WTO TRIPS Council (February 2014) – Ecuador’s interventions on the contribution of IP to facilitate the transfer of green tech

On Tuesday, 25 February 2014, Ecuador delivered the following two interventions at the WTO TRIPS Council on agenda item 11 (Contribution of Intellectual Property to Facilitate the Transfer of Environmentally Rational Technology). The antecedent to this discussion item is a paper that Ecuador circulated to the TRIPS Council in February 2013 (IP/C/W/585) on the relationship between intellectual property and the transfer of environmentally sound technology. It’s core ask was a Bali Ministerial Declaration on IP and environmentally sound technologies:

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

WTO TRIPS Council (February 2014) – India’s intervention on Non-Violation and Situation Complaints

For non-trade specialists, a ‘non-violation complaint’ at the WTO effectively amounts to a complaint that a country has violated the spirit but not the letter of trade law. While countries can launch such disputes at the WTO for trade in goods and services, there is a moratorium on doing so over intellectual property rights. Continue Reading

Uncategorized

WTO TRIPS Council (February 2014) – India’s intervention on IP and Innovation: University Technology Partnerships

On Tuesday, 25 February 2014, India delivered the following intervention at the WTO TRIPS Council on agenda item 12 (IP and Innovation: University Technology Partnerships). The United States of America tabled this standalone agenda item on University Technology Partnerships in the context of IP and Innovation.

Agenda 12 : IP and Innovation: University Technology Partnerships

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

2014, PhRMA discussion of Brazil

PhRMA’s submission (7 February 2014, USTR-2013-0040) to USTR’s 2014 Special 301 Review requested USTR to have “Brazil remain on the Priority Watch List for the 2014 Special 301 Report” expressing concerns over Brazilian patentability standards, regulatory data protection, patent term adjustment for mailbox patents and government price controls and taxation. Continue Reading

2014, NAM discussion of Brazil

The National Association of Manufacturers’s (NAM) submission (7 February 2014, USTR-2013-0040) to USTR’s 2014 Special 301 Review expressed concerns with aspects of Brazilian IPR policy including patent backlogs, ANVISA’s role in reviewing patents for pharmaceuticals, protection of test data for pharmaceuticals and Brazil’s role in WIPO advancing the use of compulsory licensing and requesting WIPO to develop a manual on the use of exceptions and limitations to the rights conferred by patents.

Continue Reading

Public Comments by Brian Pomper-Executive Director of the Innovation Alliance and Alliance for Fair Trade with India

Brian Arthur Pomper is a partner at the law firm of Akin Gump.

Mr. Pomper formerly served as chief international trade counsel to Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-MT). In that role, he was responsible for advising Chairman Baucus and other members of the Senate Finance Committee on all aspects of the Committee’s international trade and economic agenda.

Continue Reading

2014, U.S. Chamber of Commerce (Global Intellectual Property Center) discussion of South Africa

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s (Global Intellectual Property Center) submission (7 February 2014, USTR-2013-0040) to USTR’s 2014 Special 301 expressed the following concerns with South Africa’s draft National Policy on Intellectual Property. The Chamber’s concerns include proposed changes in patentability guidelines and the possible introduction of a robust compulsory licensing framework. The Chamber requested USTR to push South Africa to adopt a “modern term of protection for copyright” (life plus 70).

South Africa

Patents

Continue Reading