Login
You are not logged in.
Login | Subscribe

RSS feed 

What is RSS?

RSS (Really Simple Syndication) is an XML format of a web site or a weblog designed to allow the distribution and the sharing of information. An RSS feed or web feed provides headlines, brief descriptions and links to the full original content in a standard format.

More information is available on Wikipedia.

What is the benefit of using RSS feeds?

RSS is an easy way for you to be alerted when new content is posted on your chosen web sites, such as the Intellectual Property Watch website. Instead of visiting the IP-Watch website again and again to browse for new stories, the RSS feed automatically tells you when something new is posted.

What do I need to use RSS?

To start using RSS, you need a news reader or aggregator that displays RSS feeds from web sites or weblogs you selected. There are many different news readers, available as applications to be installed on your computer or as web services. Some web browsers such as Firefox and Safari can display RSS feeds too.

You can find a list on RSS Compendium.

Once you have set up your news reader, you simply subscribe to the RSS feeds you want.

How do I subscribe to the IP-Watch RSS feed?

Copy the URL of the IP-Watch RSS feed as provided in the left margin to your clipboard. Then follow the instructions on your particular news reader for adding / subscribing to RSS feeds.

Email alerts 

You can subscribe for free to receive automatic email notifications whenever new content is available on the Intellectual Property Watch website. Moreover, you can configure the alerts to fit your needs and interests by defining the frequency, the type of content and even the language.

Subscribe/free trial 

Intellectual Property Watch subscribers receive exclusive access to stories published on the website under password protection, plus the Intellectual Property Watch monthly edition, a 16-page selection of the most important stories and features, including the People column and News Briefs section not available anywhere else. These columns contain the latest on personnel changes in the international IP community, and items on IP policy news and reports from around the world. The Intellectual Property Watch Monthly Reporter is available online and in print, mailed to your door.


Global IP Policy in 2010:
What You Need To Know
IP-Watch Year Ahead Series

Advertise Here

Latest Comments
  • @Sam: These laws apply here in Canada...that is fo... »
  • Great move on open innovation and effort to help t... »
  • Inside Views

    Contribute your views! Submit an Inside Views idea on any relevant topic to info [at] ip-watch [dot] ch, or leave a comment within any piece such as below.

    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.

    Copyright Law Reform in Brazil: Anteprojeto or Anti-project?

    A balancing of the rights of authors and consumers, the re-introduction of a private copying exception, a remixing permission and a new regulatory agency for copyright issues are among the core points the Brazilian Ministry of Culture has planned for the new copyright law. But at the Third Conference on Copyright and the Public Interest in São Paulo a month ago, the Ministry emphasised that the bits and pieces shown to the audience were not from an actual law draft (”anteprojeto”) but only a preliminary proposal for formulating such a draft. The bill still has not been published to date. The delay in releasing the bill for public consultation now threatens the work of more than two years on the reform.


    Take Two: China’s Proposed Regulations For Patent-Involving National Standards

    The Standards Administration of China patent policy proposal fails to strike the desired balance and undervalues the intellectual property included in a standard. If implemented as worded, it will discourage the contribution of innovative technologies for use in national standards and the participation of patent holders, writes George Willingmyre.


    25 April 2008

    Rise Of Enforcement Priorities Reflected In Annual USTR IP Report

    By William New
    The annual United States government report aimed at boosting global protection of US intellectual property rights and discouraging investment in errant nations this year again took sharpest aim at China and Russia, but also raised the alert on Thailand in part for its use of permitted compulsory licensing for public health, on health and safety risks of counterfeit products such as medicines, on internet piracy, and on a global treaty against counterfeiting.

    The report shows the “expanding importance from year to year” of IP rights, and the “growing significance” of IP rights infringement, to the US economy, Stan McCoy, assistant US trade representative for intellectual property and innovation, told reporters on 25 April. He said it also shows the increased importance for developing economies as well.

    Other areas of greater emphasis this year include internet piracy and piracy on emerging technologies such as mobile telephones, palm devices, flash drives, and other mobile technologies, the report said.

    In the US Trade Representative’s annual Special 301 report (pdf) mandated by the US Congress, nine countries are on this year’s priority watch list, the worst ranking in the report before possible trade sanctions including loss of unilateral benefits for shipping to the US market. In addition to China and Russia, they include Argentina, Chile, India, Israel, Pakistan, Thailand, and Venezuela.

    A total of 78 nations were reviewed this year, and 46 landed on one or another type of watch list, which mainly leads to bilateral discussions and attempted discouragement of investment. Another 36 nations were placed on the watch list. Russia was subjected to an “out-of-cycle” review which resulted in its placement on the priority watch list. Out of cycle reviews were called for this year for Israel and Taiwan.

    Several countries improved in USTR’s eyes. Egypt, Lebanon, Turkey, and Ukraine moved from the priority watch list to the watch list, which USTR said reflected improvements in each country’s IPR regime. Belize and Lithuania were removed from the Special 301 report altogether.

    Mentioned for the first time in a Special 301 context was the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) under negotiation by leading developed nations (who also are the holders the vast majority of the world’s IP rights). USTR, in its news release, called ACTA a “new and dynamic effort to combat the challenges of counterfeiting and piracy today.” It added that “the ACTA is envisioned as a leadership effort among trading partners that will raise the international standard for IPR enforcement.” Announced last October, ACTA will not be concluded by the time of the next summit of the Group of Eight industrialised nations in Japan in July, McCoy said.

    USTR also took up the industry call and heightened its focus this year on trade in counterfeit pharmaceuticals, which it said “continues to be a particularly grave concern in light of the risks to human health and safety.” The United States “continues to be actively engaged in addressing this serious problem,” it said. In an extensive section on the issue in the report, USTR reinforces support for the existing patent-based R&D model for innovation of new drugs and medical devices, and describes its engagement with other governments to promote this view.

    USTR also stressed the importance of preventing the export of infringing products, which may reflect the continued increase attention paid by developed countries to customs and border activities related to piracy and counterfeiting.

    USTR also highlighted the benefit to protection of US intellectual property in the recently concluded bilateral agreements such as Colombia, Panama and Korea. US bilateral agreements typically extend a country’s commitments beyond those of the 1994 World Trade Organization Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS), which is the global IP policy standard for protection.

    On Thailand, McCoy said there was concern about an “overall deterioration” in Thailand on IP rights protection, including of optical media such as CDs and DVDs, but also involving the use of compulsory licenses, which are permitted at the discretion of any government under the TRIPS agreement to produce cheaper versions of patented medicines. Compulsory licences are common in the United States for other types of products, but USTR is reflecting developed-nation pharmaceutical industry concerns that the spread of the use of such licences in mid-sized economies such as Thailand could inflict economic harm on the industry and its ability to carry out research and development. The report urges Thailand to respect the viability of the existing patent system, McCoy said.

    Essential Action, a Washington-based nongovernmental organisation monitoring trade policy, reacted strongly to the announcement on Thailand, calling it for the second year in a row, “outrageous, cynical, shameful.”

    “Thailand has led the way in using TRIPS flexibilities - reaffirmed in the Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health, a declaration to which the United States is a party - to lower the prices of medicines and make important drugs available to people without regard to income,” said Robert Weissman, director of Essential Action. “Instead of congratulating Thailand, the United States denounces and sabre-rattles.”

    On China, McCoy highlighted that the two WTO cases brought by the United States against China for IP-related matters shows that the US is willing to exercise its rights at that multilateral body when problems remain after extended bilateral discussions. He said a decision could come by next autumn on the copyright case against China.

    Of the 51 total pages of the report, 14 pages specifically detail the situation in China (more than 27 percent).

    On Russia, McCoy said “the ball is in Russia’s court” to deliver improvements on TRIPS compliance, as well as with the 2006 US bilateral agreement with Russia. Both Russia and China were also cited for progress made in the past year.

    Nations mentioned in the report are given an opportunity to provide their views in the public comment process, McCoy said. Much of the information appears to come from US industry and government sources (such as the increasing presence of IP specialists at embassies around the world), though McCoy also cited foreign governments and foreign business.

    The report did not appear to mention the emerging issue of “cross-retaliation,” in which nations who win a WTO case may choose to retaliate under a different WTO agreement than the one in which the violation occurred. This phenomenon, permitted under WTO rules, became known in the recent decision involving gambling services brought by the Caribbean nation of Antigua, which found the United States in violation for failing to allow gambling services. Antigua was permitted to seek retaliation under the TRIPS agreement instead of the WTO agreement on services.

    The International Intellectual Property Alliance (IIPA), which represents the leading US trade associations across all of the copyright industries, echoed USTR by calling China and Russia the biggest problem countries. IIPA also praised USTR for including Spain and Greece on the watch list. But it showed dissatisfaction with the choice not to elevate Canada to the priority watch list for its alleged copyright violations, as IIPA had urged. But USTR said it looks forward to the implementation of new policies by Canada to address concerns in the coming months.

    The Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) hailed the increased focus on IP protection on the internet. MPAA Chairman and CEO Dan Glickman in a statement used the argument that strong IP protection is necessary for his industry to find innovative ways to deliver content to users, including online.

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


    Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 Unported  Print This Post Print This Post

    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.