EU To Get Rid Of Big Pharma-Friendly SPCs18/10/2017 by Intellectual Property Watch 1 CommentExtended monopoly protection by the Regulation EC 469/2009 concerning the supplementary protection certificate (SPC) mechanism for medicinal products has led to spiralling prices in Europe for lifesaving medicines, while exhausting the national budgets and depriving patients of fair access to treatments. The EU Commission should repeal the SPCs and put in practice the recommendations signed on 8 September 2017 by thirty-three civil society organisations, in alignment with the final report of the UN High Level Panel on Access to Medicines, writes Daniele Dionisio.
JPO Issues First Decision To Register Sound Trademark Consisting Solely Of Sound Element16/10/2017 by Guest contributor for Intellectual Property Watch Leave a CommentOn 26 September, the Japan Patent Office (JPO) announced, for the first time ever, the grant of protection to three sound trademarks consisting solely of a sound element, writes Masaki Mikami
WIPO’s Program And Budget Stand-Off Highlights That Member States Must Act On WIPO’s Governance System09/10/2017 by Intellectual Property Watch Leave a CommentAs the WIPO Annual Assemblies draw to a close this week, governments face a dramatic stand-off over the organisation’s biennial Program and Budget. Unless a series of its demands regarding the organisation’s financing and treaty-making processes are met, the United States is refusing to approve the WIPO budget – a decision Member States normally take by consensus. While sparring among governments over the budget and content of a UN organisation’s programs is not unusual, the debate at WIPO this year highlight challenges at the heart of its governance system, writes Carolyn Deere.
Section 301: US Investigates Allegations Of Forced Technology Transfers To China08/10/2017 by Intellectual Property Watch 3 CommentsOn 18 August 2017, the Trump administration invoked Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 to launch an investigation into alleged Chinese violations of intellectual property rights (IPR). In response, China stated that the United States ‘disregards the rules of the WTO’ and that it will ‘take all proper measures to safeguard its legitimate rights’. Alongside investigations into steel and aluminium imports, the new Section 301 case holds the potential to escalate US–China trade tensions, write Zhiyao (Lucy) Lu and Gary Clyde Hufbauer.
Medicines Law & Policy Expert Wins Prescrire Prize For ‘Major Reference Work’ On Access To Medicines05/10/2017 by Guest contributor for Intellectual Property Watch Leave a CommentPARIS — La Revue Prescrire, a French journal for healthcare professionals, has chosen “Private Patents and Public Health” — a 2016 book written by Ellen ’t Hoen — as one of four winners of its 2017 Prescrire Prize Book Award. Calling it “a major reference work on access to medicines and the patent system,” Prescrire praised ’t Hoen’s book both for its extensive collection of data and examples as well as its readability. (Medicines Law & Policy contributor, Kaitlin Mara was the editor of the book).
Case Shows European Luxury Brands Must Be Popular In Japan To Be Protected There29/09/2017 by Guest contributor for Intellectual Property Watch Leave a CommentIn a recent decision, the Opposition Board of the Japan Patent Office dismissed an opposition filed by CFUB Sisley, a French producer of cosmetics and fragrances founded in 1976, against the word mark “SISLOY” written in a standard character. The case shows that the status of European luxury brand will not automatically enjoy broader scope of protection in Japan unless the brand obtains a high degree of popularity and reputation among Japanese consumers, writes Masaki Mikami.
In-N-Out vs. Smashburger: A Juicy US Burger Lawsuit Invokes Multiple Trademark Law Doctrines04/09/2017 by Guest contributor for Intellectual Property Watch 1 CommentIn a US burger battle, it appears that Smashburger may soon end up with a bad taste in its mouth if In-N-Out’s allegations in its latest trademark complaint against Smashburger are proven true.
Case Study – Building Effective IP Coverage Efficiently Within An International Engineering Conglomerate29/08/2017 by Guest contributor for Intellectual Property Watch Leave a CommentThis article describes how to build up an effective IP coverage for an international industrial conglomerate by defining the basic IP shield construction for all group companies, setting up IP generation programs and developing an IP focus while doing this efficiently by engaging the management into the IP decisions and managing the mix of internal and external IP service resources.
Did Monsanto Write Malawi’s Seed Policy?25/08/2017 by Intellectual Property Watch 1 CommentTim Wise writes: In late July, a short article was published in a Malawian newspaper: “Press Release on Organization of Seed Fairs.” Issued by the Ministry of Agriculture, Irrigation, and Water Development, in conjunction with the Seed Traders Association of Malawi, the short statement advised the public that “only quality certified seed suppliers registered with Government to produce and/or market seed should be allowed to display seed at such events.” The release was signed by Bright Kumwembe for the Agriculture Ministry.I received this news in the United States as I prepared a research trip to Malawi, and I was shocked. Malawi is in the final stages of a multi-year effort to reform its seed policy and laws, and the largest point of contention at this point is the failure of the draft policy to recognize and protect so-called “farmers’ rights” to save, exchange, and sell the seeds they grow on their farms.
Malaysia Inclusion In Gilead Voluntary Licence – A Product Of Compulsory Licence Pressure24/08/2017 by Intellectual Property Watch Leave a CommentGilead’s announcement today that they would include four middle-income countries (Malaysia, Thailand, Belarus, Ukraine) in their sofosbuvir voluntary licence was a welcome surprise, and will enable millions access to their highly effective, but exorbitantly priced, drug. The decision to include these countries, however, no doubt is a response to increasing pressure from within these countries to either issue a compulsory licence (CL) or a government use licence (GUL), invalidate the sofosbuvir patents, or block data exclusivity for the drug.
