Do Pharmaceutical Firms Invest More Heavily in Countries with Data Exclusivity?

 Posted by on May 8, 2013  No Responses »
May 082013
 

me[Forthcoming paper, Summer 2013, Currents International Trade Law Journal]   Abstract:   Countries may choose various methods of data protection in order to comply with the TRIPS Agreement. Policymakers should consider the effects of data exclusivity on prices and investment relative to other types of data protection. The data presented here suggest there is no relationship between whether or not a country has data exclusivity, and the amount of investment in the country by the pharmaceutical industry. On the other hand, empirical evidence in previous papers has shown that data exclusivity does drive prices higher.

Full paper available on SSRN at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2259797

 

FacebookTwitterRedditStumbleUponWordPressTumblrBlogger PostEmailPrintFriendlyShare

Internet Activa: A webinar for digital activists

 Posted by on September 17, 2012  No Responses »
Sep 172012
 

“Digital rights and civil freedoms on the web, 12 basic lessons online” is the first online seminar, to be launched from September 2012 until February 2013. This webinar will give you the information, criteria and basic tools to understand key issues in our times. It will also give you  a glimpse of similar experiences in Latin America and will connect you with other fellow activists in the defense of an Open, Participative and Free Web. Continue reading »

FacebookTwitterRedditStumbleUponWordPressTumblrBlogger PostEmailPrintFriendlyShare

Letter from Profs. Peter Jaszi, Michael Carroll, and Sean Flynn to USTR Ron Kirk on Limitations and Exceptions to Copyright in the TPP

 Posted by on September 8, 2012  No Responses »
Sep 082012
 

Dear Ambassador Kirk:

We appreciate having had the opportunity to meet recently with members of the Administration regarding the position the United States has taken concerning limitations and exceptions in copyright law as part of the Intellectual Property chapter of the proposed Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP).  We write to follow up by expressing our views on language the United States could propose that we believe would help it answer some of the criticisms that the U.S. position is insufficiently attentive to the public interest.

Click here for the full letter

FacebookTwitterRedditStumbleUponWordPressTumblrBlogger PostEmailPrintFriendlyShare

One Step Ahead Two Steps Back: Reverse Engineering 2nd Draft for 3rd Revision of the Chinese Copyright Law

 Posted by on July 16, 2012  No Responses »
Jul 162012
 

PIJIP Research Paper no. 2012-09

Author: Hong Xue

Abstract: On July 6, 2012, the National Copyright Administration of China released the 2nd Draft of the 3rd Revision of the copyright law, in which 81 provisions were changed from the 1st Draft. It does contain a few improvements, but it contains more compromises and even steps backward under the pressure of interest groups. Continue reading »

FacebookTwitterRedditStumbleUponWordPressTumblrBlogger PostEmailPrintFriendlyShare

ACTA Rejected by the European Parliament: is TPP next?

 Posted by on July 4, 2012  1 Response »
Jul 042012
 

The European Parliament overwhelmingly rejected the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement today, 478-39. The rejection issued a massive blow to the prospects of the agreement itself, as well as to the larger international intellectual property agenda of the United States, now playing out in the ongoing Trans-Pacific Partnership Negotiation in San Diego, California this week. Continue reading »

FacebookTwitterRedditStumbleUponWordPressTumblrBlogger PostEmailPrintFriendlyShare

Intellectual Property, Innovation and Growth (presentation at TPP negotiation side event)

 Posted by on May 11, 2012  No Responses »
May 112012
 

Yesterday I gave a presentation on IPRs, technology and growth at the Dallas round of TPP negotiations.  The following blog is based on my presentation.  The slides I used are here.

Policymakers and US industry groups have been arguing that TRIPS-Plus intellectual property rights will drive growth and innovation in all of the countries involved in the TPP negotiations.  They often refer to studies of how IPRs work in the U.S., and assume that IPRs will have the same effects in other countries.  Of course, the U.S. has characteristics that are conductive to IPR-led growth, such as a large public R&D base and a competitive advantages in IP-intensive industries.  Continue reading »

FacebookTwitterRedditStumbleUponWordPressTumblrBlogger PostEmailPrintFriendlyShare

The Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement and Criminal Enforcement of Intellectual Property: What Consequences for the European Union?

 Posted by on April 26, 2012  No Responses »
Apr 262012
 

Abstract: The Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) and the secrecy of its negotiation process have given rise to widespread speculation on the content and the objectives of the Agreement, leading to the development of considerable mistrust among the general public. This article concentrates on one of the most problematic aspects of the Agreement: the provisions on criminal enforcement. It will first show why criminal enforcement of intellectual property is generally a problematic issue, especially in the European Union, and then briefly try to demonstrate why ACTA is not the right answer in this regard, since criminal enforcement provisions clearly need a differentiated approach, an approach which is not reflected in the Agreement.

Click here for the full paper.

FacebookTwitterRedditStumbleUponWordPressTumblrBlogger PostEmailPrintFriendlyShare

The U.S. Trade Representative’s (USTR’s) Democracy Problem

 Posted by on April 26, 2012  No Responses »
Apr 262012
 

Abstract: This paper explores why the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) seems so shocked by current demands for what seem like basic democratic elements of transparency and public involvement. I summarize the current state of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) and what it contains. ACTA is part of a larger trend of international lawmaking in the United States, a shift from Article II treaties to executive agreements. ACTA is also part of a longstanding trend of coziness between industry groups and government representatives within IP policy-making. Trade negotiations made through the executive branch are particularly subject to industry capture, and that industry capture is particularly problematic when it is located in an agency of the government that does not envision itself as publicly accountable. Continue reading »

FacebookTwitterRedditStumbleUponWordPressTumblrBlogger PostEmailPrintFriendlyShare

PIJIP Res. Paper: A Pragmatic Approach to Intellectual Property and Development – A Case Study of the Jordanian Copyright Law in the Internet Age

 Posted by on April 23, 2012  No Responses »
Apr 232012
 

(CC-BY-2.0, by Joi - goo.gl/IApsl)

PIJIP Research Paper no. 2012-07

Author: Rami Olwan

Abstract: On October 4, 2004, Brazil and Argentina requested that WIPO adopt a development-oriented approach to IP and to reconsider its work in relation to developing countries. In October, 2007, WIPO member States adopted a historic decision for the benefit of developing countries, to establish a WIPO Development Agenda. Although there have been several studies related to IP and development that call for IP laws in developing countries to be development-friendly, there is little research that attempts to provide developing countries with practical measures to achieve that goal. Continue reading »

FacebookTwitterRedditStumbleUponWordPressTumblrBlogger PostEmailPrintFriendlyShare

Limitations and Exceptions to Copyright in China

 Posted by on April 19, 2012  No Responses »
Apr 192012
 

This overview on copyright flexibilities in China consists of two parts:  first, answers to a questionnaire on the state of copyright law and second, a table organizing the limitations and exceptions to copyright in China’s laws. The first part includes an analysis of copyright flexibilities and the current political context of copyright provided by Hong Xue.  The questionnaire was given to participants at a meeting on Limitations and Exceptions to Copyright hosted by IViR and PIJIP last December.  The authors reviewed the answers before this document was uploaded.  The second part was compiled by PIJIP fellow Marcela Palacio Puerta. The compilation is part of a larger project to map flexibilities in copyright law, and input is appreciated. Please send comments, corrections, or suggestions to pijip@wcl.american.edu. Continue reading »

FacebookTwitterRedditStumbleUponWordPressTumblrBlogger PostEmailPrintFriendlyShare

U.S. Decreases Stakeholder Process for TPP

 Posted by on April 5, 2012  No Responses »
Apr 052012
 

Stakeholder registering for the Dallas round of TPP negotiators have been informed that the conference style presentation format supported at all previous rounds has been disbanded and in place stakeholders will be given options of setting up “tables” to pass out information to browsing delegates.

Carol Guthrie, a public affairs official at USTR, explained in email correspondence: “The format for these more direct discussions will take the place of the conference-style format,  to enable more valuable exchanges at this stage.   The United States discussed this format with all our TPP counterparts, considering that at this stage in the talks,  individual discussions with interested stakeholders rather than general presentations would yield more valuable input for negotiators.” Continue reading »

FacebookTwitterRedditStumbleUponWordPressTumblrBlogger PostEmailPrintFriendlyShare

TPP vs. ACTA – Line by Line

 Posted by on March 27, 2012  2 Responses »
Mar 272012
 

As the TPP heads for its next intersessional meeting on IP provisions in April, public concern about the agreement has been growing, often tied to the previous public outcry over SOPA/PIPA and ACTA. The enforcement provisions in the IP section of the TPP have been described as “ACTA-plus,” but to what extent is the TPP an ACTA clone? And how far beyond ACTA does the TPP go? To answer these questions, PIJIP asked me to prepare a comprehensive comparison of the copyright enforcement provisions in the U.S. proposal for an TPP Chapter on IP with those in ACTA. Continue reading »

FacebookTwitterRedditStumbleUponWordPressTumblrBlogger PostEmailPrintFriendlyShare
 Older Entries