PTAB identifies could be corrected with a second petition later on. Several recent decisions from the PTAB reveal limits to that strategy.