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.


    13 November 2009

    Los derechos de PI se encuentran en los bloques de salida hacia Copenhague, pero aún reina incertidumbre en torno al tema

    By Catherine Saez @ 3:41 pm

    BARCELONA – El 6 de noviembre culminaron las negociaciones sobre el cambio climático que se extendieron durante una semana, y, si bien la mayoría de las delegaciones aseguraron que todo es aún posible en la conferencia sobre cambio climático que se celebrará en diciembre, continúa habiendo incertidumbre en torno a numerosas cuestiones. Entre ellas se incluyen las finanzas, la reducción de emisiones, la transferencia de tecnologías y la naturaleza del acuerdo que se establecerá en Copenhague.

    La Convención Marco de las Naciones Unidas sobre el Cambio Climático (CMNUCC) se reunió del 2 al 6 de noviembre en Barcelona con el fin de lograr avances en el proyecto de texto para la reunión final en Copenhague del 7 al 18 de diciembre. Las negociaciones se han llevado a cabo en grupos más pequeños denominados grupos de contacto.

    Si bien durante la semana no se deliberó formalmente sobre los derechos de propiedad intelectual, estos constituyeron el foco de atención y, a fines de la semana, no solo se mencionaron en el documento oficioso en materia de transferencia de tecnologías, sino que también se aludió a ellos en el último día en una nueva versión de un documento oficioso sobre medidas de mitigación.

    Los documentos oficiosos que se elaboraron en Barcelona servirán de base para las rondas de conversaciones de Copenhague, y el debate promete caldearse habida cuenta de la dualidad de las posiciones de algunos actores en materia de propiedad intelectual (PI).

    En el último día, el grupo de contacto también publicó un nuevo documento oficioso sobre medidas más eficaces para el desarrollo y la transferencia de tecnologías, que reemplaza la versión precedente del martes, la número 36, que fue cuestionada por algunos países en desarrollo, como la India, Bolivia, Bangladesh y el Grupo de los 77 y China, por haber eliminado del texto principal los temas relativos a PI.

    El nuevo documento oficioso, número 47, reincorporó en el texto principal las medidas relacionadas con los derechos de propiedad intelectual. En el documento oficioso 36, dichas medidas se habían relegado a un apéndice en un pie de página en el que se afirmaba que los temas incluidos en el apéndice podían discutirse con posterioridad a la conferencia de Copenhague, lo que generó descontento entre los países en desarrollo.

    El 5 de noviembre, la India, Bolivia y Bangladesh presentaron algunas enmiendas al documento oficioso 36 con el fin de reincorporar en el cuerpo del proyecto de texto los puntos trasladados al apéndice, según señaló Ajay Mathur, Director General de la Bureau of Energy Efficiency de la India. El 6 de noviembre se publicó el documento oficioso 47.

    El Grupo de los 77 y China también presentaron enmiendas al texto. Se agregaron el párrafo 9 bis en el documento 47, que incluía medidas específicas destinadas a eliminar los obstáculos para el desarrollo y la transferencia de tecnologías, y los párrafos 10 bis, 10 bis 1, 10 bis 2 y 10 bis 3, que recuperaban parte del texto del documento con el que se iniciaron las conversaciones en Barcelona, a saber, el documento oficioso 29.

    Documento oficioso 47 disponible aquí [pdf en inglés]
    Documento oficioso 36 disponible aquí [pdf en inglés]

    Kunihiko Shimada, Presidente del grupo de contacto a cargo de elaborar medidas más eficaces para el desarrollo y la transferencia de tecnologías y Coordinador de Políticas para el Ministerio de Medio Ambiente del Japón, dijo a Intellectual Property Watch que los derechos de PI revisten importancia para todos en diferentes contextos.

    Los países desarrollados necesitan una sólida protección de los derechos de PI como incentivos para la innovación, y los países en desarrollo consideran a tales derechos como un obstáculo clave para la transferencia de tecnologías y solicitan que los países desarrollados concedan más flexibilidades en materia de derechos de PI.

    “El grupo de la CMNUCC a cargo de las negociaciones en materia de tecnología debería procurar asistencia de la comunidad de expertos en derechos de PI, como la Organización Mundial de la Propiedad Intelectual o la Organización Mundial del Comercio”, afirmó. Ambos grupos estuvieron presentes en Barcelona.

    Los países europeos junto con los Estados Unidos y la mayoría del resto de los países desarrollados consideran que las cuestiones relativas a los derechos de PI no deben abordarse en las negociaciones sobre el cambio climático, según señalaron delegados de países desarrollados.

    Los derechos de PI vuelven a mencionarse en el grupo de contacto sobre mitigación.

    Tras la presión ejercida por los países en desarrollo el 5 de noviembre, se incorporó una mención a los derechos de PI en un nuevo documento oficioso, número 42 que reemplazó al documento oficioso 30, que versa sobre diversas estrategias destinadas a aumentar la rentabilidad de las medidas de mitigación y a promoverlas. Documento oficioso 42 disponible aquí [pdf en inglés]

    El texto del documento oficioso 42 es similar al incluido en el documento oficioso 47. En ambos documentos, se deliberará sobre los derechos de PI en Copenhague, dado que estos temas no se discutieron oficialmente en Barcelona.

    En una conferencia de prensa, el delegado de la India señaló que dicho país no estaba dispuesto a aceptar un acuerdo débil en Copenhague, en alusión al temor de los países en desarrollo de que los países desarrollados intenten impedir que el acuerdo adquiera un carácter jurídicamente vinculante y que prefieran uno de naturaleza políticamente vinculante.

    El delegado sostuvo que todavía puede alcanzarse un resultado favorable en Copenhague. “Aún no nos damos por vencidos”, dijo. El avance logrado es decepcionante pero las negociaciones son complejas y los países poseen importantes intereses económicos, agregó.

    La Alianza de los Pequeños Estados Insulares exigió que se llegara a un resultado jurídicamente vinculante en Copenhague e hizo hincapié en que el principal ingrediente era la voluntad política. “No contamos con la opción de la postergación”, sostuvo el representante.

    Según el Fondo Mundial para la Naturaleza (WWF), las reuniones de Barcelona constituyeron una “sesión de asuntos perdidos y encontrados” en la que los países desarrollados perdieron sus ambiciones y África halló sus fortalezas, en alusión al boicot mantenido por los países del Grupo Africano al comienzo de la semana en relación con el Protocolo de Kyoto.

    El representante del Grupo de los 77 y China manifestó que se había logrado poco progreso y que el problema principal residía en el nivel requerido de reducción de emisiones con el que los países desarrollados no quisieron comprometerse. En una reunión de información para la prensa, agregó que el Grupo necesitaba un compromiso justo en materia de tecnología, incluido el abordaje de los asuntos relacionados con los derechos de PI.

    La CMNUCC conserva sus esperanzas de que en Copenhague se alcance un sólido acuerdo climático, que requerirá una combinación de compromisos y avenencias de las partes a fin de lograr esta meta, sostuvo Yvo de Boer, Secretario Ejecutivo de la CMNUCC, en una conferencia de prensa.

    Además, agregó que la cuestión sobre el cambio climático nunca antes tuvo tal nivel de importancia en el orden del día de los líderes mundiales y esperó que en las negociaciones de Copenhague se saque partido de ello. Si ha de celebrarse un tratado, sus contenidos deberían negociarse en Copenhague. “Luego de Copenhague, las negociaciones deben transformarse en acciones”, concluyó.

    Traducido del inglés por Fernanda Nieto Femenia


    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.