Archive for the ‘Trade’ Category
IP Australia has issued a consultation paper on implementing the TRIPS protocol.
The TRIPS protocol is the modification (or is that clarification?) of TRIPS obligations to improve the availability of “crisis” pharmaceuticals in least developed and developing countries. From the discussion paper:
Read the paper here (pdf).
Submissions due by 4 June 2010.
Michael Geist has a link to the leaked EU comments on the chapter for third party liability on the internet – being drafted by the USA.
The Guardian has weighed into the debate.
Selected microblog posts from the past week:
- RT @VogeleLaw: Found: Mary Beth Peter’s testimony (via @cathygellis – thanks!) http://bit.ly/Cijau #gbs_hearing [US Copyright Register opposes Google Book Settlement]
- Google Book in the EU? http://ff.im/-7OYfA
- RT @MegLG: A Billion Dollar Test of the DMCA Safe Harbors in Viacom v YouTube http://ow.ly/om66 via Cyberlaw Cases
- RT @michaelgeist: Microsoft wins stay of injunction on Word. Case arises from patent claim by Toronto’s i4i.http://bit.ly/oDmLU
- IP Think Tank Blog looks at i4i v Microsofthttp://ff.im/-7zfKp
- AAR on UWA v Gray – Universities and their employees: who owns developed IP? http://ff.im/-7RmgI
- Hannahland: Ph D candidate on UWA v Gray http://ff.im/-7WcoR
- RT @filemot: Useful note on Bose case and reckless US trademark intent to use statements by foreignershttp://tr.im/yb7L
- Even the Australian doesn’t believe the Govt’s attempt to filter the web (RT @nicsuzor) http://ff.im/-7zg5v
- RT @IPThinkTank: ACTA 5th negotiation roundhttp://short.to/pqtt
- SPICY IP: WTO rules in favour of Brazil, allows for cross retaliation against U.S. IPRs http://ff.im/-7KvwX
Patently-O considers a new Federal Circuit case in the USA dealing with the scope of s 271(e)(1) – a defence to infringement by working the patent to prepare regulatory data.
It would appear that the defence should now apply in proceedings against imports before the ITC.
Patents Act 1990 (Cth) s 119A (introduced with effect from 25 October 2006 following ACIP’s report) permits such activity where the working:
- is for purposes of having a therapeutic pharmaceutical product included in the Australian Register of Therapeutic Goods;
- or a similar foreign regulatory approval.
Although working for a foreign regulatory approval may take place only in the supplementary protection period (see e.g. ACIP on experimental use p. 44 (pdf)).
See now Alphapharm Pty Ltd v H Lundbeck A/S  FCA 559 at ff.
IP Australia is considering extending this: see paragraphs 9 and 17 of IP Australia’s Consultation Paper on experimental use (pdf) [NOTE: submissions should be in by 8 May 2009. Submissions on the Getting the Balance Right paper (pdf) are also due by then.]
I’m not quite sure why, but the blogosphere is increasingly chattering again about relaxing the rules against infringing a patent by making the protected product (esp. a pharmaceutical) for export:
IP’s What’s Up reviews the TRIPS status including the DOHA declaration and its rather tentative take up.
Australia has entered into Free Trade Agreements (1) with NZ and ASEAN and (2) with Chile.
ASEAN as a bloc is apparently our largest trading partner.
Chapter 13 deals with Intellectual Property. Various fact sheets, e.g. Pharmaceuticals, deal with our exports or imports thereto.
Hey, our 12 month grace period for filing patents will work in Chile, see art. 17.22! Can’t spot a corresponding provision in the AANZFTA? Also, to facilitate domain name dispute resolution, Chile has agreed to adopt an UDRP-style dispute resolution process for its cc.TLD (assuming it doesn’t already have one, of course).
The Australian Government has announced that it will be fastracking new consumer laws protecting against unfair contracts, with the aim of the law being introduced in June 2009 and in force by January 2010.
David Jacobson has a detailed report with links to consultation papers etc. here.
Stephen King gets exercised about the economics here.