28 Feb 2012: Intervention delivered by India at WTO TRIPS Council on IP Enforcement Trends noting concerns with ACTA and TPPA
This intervention was delivered by India at today’s WTO Council for TRIPS during discussions of agenda item “N” on IP Enforcement Trends. The statement raises India’s concerns with plurilateral agreements like ACTA and TPPA and their potential impacts on public health, international exhaustion, border measures and digital goods and internet freedom.
28 February 2012: WTO TRIPS Council discussions on Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA)
As reported previously, Australia, Canada, the European Union, Japan, Korea, Mexico, New Zealand, Singapore, Switzerland and the United States have requested the WTO TRIPS Council to hold a discussion on IP Enforcement Trends (ie, ACTA). Continue Reading
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
IIPA Special 301 complaints regarding unauthorized copying of textbooks and other educational materials
USTR asked to use trade pressure to curtail unauthorized copying of educational materials
Size Matters: PhRMA’s Special 301 picks for South America.
Every year, USTR publishes the names of countries that do not adequately protect intellectual property rights. (See /ustr/special301) . Among the classifications are the Priority Watch List (PWL) and the somewhat lower status Watch List (WL).
Total expenses vs reported expenditures on lobbying, six trade associations that lobby on IPR
President Obama claims to have kept “lobbyists” off the advisory boards for USTR. The Obama Administration relies upon the narrow legal definition of those persons who register to lobby the US Congress, which excludes expenditures to direct, supervise or support the lobbyists, and expenditures of many staff and consultants who are not fully engaged in lobbying the Congress. Expenditures to influence the executive branch (including USTR) has very little if any regulation, and are not counted as lobbying. Continue Reading
UPDATE: WIPO intergovernmental committee debates patents on life in relation to IP and genetic resources
18 January 2012
Chair of IGC 20, Ambassador Wayne McCook, Jamaica, and Wend Wendland, WIPO
Courtesy of Marc PerlmanUSPTO Holds Public Hearing on Genetic Diagnostic Testing
On February 16, 2012, the USPTO held a public hearing on genetic diagnostic testing, permitting stakeholders to present their views relating to DNA patents, exclusive licensing, patient health and genetic testing, particularly as they relate to secondary or confirmatory genetic diagnostic testing. Notes from the hearing and speaker statements are included below. KEI’s oral statement can be found here.
KEI Statement at USPTO Public Hearing on Genetic Diagnostic Testing
On February 16, 2012, the USPTO held a public hearing on genetic diagnostic testing, pursuant to a Congressional mandate that was part of the America Invents Act. This mandate directed the USPTO to evaluate several questions related to genetic diagnostic testing, particularly with regard to second opinion or confirmatory genetic testing. USPTO will deliver its final report to Congress in June. Notes from the public hearing are available in a separate blog post.
What we don’t know, and why, about incentives to stimulate biomedical R&D
This is an essay about strategic ignorance, as regards evidence relevant to policies that cost consumers and taxpayers billions of dollars.
The United States government grants 20 year patents on pharmaceutical drugs, and it also provides a growing number of other non-patent incentives and subsidies to stimulate R&D investments in new medicines. Are these incentives and subsidies necessary or cost effective? How would anyone know?
Here are some of the incentives we offer:
- Up to five year extensions of patents on pharmaceutical drugs.