Author: PIJIP

TPP Section-by-Section Analysis

PIJIP fellow Jimmy Koo has written a section-by-section analysis of the US-proposed intellectual property chapter of the the Trans Pacific Partnership. The document lists each article and compares it to US law, TRIPS, and/or other trade agreements where appropriate. Please send comments to jk3868a@student.american.edu. Click here for the...

Read More

Letter from Australian Trade Minister Craig Emerson – Releasing TPP Text Would Be “Problematic”

EXCERPT:   “…Your suggestion that draft negotiating text and position papers should be made public is understandable but problematic. First, this would only be possible if all parties agreed. Many negotiating parties would consider releasing the text as a breach of confidence.  Second, negotiating text really has no status until it is agreed by all parties. I am not convinced that exposing contested text, potentially including ambit claims, would assist informed public debate on the issues.” Click here for the full...

Read More

PIJIP and American University Center for Social Media Release Code of Best Practices in Fair Use for Poetry

PIJIP’s Peter Jaszi and the Center for Social Media’s Pat Aufderheide, co-facilitated by UC Berkeley’s Jennifer Urban and Poetry Foundation’s Kate Coles, have just released a Code of Best Practices in Fair Use for Poetry (PDF).  The code is a resource for the poetry community, to help poets formulate and defend their creative decisions to forego rights clearance in favor of fair use.  Creators like poets must be aware of and rely on fair use, so that their creative expressions are not always limited for fear of legal action by rights holders.  The code contains seven principles where the doctrine of fair use applies, and is a culmination of eight meetings with working groups of poets, editors, publishers, and experts in copyright law and new media.  It also provides a very useful explanation of the relevant portions of copyright and remarkably demystifies the fair use doctrine. This document joins the Center for Social Media and PIJIP’s other fair use best practices guides:  documentary filmmakers, media literacy teachers, online video creators, dance archivists, film scholars, communication scholars, creators of OpenCourseWare, with codes for research librarians and music samplers in progress, as...

Read More

ACTA December (Final) Draft – Section by Section Analysis

Download as a PDF Jimmy Koo, PIJIP Fellow January 28, 2010 Generally 1.        Each section of ACTA should be limited to copyrights and trademark rights. [1] See Kaminski Paper p. 28. 2.       The mandatory obligations of ACTA parties are too expansive and broad.[2] 3.       Definitions go beyond TRIPS. a.       TRIPS defines “counterfeit trademark goods” and “pirated copyright goods” as goods infringing “under the law of the country of importation”.  However, ACTA defines them as good infringing “under the law of the country in which the procedures . . . are invoked” thereby allowing in-transit countries “to seize goods that would be infringing under their laws, even if the goods are not infringing under the laws of the countries of import or export.”  This could give rise to “Dutch Seizure” cases, where goods are seized en route despite their legal status.[3] Chapter II – Section 1: General Obligations 1.       Art. 6.4 – the phrase “liability for acts” is unclear whether it’s referring to infringements or damages caused during enforcement or both.[4] Chapter II – Section 2: Civil Enforcement 1.       FN2 – exclusion of patents is not required but allowed under Section 2.  This language should read to require exclusion of patents like FN6. 2.       Art. 8.1 – Injunctions – “a third party over whom the relevant judicial authority exercises jurisdiction” is very broad.  It is unclear who “third party” is.[5]...

Read More