Author: James Love

The January 2010 Guadalajara, Mexico, meeting on ACTA included an agenda item on transparency. I asked USTR if they could provide TACD with a briefing on transparency and other issues in the negotiation. The one hour briefing was held today. I can report nothing of what the USTR said at the meeting, other than they insisted it be off the record. TACD has asked for an on the record meeting, but that apparently will have to wait until after the New Zealand meetings are held the week of April 12. Continue Reading →

Senators Barrasso, Bingam and Enzi have proposed a prize fund for “competitive technology financial awards for carbon dioxide capture from media in which the concentration of carbon dioxide is dilute.” This bill is is now being proposed as an amendment to an energy bill that might see some action this year. A few things to highlight.

• First, the prize requires that:

“an applicant shall agree to vest the intellectual property of the applicant derived from the technology in 1 or more entities that are incorporated in the United States.”

Continue Reading →

Continue Reading →

Just in case anyone does not appreciate how difficult it will be to change the USTR direction on ACTA, note that today the USTR proudly put this letter on the USTR Blog:

http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/blog/2010/march/new-information-ustrgov/acta

(Maybe best to first skip down to see who signed it).

March 22, 2010

The Honorable Barack Obama
President of the United States
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20500

Continue Reading →

On March 5, 2010, KEI published documents received from a FOIA request, about a collaboration between the USPTO and Pfizer to hold workshops in India. On March 11, the USPTO responded with a statement of regret concerning the collaboration, which it termed a mistake.

The Business Standard of India has written an article about the USPTO/Pfizer collaboration here:

Continue Reading →

KEI has access to a recent draft of ACTA. Chapter One, Section B of the agreement provides for “General Definitions.” It is interesting that the term “counterfeits” does not have a general definition. The ten defined terms include:

• days
• intellectual property (See below)
• Council (ACTA Oversight Council)
• measure
• person (natural or juridical)
• right owner (includes federation or assicaitons that have legal standing or authoirty to assert rights)

Continue Reading →

KEI has access to yet undisclosed sections of the negotiating ACTA text. The text is organized in 6 chapters. The longest is Chapter 2 on “legal framework for enforcement of intellectual property rights.” The second longest is Chapter 5, on “Institutional Arrangements.” In ten pages of text, the ACTA negotiators have set out a plan to create a new institution to administer, implement and modify ACTA. Continue Reading →

(Updated March 17, 2010, 12pm).

KEI has learned that the European Union has proposed language in the ACTA negotiations to require criminal penalties for “inciting, aiding and abetting” certain offenses, including “at least in cases of willful trademark counterfeiting and copyright or related rights piracy on a commercial scale.”

The EU proposal is reported on a recent (but still secret) version of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement Consolidated Text, and reads as follows:

Continue Reading →

See update at the end. ———-

Continue Reading →

• March 10, 2010. In the Guardian: Ari Emanuel, the co-chief executive of William Morris Endeavor, the biggest Hollywood talent agency, was among several executives attending a meeting in Abu Dhabi, calling for governments to get tough on illegal downloading.
  

  Emanuel, the brother of US presidential adviser Rahm, said the industry was talking to the US government in a bid to introduce a “three strikes and you’re out” law to govern illegal downloading.
  Continue Reading →