Aug 152012
 

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 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.

This is a working draft.  Please send comments or feedback to jimmy.koo84@gmail.com  [ed.] Continue reading »

FacebookTwitterRedditStumbleUponWordPressTumblrBlogger PostEmailPrintFriendly
Jun 062012
 

This brief article will discuss the March 17, 2008 RIAA Suggestions for the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA)[1] and will pinpoint the Suggestions that did not make it into the final draft of ACTA, but are making a ‘come-back’ through the U.S.-proposed chapter on intellectual property of the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP).  Although ACTA negotiations began in 2008, the first leaked draft was not available until March of 2010 and most of the subsequent drafts were also leaked, and not officially published.[2] For the most part, the negotiating Parties, including the U.S. had “attempted to keep the ACTA negotiations in the proverbial ‘black box’.”[3] Despite this utmost secrecy from the public, it seemed clear that a select batch of industry groups were heavily influencing the U.S.’s negotiation stance.  One such group that seemed to have influenced the USTR is the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA).  On March 17, 2008, the RIAA submitted to the USTR a ‘wish-list’ of provisions that it wanted to be contained in ACTA.  Shortly thereafter, the text of the RIAA submission was leaked and became available online.[4] Continue reading »

FacebookTwitterRedditStumbleUponWordPressTumblrBlogger PostEmailPrintFriendly
May 242012
 

Recently, Inside U.S. Trade reported that Australia, New Zealand and Singapore have proposed replacing some elements of the U.S. proposed TPP chapter on IP with provisions from ACTA.   The table below compares the provisions from the two texts (as well as with TRIPS and the U.S.-Chile Free Trade Agreement). Overall, the comparative analysis shows that TPP contains a plethora of TRIPS-plus provisions as well as ACTA-plus and Chile FTA-plus provisions.

The chart is organized in the following order of categories:  General Provisions; Scope; Special Measures Relating to Enforcement in the Digital Environment; Technological Protection Measures; Criminal Enforcement; Provisional Measures; Civil and Administrative Procedures and Remedies; Special Requirements Related to Border Enforcement; Rights Management Provisions.

This table is the product of work by multiple PIJIP fellows, including myself, Carrie Ellen Sager, and Sophia Castillo.

Click here to download the table.

FacebookTwitterRedditStumbleUponWordPressTumblrBlogger PostEmailPrintFriendly