CCIA proposes alternative text for TPPA, but proposals do not address many problems in the text

The Computer & Communications Industry Association (CCIA) recently made proposals for what it considers to be necessary “to make the Internet work” in the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement. The proposals put forth either as additions or alternatives to some of what the US has tabled are, in general, a step in the right direction as they seek to improve copyright exceptions and limit liability. Continue Reading

Uncategorized

ACTA: US Intervention on IP Enforcement Trends at WTO Council for TRIPS (28 February 2012)

These are the interventions delivered by the United States of America on 28 February 2012 during WTO Council for TRIPS discussions on ACTA under “IP Enforcement Trends”.

N. IP ENFORCEMENT TRENDS

[U.S. First Intervention]

• We appreciate this opportunity to discuss enforcement of IP rights, and hopefully to dispel some misperceptions about IP enforcement in general and the ACTA in particular.

• Effective enforcement of intellectual property rights is critical to sustaining economic growth across all industries and globally.

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

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.

IP Enforcement Trends
(TRIPS council Feb 28, 2012)

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

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

Uncategorized