The following is extracted from China’s intervention made at the WTO TRIPS Council meeting held from 26-27 October 2010; this reflects China’s position on ACTA.
On Wednesday, 27 October 2010, Canada delivered the three interventions to the WTO TRIPS Council related to the review of the Paragraph 6 system. The first intervention below details the Canadian experience using the Paragraph 6 system in the case of Apotex and Rwanda.CANADA Intervention: (1) Experience using the System (Apotex-Rwanda Case)
As we recall, the 2003 WTO Decision on TRIPS and Public Health was an intensely negotiated decision that garnered unanimous support from all WTO Members.
The following statement was delivered by Brazil at this week’s TRIPS Council.TRIPS Enforcement Trends/ACTA – TRIPS Council – Intervention by Brazil
According to press releases circulated in the first week of this month, the negotiating process of ACTA is virtually concluded.
A few points only would still remain open and those points would not prevent a final agreement from being reached soon, according to statements released by authorities from the countries participating in the ACTA negotiations.
On Wednesday, 27 October 2010, the WTO TRIPS Council held its annual review of the Paragraph 6 System. IP-Watch has a link to the detailed program of the annual review. This annual review of the Paragraph 6 system lasted till around 8 PM Geneva time. More details of this closed door meeting will be provided in due course. Continue Reading
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, 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:
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.
In advance of the 21st session of the WIPO Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights (SCCR 21), WIPO is holding a Global Meeting on Emerging Copyright Licensing Modalities on 4-5 November 2010 in Geneva which endeavors to facilitate ‘Access to Culture in the Digital Age’. The program for this Global Meeting can be found here: http://www.wipo.int/meetings/en/2010/wipo_cr_lic_ge_10/program.html.