James Love's blog

Six recent secret ACTA documents

European generic drug companies ask EU Parliament to remove patents from ACTA

The European Generics Association has written to the European Parliament asking that patents be removed from the Anti-Counterfeiting Agreement. A PDF copy of their letter is here. The text in html follows:

MEP Mr. Gianluca Susta
INTA Committee
European Parliament
1049 Bruxelles- Belgium

Brussels, 5th of November 2010

Ref. EGA comments to the consolidated text on ACTA that reflects changes made during the

September 2010 Tokyo round1.

Dear Mr. Susta,

The 2010 US elections

This was originally published in the Huffington Post here.
------------

USTR positions in China WTO TRIPS dispute at odds with talking points on ACTA flexibility

Use of Article 1.1 of the TRIPS in the US/China WTO dispute over the enforcement of intellectual property rights

USTR claims that Article 1.2.1 of ACTA provides the flexibility to overlook inconsistencies between US law and ACTA. Below is the text from both Article 1.2.1 of ACTA, and Article 1.1 of TRIPS:

ACTA ARTICLE 1.2: NATURE AND SCOPE OF OBLIGATIONS

Michèle Rivasi asks question about ACTA and Access to Medicine

225px-michel-rivasi.jpg Michèle Rivasi, a Member of the European Parliament, representing South East France for The Greens, has asked the European Commission: "Given the possible impacts of the inclusion of patents the agreement on access to medicines and on innovation, would the Commission consider accepting the exclusion of patents from the agreement as proposed by a number of ACTA negotiating parties?" The full text of her question follows:

Françoise Castex, French Socialist MEP, asks about USTR assertions that ACTA does not require changes in US law

francoisecastex2.jpg As David Hammerstein of TACD has also blogged about here, Françoise Castex, a French Socialist MEP, has submitted this priority question about ACTA to the European Commission, asking the Commission to respond to the assertions by the USTR that ACTA wo

KEI Letter to the European Parliament regarding ACTA, October 25, 2010

(A PDF version of this is available here.)

Knowledge Ecology International

October 25, 2010

Letter to the European Parliament regarding ACTA

USTR's implausible claim that ACTA Article 1.2 is an all purpose loophole, and the ramifications if true

The October 2010 version of the ACTA text is inconsistent with several areas of U.S. law, and proposals for new laws in the areas of the reform of patent damages and access to orphaned copyrighted works. In particular, the obligations in the ACTA text do not incorporate many of the areas of limitations and exceptions to remedies found in U.S. law, and in the statutes of some other countries.

Statement of the Holy See at 48th WIPO General Assembly

48th Series of Meetings of the World Intellectual Property Organization’s General Assemblies

Statement by H.E. Archbishop Silvano M. Tomasi, Permanent Representative of the Holy See to the United Nations and Other International Organizations in Geneva

at the 48th Series of Meetings of the World Intellectual Property Organization’s General Assemblies

Geneva, 21 September 2010

Mr. President,

Access to Orphan Works, and ACTA provisions on damages

Access to Orphan Works, and ACTA provisions on damages
KEI Policy Brief 2010: 1
20 October 2010

Introduction

Copyright is a term that in the United States describes the laws that regulate the use and distribution of "original works of authorship." The types of activities and expressions protected by copyright have expanded over the years, particularly due to technology, but also due to the lobbying by various interested parties. The current systems of registration of copyrighted works in the United includes the following catagories:

Senators Sanders and Brown write to Kappos at USPTO, ask if ACTA is consistent with US law

sanders_brown.jpg
Senators Bernie Sanders and Sherrod Brown

On October 19, 2010, Senators Bernard Sanders (I-VT) and Sherrod Brown (D-OH) have written to David Kappos, the Director of the USPTO, asking for an assessment of conflicts between the October 2010 ACTA text, and U.S. law.

Areas where the Oct 2, 2010 ACTA text is inconsistent with U.S. law

Note: On October 8, 2010, Senator Wyden asked the American Law Division of the Congressional Research Service of the Library of Congress undertake and provide to Congress:

Senator Wyden asks for legal review of ACTA

Senator Ron WydenNoting the ACTA is being negotiated as an "executive agreement" because "it is not intended to impact U.S. law, but that "some experts outside of government are raising concerns that the ACTA text is contrary to U.S. law and its application or would present a barrier to changes in U.S.

Senator Sanders' summary of Ethical Pathway Act of 2010 – S. 3921

The following is a summary of S. 3921, 111th Congress, the Ethical Pathway Act of 2010, provided by the Office of Senator Sanders, plus an attachment of Article 20 and 21 f the Declaration of Helsinki on Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects.

The October 2, 2010 version of the ACTA text

The October 2, 2010 version of the ACTA text is now available. A copy is here.

See also: Areas where the Oct 2, 2010 ACTA text is inconsistent with U.S. law

Quick look

(revised 10:17 am, October 7, 2010)

Syndicate content