A Comparative Table of Brazilian Copyright Reform Draft Bills
[by Pedro Mizukami] The following note explains the contents of the table attached to the blog post: The WIPO translation was used for the current law (column 1). Except in a couple of passages, the text of the WIPO translation was transposed to that of the new proposals every time the draft language followed the current legislation. The translations for the four versions of the copyright reform draft bill here presented (columns 2-4) are only meant to roughly convey the substance of the proposals. While great care has been taken, the translations might in some cases be inadequate or insufficient. Please check the translations against the original text of each proposal, provided below in a separate table. Click here for more.
TPP Patent Requirements vs. NAFTA and the Domestic Laws of Canada and Mexico
[by Jimmy Koo] As Canada and Mexico prepare to enter the Trans Pacific Partnership negotiations, there is interest in how their intellectual property laws would need to change to adhere to the requirements found in the leaked text. The following is a brief comparison of 1) their patent and data protection laws to the leaked texts, and 2) a comparison of the TPP leaked text with NAFTA requirements. It shows that the TPP would require Canada and Mexico to alter their domestic laws to allow patents on more types of subject matter (ie – new uses in Mexico and method patents in Canada), and would require patent extensions beyond the 20 year limit in Canadian and Mexican law. Click here for more.
Green Parties in Australia, New Zealand, and Canada Criticize IP Provisions in the TPP
[Excerpt from Joint Statement] “We believe the TPPA is being used to sneak in measures to bind its member countries to extensive and harsh laws on Internet use that wouldn’t be acceptable at the domestic level – including harsher criminal penalties for minor, non-commercial copyright infringements, a ‘take-down and ask questions later’ approach to pages and content alleged to breach copyright, and the possibility of Internet providers having to disclose personal information to authorities without safeguards for privacy.” Click here for more.
UK Man Sentenced to Four Years in Prison for Website that Linked to Copyrighted Content
Anton Vickerman has become the first man in Great Britain to be sentenced to prison for owning a website that linked to content hosted elsewhere on the internet. His website, Surfthechannel.com, did not host infringing content, so Vickerman was not charged with infringement. Rather, he was charged with two counts of conspiracy to facilitate copyright infringement. His prosecution was pursued by the anti-piracy group Federation Against Copyright Theft (FACT), and Vickerman was found guilty in June. Click here for more.
Indian Supreme Court to Hear Novartis Case Against Section 3(d) of the Patents Act
The Indian Supreme Court will begin final arguments in Novartis’ challenge of Section 3(d) of the country’s patent law. In 2006, the Patent Office rejected Novartis’ patent application for the cancer drug imatinib mesylate (sold under the brand name Glivec), finding that the drug was a new salt formulation of a known drug, and therefore unpatentable under Indian Law. Section 3(d) of the Indian Patents Act specifies that patents cannot be granted for “the mere discovery of a new form of a known substance which does not result in the enhancement of the known efficacy of that substance…” Novartis has asked that court to endorse a broad interpretation of the word “efficacy” that would include its product. Click here for more.