Author: James Love

STATEMENT OF THE MINISTERS AND HEADS OF DELEGATION FOR THE TRANS-PACIFIC PARTNERSHIP COUNTRIES
December 10, 2013
Singapore

We, the Ministers and Heads of Delegation for Australia, Brunei Darussalam, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, the United States, and Vietnam, have just completed a four-day Ministerial meeting in Singapore where we have made substantial progress toward completing the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement.

Continue Reading →

Professor Joseph Stiglitz has written an open letter to the TPP negotiators, asking that they resist proposals to weaken consumer rights in intellectual property. The letter identifies 12 specific “grave risks” in the IP Chapter, and calls upon negotiators to publish the investor state dispute resolution text.

Continue Reading →

USTR recently asked KEI if there were areas in the IP Chapter where we approved of the positions taken by USTR, and the answer is, yes. Given how critical we have been about the text, I will mention a few here.

USTR now “supports a more flexible approach under which partners could retain reasonable patent pre-grant opposition procedures.” This is welcome, and useful.

Continue Reading →

In a word, MSF is disappointed.

Continue Reading →

On November 28, 2013, I wrote a blog about the problems in using the World Bank’s definition of high income, in the specifc context of a proposal by the United States to use this as a measure of which countries in the TPP should have lower standards for intellectual property rights on medical inventions. (See: https://www.keionline.org/node/1834).

Here a different metric is presented, based upon relative incomes, benchmarked against the five highest income countries in the TPP with a population of more than 1 million persons.

Continue Reading →

In a December 2, 2013 letter, Senator Orrin Hatch wrote to USTR’s Michael Froman, suggesting TPP exclude any countries that do not meet “high levels of ambition.” According to Hatch, these high ambitions include agreeing to 12 years of exclusive rights for IPR in biologic drug test data, and the elimination of barriers to cross border data flows (a privacy issue). A copy of the Hatch letter is attached below.

The timing of the Hatch letter is designed to pressure countries meeting in Singapore on December 7-10 in the TPP negotiation, on these two contentious issues.

Continue Reading →

I missed this news earlier. Here is a report from IP-Watch:

Continue Reading →

The United States has proposed that some (but no means all) IPR obligations involving medicines be modified for countries with incomes below the amount the World Bank defines as “high.” The threshold to be considered a high income country was $12,616 in per capita income for 2012, and is adjusted every year. In contrast, the US per capita income was $50,124 in 2012. (More data here)

Continue Reading →