- Knowledge Ecology International Leaks TPP Text on Intellectual Property
- Seminars on Drug Pricing: Part 3, Aidan Hollis
- Consensus achieved at WIPO Standing Committee on the Law of Patents (SCP) on Future Work Program
- WIPO SCP22: Language on GRULAC proposal to revise 1979 WIPO Model Law for Developing Countries on Inventions
- WIPO SCP22: Informal Non-Paper by Chair on Future Work (30 July 2015, 20:30 version)
- WIPO SCP 22: Written Statement of Knowledge Ecology International on Patents and Health
- SCP22: Australian response to GRULAC proposal to revise 1979 WIPO Model Law for Developing Countries on Inventions
- WIPO SCP22: KEI statement on GRULAC proposal (SCP/22/5)
- SCP22: India’s Intervention on inventive step (SCP/22/3)
- SCP22: Opening statement of the Group of Latin American and Caribbean Countries
In May 2010 the WIPO Secretariat published a paper entitled "WIPO Scoping Study on Copyright and Related Rights and the Public Domain" prepared by Professor Séverine Dusollier (Professor, University of Namur, Belgium). This study was produced as an output of the WIPO Committee on Development and Intellectual Property's (CDIP) thematic project on intellectual property and the public domain which is predicated upon Recommendations 16 and 20 of the Development Agenda.
KEI has obtained a copy of the August 25, 2010 version of the ACTA consolidated negotiating text. This is Part 1 of our initial notes on the document.
(Part 2 is available here.)
(revised September 9, 2010)
The preamble in the August, 25, 2010 text includes 10 paragraphs, of which only 3 do not have brackets.
ACTA negotiating text: the August 25, 2010 version, incorporating changes from Washington, DC negotiationsSubmitted by Malini Aisola on 5. September 2010 - 9:07
The negotiating text emerging from 10th round ACTA negotiations in Washington DC (August 16-20, 2010) was not shared with the public because the United States successfully opposed its release. The US was the only negotiating party to have taken this position on transparency.
We have obtained a copy of the August 25 consolidated text which reflects changes made during the DC round. Here is a TRANSCRIBED version of this document.
On August 10, 2010, KEI sent a letter to the President of Mexico expressing our concerns in the position of the Mexican government in the ACTA negotiations. KEI noted that the proposed ACTA text, if adopted, would require the adoption of new legal provisions that would compromise the public interest of Mexico. KEI asked the Mexican government to change some positions it had taken earlier in the negotiation, and to support the inclusion in the ACTA text of of new flexibilities and protections of the fundamental rights of its citizens.
The following are selected documents from the 1998 to 1999 WHO debate of the revised drug strategy.
- The January 1998 proposal for the Revised Drug Strategy (EB101.R24)
- May 27, 1998 Department of State cable: Revised Drug Strategy At W.H.O.: Atmospherics Of The Debate, And Recommended Plan Of Action.
- European Commission October 5, 1998 memorandum on the WHO Revised Drug Strategy negotiation
On Tuesday, August 17, 2010, USTR organized a lunch between ACTA negotiators and civil society NGOs. There was not much notice. We received our invite to the lunch last Thursday. Representatives from KEI, Public Citizen, Oxfam, Public Knowledge and the American University program on intellectual property attended the event.
Since the early ‘70s, European countries have adopted a comprehensive legal framework on personal data protection that aims to balance the free flow of information for market purposes with an adequate level of protection for the right of privacy.
USTR will host the next round of ACTA negotiations that will take place all of next week, August 16-20, in Washington DC. According to USTR yesterday, the negotiators "expect to cover all issues" and the agenda would be made available in a day or so.
Here is a proposed agenda that we have obtained from another source.
ANTI-COUNTERFEITING TRADE AGREEMENT (ACTA)
10th Round of Negotiations
August 16th-20th, 2010, Washington, DC
According to an informed source, USTR intimated that next week's ACTA meeting in Washington DC will be attended by all the negotiating parties and that discussions would include all issues under consideration in ACTA. We are still awaiting a response from USTR regarding the attendees, scope and purpose of the meeting but this new information seems to be indicative of nothing short of the next ACTA round.
Earlier, US government officials had informed that the an intersessional meeting would be held the week of 16 August in Washington DC.
WHO releases names of experts and advisor to the Emergency Committee concerning Influenza Pandemic (H1N1) 2009Submitted by thiru on 11. August 2010 - 2:09
WHO has released the 'List of Members of, and Advisor to, the International Health Regulations (2005) Emergency Committee concerning Influenza Pandemic (H1N1) 2009' at the following site: http://www.who.int/ihr/emerg_comm_members_2009/en/. Of the 15 members and one advisor, 6 had declaration of interests. On this matter, WHO had the following statement:
The following is an August 10, 2010 letter written by Alberto Cerda Silva, a Research Associate of Knowledge Ecology International, to Felipe Calderón Hinojosa, Presidente Constitucional de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos, regarding the position of the Mexican government in the ACTA negotiations.
Transparency, cost benefit analysis and de-linkage of cost of R&D from price of the products for Rare and Neglected Pediatric DiseasesSubmitted by James Love on 5. August 2010 - 7:07
On the topic of
NIH rejects Fabrazyme March-In Petition
- December 7, 2010. Press release from Fabry patients: DHHS denies patient’s march-in request to end Genzyme’s rationing of treatment for Fabry Disease citing that FDA rules block manufactures from supplying the drug in a timely manner.
- December 7, 2010. Statements by KEI and others on NIH rejection of Fabrazyme March-In Request
2 U.S.C. 170 - American Television and Radio Archives
(c) Liability for copyright infringement by Librarian or any employee of Librarian.