FAO Head Says Livestock Diversity Is Crucial For Future Food Security On A Harsher Planet 27/01/2016 by Intellectual Property Watch 1 Comment FAO Director-General José Graziano da Silva writes: Our livestock is increasingly being raised indoors and fed on concentrate feed that is often imported. Intensive production of chickens, pigs and dairy cows is based on a few breeds worldwide. These developments are risky, as we and future generations are losing the potential to adapt livestock production systems to increasingly harsh conditions such as those associated with higher temperatures and shortages of nutritious feeds.
A Look At The Marrakesh Treaty Ratification In Brazil 14/01/2016 by Intellectual Property Watch 4 Comments The Marrakesh Treaty, first of its kind, will enter into force three months after the deposit of the instruments of ratification or accession by 20 eligible countries. So far, thirteen have done so. Brazil, which was one of the main proponents and negotiators, deposited its ratification of the treaty on December 11, 2015, after the yearlong internal legislative process. The key question we are trying to face here is how the ratification of this treaty may impact Brazilian copyright legislation and the interpretation of the limitations.
Opportunities And Challenges That The Internet Of Things Creates 13/01/2016 by Intellectual Property Watch 1 Comment Over the past few years, we’ve seen paramount change in the way we access the internet – it started with desktops and soon shifted to mobile devices. But the world hasn’t been waiting for long to see it grow into something huge. Internet intelligence is now knocking at the door of our homes, cities, and businesses – this is what you’ve heard of as the Internet of Things (IoT).
How To Manage Patent Costs With Quality Applications, Accurate Translations 13/01/2016 by Intellectual Property Watch Leave a Comment The number of patent applications filed worldwide continues to increase, up by 4.6 percent in 2014 for a total of nearly 2.7 million, according to the 2015 edition of the World Intellectual Property Indicators. The increasing number of patents filed worldwide demonstrates the strength of ongoing innovation and the value companies put on protecting their intellectual property where they wish to do business. The filing numbers would likely be even higher, and across more countries, if the filers were more prepared for the costs associated with filing patents.
New Patent Search Capability For Chemical Compounds In Progress At WIPO 11/12/2015 by Intellectual Property Watch 1 Comment The World Intellectual Property Organization is working on an extension to its patent search systems to include specific searches for chemical compounds. The system is expected to be operational by July 2016.
Colombia Asked To Declare Excessive Price For Cancer Drug Contrary To Public Interest, Grounds For Compulsory License 03/12/2015 by Intellectual Property Watch 11 Comments Colombia has a decision to make. A full year has passed from the November 24, 2014 request by iFarma, Misión Salud and CIMUN for a declaration of the public interest regarding the cancer drug imatinib (marketed by Novartis as Gleevec/Glivec), the first step on the path toward a compulsory license in Colombia. Thus far, Colombia’s Ministry of Health and Social Protection has failed to act one way or another, leaving patients in limbo and the government at the mercy of a Swiss pharmaceutical giant that reported revenue of over $57.9 Billion USD in 2013, write James Love and Andrew S. Goldman.
Impact Of The TPP On The Pharma Industry 02/12/2015 by Intellectual Property Watch Leave a Comment The final text of the Trans-Pacific Partnership confirms beyond doubt the apprehensions expressed by civil society, academia and the generic industry about new barriers to access to medicines. The TPP has done away with several flexibilities provided under the TRIPS Agreement and the Doha Declaration on Public Health. Though the text mentions “nothing in this [IPR] Chapter limits a Party’s rights and obligations under Article 31 of the TRIPS Agreement,” the TPP Investment Chapter overrides these flexibilities, says D G Shah.
Flexibility In The TPP Statutory Damages Provision 01/12/2015 by Intellectual Property Watch 2 Comments Jonathan Band writes: During the negotiation of the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement, many concerns were voiced about how TPP would mandate adoption of US-style statutory damages. Under the US Copyright Act, a court can award damages of up to $30,000 per work infringed, which can be ratcheted up to $150,000 per work infringed in cases of willful infringement. Scholars have found that statutory damages in the US have discouraged investment in innovative technologies while incentivizing the emergence of copyright trolls. So how bad is the statutory damages provision in the final TPP agreement?
TPP Article 14.17 & Free Software: No Harm, No Foul 24/11/2015 by Intellectual Property Watch Leave a Comment [Software Freedom Law Center, Link (CC-BY-SA)] The first official public release of the text of the Trans-Pacific Partnership Trade Agreement (known universally as the TPP) on November 5, 2015 generated much heated speculation. The ideal of “open agreements, openly arrived at” remains regrettably unattainable in international affairs. “Fast track” trade negotiating authority in the US means that parties excluded from the negotiating process have a short time in which to mobilize for or against the treaty as a whole in light of their specific concerns. The premium on speed of response to a very lengthy and complex legal document—and the presence of intense public attention—guarantees that hasty judgment and occasional self-promotion will always outrun professional analysis; this is one of the inherent defects of secret legislation.
A User-Focused Commentary On The TPP ISP Safe Harbors 24/11/2015 by Intellectual Property Watch 2 Comments Annemarie Bridy writes: Section J of the Trans-Pacific Partnership’s IP chapter, on ISP safe harbors, looks a lot like Section 512 of the DMCA [US Digital Millennium Copyright Act], but the two frameworks differ in some important respects that could negatively impact the global environment for user speech online. This post offers a comparison of Section J and Section 512 with a focus on the rights of users and the status of user expression in the TPP’s intermediary safe harbor provisions.