KEI submission to WIPO patent committee commenting on the US proposal on patents and health
KEI submission to the WIPO Standing Committee on the Law of Patents (SCP) on Patents and Health
28 February 2012
Search Results for: injunction
28 February 2012: Intervention delivered by Ecuador @ WTO TRIPS Council raising concerns with ACTA
According to informed sources, the delegation of Ecuador delivered the following statement to the WTO Council for TRIPS on Tuesday, 28 February 2012 raising concerns that the damages section found under Article 9 of ACTA could potentially chill the flexibilities found under Article 44 of the TRIPS Agreement which sets out the WTO rules on injunctions.
CONSEJO DE LOS ADPIC
28-29 DE FEBRERO DE 2012
PUNTO N. DE LA AGENDA
INTERVENCIÓN DEL ECUADORSeñor Presidente,
What’s (still) wrong with ACTA, and why governments should reject the illegitimate agreement
This is a blog about the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA). More information is available here: /acta
ACTA is an attempt to bypass multilateral institutions
Damages for infringement
United States
- Text of various US FTA Agreements on standards for damages for infringements.
- US Statutes
2012: KEI asks Senator Leahy (D-VT) to demand greater transparency in the TPPA
On January 26, 2012, KEI sent a letter to Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT), Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, calling for greater transparency in the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPPA). The letter highlights the fact that the general public is kept in the dark regarding negotiating positions and the actual text while “cleared advisers” and corporate lobbyists have unequal access to information. It calls for Senator Leahy to urge the Obama Administration to release the negotiating text in order to allow full and effective public participation in our democratic society.
WTO TRIPS Council: India raises concerns on ACTA and TPPA on discussion of “Trends in the Enforcement of IPRs”
On 25 October 2011, India delivered the following intervention at the WTO TRIPS Council raising concerns on ACTA and the TPPA during discussions of “Trends in the Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights”. On ACTA, India voiced concerns on the scope of ACTA’s civil enforcement measures, border measures potential role in the seizure of generic medicines, third party liability, damages and also raised systemic issues such as how WTO MFN obligations would affect WTO members who are not ACTA parties,
WTO TRIPS Council: India questions the United States on eBay v. MercExchange precedent as alternative to Paragraph 6 mechanism
On 25 October 2011, the WTO TRIPS Council held its annual review of the Paragraph 6 System. The following are extracts from the intervention of India. Note that under “Any alternatives to the use of Paragraph 6 System to achieve the objective of access to medicines” India asked the United States to shed light on state practice in the US following the US Supreme Court’s eBay versus MercExchange ruling (/content/view/174/1). Continue Reading
KEI comment on US signing of ACTA
Today USTR was pointing to four documents to explain the U.S. decision to sign the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement. While it was not surprising that the United States signed the agreement, KEI was disappointed that the statements did not address the issue of the inconsistencies between US law and the ACTA, or make any commitments that the ACTA Committee would operate in an open, transparent and inclusive manner.
These are the USTR documents:
The Johnson & Johnson Acuvue Compulsory License
In April of 2010, District Judge Timothy J. Corrigan (M.D Florida, Jacksonville division) declined to grant a permanent injunction following a finding that the Johnson & Johnson’s ACUVUE®OASYS contact lens product infringed patents owned by CIBA Vision Corporation, providing another example of, in effect, a judicial compulsory license following the 2006 eBay v. MercExchange case; the judge wrote:
The CoreValve compulsory license on patent to treat aortic stenosis
On February 7, 2011, a federal judge in Delaware rejected a request for an injunction to prevent the continued infringement of United States Patent No. Continue Reading