DOCSLIB.ORG

English Intellectual Property Rights

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

IP/C/W/644/Rev.1/Add.5 19 October 2018 (18-6560) Page: 1/51 Council for Trade-Related Aspects of Original: English Intellectual Property Rights TECHNICAL COOPERATION ACTIVITIES: INFORMATION FROM OTHER INTERGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS WORLD INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ORGANIZATION (WIPO) Addendum At its meeting of 4-5 June 2018, the Council for TRIPS agreed to invite intergovernmental organization observers to the Council to update the information on their technical and financial cooperation programmes relating to the implementation of the TRIPS Agreement. The present document reproduces the information which has been received from World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) by means of a communication dated 12 October 20181. _______________ 1. This note has been prepared by the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), pursuant to the invitation of the Chair of the World Trade Organization (WTO) Council for TRIPS of 6 July 2018, to provide updated information on its technical, legal and financial cooperation programmes relevant to the implementation of the TRIPS Agreement for the meeting of the Council for TRIPS scheduled for 8 and 9 November 2018. 2. WIPO is committed to providing Member States with the necessary advice and assistance relating to the implementation of the TRIPS Agreement. In this respect, WIPO regularly responds to requests received from developing countries, least developed countries (LDCs) and countries in transition to provide such assistance. TRIPS-related legal assistance and technical cooperation activities and programmes fall within the framework of the provisions of the Agreement between WIPO and WTO and are complemented by two joint initiatives that were launched by the Directors General of the two Organizations in July 1998 and in June 2001, respectively. 3. For the period September 2017 to September 2018, WIPO has provided legal and technical assistance to Member States in support of their efforts in implementing obligations deriving from the TRIPS Agreement and within the context of WIPO's Results Framework. WIPO assisted countries mainly from developing and least developed countries in developing and implementing strategies and policies aimed at creating, protecting, managing and exploiting IP for economic, social and cultural development. WIPO also strengthened its assistance to help these countries in integrating IP into the overall national development and public policy in areas such as health, trade, education, research, technology transfer and competition policies, including advising countries on the flexibilities available under international IP treaties, and, in particular, the TRIPS Agreement. 4. The Annex provides a list of the relevant activities undertaken by WIPO in the period September 2017 to September 2018. _______________ 1 This communication refers to activities benefiting WIPO Member States and retains its original nomenclature. ANNEX1 WIPO SUBMISSION TO THE TRIPS COUNCIL ON TECHNICAL AND FINANCIAL COOPERATION RELATED TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TRIPS AGREEMENT DURING THE PERIOD SEPTEMBER 2017 TO SEPTEMBER 2018 Country Activity Title Activity Year Start Date End Date City IP Field Albania Administration of Collective Management of 2017 12/11/2017 12/11/2017 Tirana Collective Copyright and Related Management Albania Subregional Roundtable on Copyright and 2018 03/06/2018 03/07/2018 Tirana Copyright Related Rights: Marrakesh and Beijing Treaties Algeria Study Visit to the Algerian Copyright Office 2017 16/10/2017 18/10/2017 Algiers Copyright (ONDA) for 2 Officials from Benin and Mali IP/C/W/644/Rev.1/Add.5 Algeria National Office of Copyright and Related Rights 2017 11/05/2017 11/09/2017 Algiers Copyright of Algeria (ONDA) Algeria PCT Workshop and ePCT Training for TISC 2017 12/12/2017 15/12/2017 Oran Patents - 2 Network Staff and University Users - Algeria Atelier sur l'Etablissement des centres d'appui à 2017 12/12/2017 15/12/2017 Oran Trademarks, la technologie et à l'innovation (CATI) pour la Geographical communauté universitaire algérienne et le Indications réseau des CATI, Université d'Oran, Algérie Algeria National PCT Workshop for a Member State with 2018 24/04/2018 26/04/2018 Setif Patents Potential for Growth in PCT Filings, Setif, Algeria, April 24 to 26, 2018 Antigua and Barbuda National Seminar on Patent Law: the Multilateral 2017 30/10/2017 11/03/2017 St. John's Patents Legal Framework and its National Implementation, Argentina Webinar for Arbitration Programme at 2017 01/11/2017 01/11/2017 Geneva Mediation and Universidad Austral Arbitration 1 In English only. Country Activity Title Activity Year Start Date End Date City IP Field Argentina Signing of MoU on ADR with National Institute of 2017 06/10/2017 06/10/2017 Geneva Mediation and Industrial Property (INPI) Arbitration Argentina Masters Degree Programme in IP and Innovation 2018 04/03/2018 10/05/2018 Buenos Aires Multiple IP Fields (MIPI) San Andres University Argentina WIPO Training Course on Patent Search and 2018 04/09/2018 13/04/2018 Buenos Aires Patents Examination for Latin American Countries Argentina Argentina - PCT Promotional Visit and PCT 2018 23/04/2018 25/04/2018 Buenos Aires Patents Seminar - Buenos Aires Argentina Inter-Governmental Committee Meeting of the 2018 28/05/2018 28/05/2018 Buenos Aires Multiple IP Fields Iberoamerican Programme on Industrial Property and Development Promotion (IBEPI) IP/C/W/644/Rev.1/Add.5 Azerbaijan Regional Seminar on the Patent Law Treaty and 2017 28/11/2017 29/11/2017 Baku Patents Consultations with the State Committee on Accession to the PLT - 3 Azerbaijan Subregional Seminar on Building Respect for 2017 13/12/2017 14/12/2017 Baku Industrial - Copyright and Combating Counterfeiting and Property Piracy in the Digital Environment Azerbaijan WIPO Subregional Workshop on Building 2018 05/03/2018 05/04/2018 Baku Industrial Respect for IP Property Azerbaijan Regional Seminar on Intangible Capital and 2018 06/05/2018 06/05/2018 Baku Multiple IP Fields Global Value Chains: How can economies capture the benefits of innovation? Azerbaijan Automation Project Initiation (Azerbaijan): 2018 17/06/2018 23/06/2018 Baku Industrial - Discussing and planning project deliverables Property and time-frame. - Working on Actual systems a data migration to IPAS database - Working on IP offices business rules, laws and regulations Country Activity Title Activity Year Start Date End Date City IP Field Bahrain, Kingdom of Participation in the Sixth Meeting of the Inter- 2017 11/11/2017 15/11/2017 Manama Multiple IP Fields Agency and Expert Group on the Sustainable Development Goal Indicators Barbados Subregional Workshop on IP Management by 2018 24/01/2018 26/01/2018 Bridgetown Industrial SMEs Property Belarus Training of Technology and Innovation Support 2018 19/06/2018 20/06/2018 Minsk Industrial Center (TISC) Staff on the Patent Database Property Searches and Analysis Belarus Training of Technology and Innovation Support 2017 18/10/2017 19/10/2017 Minsk Industrial Center (TISC) Staff on the Patent Database Property Searches and Analysis Belarus National Workshop on Building Respect for IP 2017 10/18/2017 19/10/2017 Minsk IP/C/W/644/Rev.1/Add.5 and Combating Counterfeiting and Piracy in the Digital Environment Belarus Subregional Seminar on IP Policies for 2018 26/04/2018 27/04/2018 Polotsk Multiple IP Fields - Universities and Research Institutions 4 - Belarus Training of TISC Staff on the Patent Database 2018 19/06/2018 20/06/2018 Minsk Industrial Searches and Analysis Property Belize Legislative advice 2017 22/10/2017 27/10/2017 Belmopan Patents Belize WIPO Workshop on intellectual property and 2017 23/10/2017 24/10/2017 Belmopan Multiple IP Fields innovation Belize WIPO Workshop on Leveraging IP Tools for 2018 05/07/2018 05/09/2018 Belize City Industrial Competitiveness Property Benin WIPO Technology and Innovation Support 2018 25/04/2018 27/04/2018 Cotonou Industrial Centers (TISCs) Seminar on the Development of Property the Local TISC Network in Benin Bolivia, Plurinational State Regional Seminar on the Modernization of the 2017 16/10/2017 19/10/2017 Santa Cruz de la Industrial of Industrial Property National Offices Sierra Property Management: Tools targeted at Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises (SMEs) to foster the knowledge and use of Industrial Property. From the idea to the Market Country Activity Title Activity Year Start Date End Date City IP Field Bosnia and Herzegovina National Workshop on WIPO IP Toolkit for 2018 20/04/2018 20/04/2018 Mostar Multiple IP Fields Academic Institutions Bosnia and Herzegovina National Workshop on Administration of 2018 06/05/2018 06/06/2018 Mostar Copyright Collective Management of Copyright and Related Rights – Sharing of Experiences and Good Practices Botswana WIPO CONNECT: 2 pilot deployment and 2017 12/05/2017 14/12/2017 Gaborone Industrial training at COSBOTS Property Botswana WIPO-CIPA National Workshop on Building 2018 27/06/2018 29/06/2018 Gaborone Industrial Respect for Intellectual Property for Senior Property Police Officials and Public Prosecutor/ and for Magistrates Botswana WIPO CONNECT 2 pilot deployment and training 2017 07/12/2017 12/12/2017 Gaborone Collective IP/C/W/644/Rev.1/Add.5 at COSBOTS Management Brazil Regional Workshop on Patent Examination 2017 27/06/2017 29/06/2017 Tokyo Patents Quality Management - 5 Brazil Mission on Automation of the IP Office 2017 10/07/2017 22/10/2017 Rio de Janeiro Industrial - Property Brazil IBEPI Programme. Mission of the Technical 2017 18/10/2017 19/10/2017 Rio De Janeiro Multiple
Recommended publications
  • State of Intellectual Property Protection and Enforcement in Armenia

    State of Intellectual Property Protection and Enforcement in Armenia

    State of intellectual property protection and enforcement in Armenia 2020 Supported by Implemented by Table of contents Foreword ............................................................................................................................................... 4 Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................................... 5 About Editors ......................................................................................................................................... 6 Acronyms and Abbreviations ................................................................................................................ 7 Introduction............................................................................................................................................ 9 Executive summary ............................................................................................................................... 11 Chapter 1 Contribution of IP system and IP protection to economic growth and development .......................................................................................................................................... 13 1.1. Importance of efficient IP system for economic growth and development ............. 13 1.2. Importance of IP protection for national economies ............................................... 15 Chapter 2. Current state of the IP system in Armenia ..................................................................
  • Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) Working Group

    Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) Working Group

    Annex 1 E PCT/WG/11/27 ORIGINAL: ENGLISH DATE: JANUARY 11, 2019 Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) Working Group Eleventh Session Geneva, June 18 to 22, 2018 REPORT adopted by the Working Group 1. The Patent Cooperation Treaty Working Group held its eleventh session in Geneva from June 18 to 22, 2018. 2. The following members of the Working Group were represented at the session: (i) the following Member States of the International Patent Cooperation Union (PCT Union): Algeria, Australia, Austria, Belarus, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, China, Colombia, Côte d’Ivoire, Czech Republic, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Denmark, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Guatemala, Honduras, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Israel, Italy, Japan, Kazakhstan, Kuwait, Lithuania, Malaysia, Malta, Mexico, Montenegro, Morocco, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Romania, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Singapore, Slovakia, South Africa, Spain, Sudan, Sweden, Switzerland, Thailand, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkey, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United States of America, Uzbekistan, Viet Nam, Zimbabwe (69); and (ii) the following intergovernmental organizations: the European Patent Office (EPO), the Nordic Patent Institute (NPI), and the Visegrad Patent Institute (VPI) (3). 3. The following Member States of the International Union for the Protection of Industrial Property (Paris Union) participated in the session as an observer: Mauritius, Yemen (2). 4. The following intergovernmental organizations were represented by observers: African Intellectual Property Organization (OAPI), African Regional Intellectual Property Organization (ARIPO), African Union (AU), Eurasian Patent Organization (EAPO), European Union (EU), Patent Office of the Cooperation Council for the Arab States of the Gulf (GCC Patent Office), South Centre (7).
  • Patent Harmonisation and Utilisation: First Europe and Then the World?

    Patent Harmonisation and Utilisation: First Europe and Then the World?

    Patent Harmonisation and Utilisation: First Europe and Then the World? Dr Mark Weaver 3 December 2009 Director Practice & Procedure Utilisation and Harmonisation - Drivers Challenges • Worldwide Patent Application Backlogs - Millions • Duplication of Work • Increased Costs • Lack of Consistency • Increased Legal Uncertainty Possible Solutions • Utilisation and Work Sharing • New Bilateral or Multi-Lateral Agreements • Improve on Existing Work Sharing Agreements • Substantive Patent Law Harmonisation • Simplified Language Requirements First Europe ... European Patent Landscape EPO - 36 Member States Unified Patent Litigation System Austria • Belgium • Bulgaria • Croatia • UPLS Cyprus • Czech Republic • Denmark • Estonia • Finland • France • Germany • Greece • Hungary • Iceland • Ireland • Italy • Latvia • Liechtenstein • Lithuania • Luxembourg • Former Yugoslav Republic of European and Macedonia • Malta • Monaco • Netherlands • Community Norway • Poland • Portugal • Romania • Community San Marino • Slovakia • Slovenia • Spain • Patents Court Patent Sweden • Switzerland • Turkey • United Kingdom ECPC European patent applications and patents can European also be extended at the applicant's request to Enhanced Patent Network the following states: Partnership Albania • Bosnia-Herzegovina • Serbia EPN Status: December 2009 European Patent Landscape • Unified Patent Litigation System • Draft Council Conclusions on an enhanced patent system in Europe http://register.consilium.europa.eu/pdf/en/09/st14/st14040.en09.pdf • Draft Council Agreement
  • Doing Business in Kazakhstan

    Doing Business in Kazakhstan

    DOING BUSINESS 2021 IN KAZAKHSTAN Doing Business in Kazakhstan 2021 Baker McKenzie – CIS, Limited Almaty office Samal Towers, 8th Floor 97 Zholdasbekov Street Almaty, Kazakhstan 050051 Phone: +7 727 3 300 500 Facsimile: +7 727 258 40 00 [email protected] www.bakermckenzie.com The information in this brochure is for informational purposes only and it may not reflect the most current legal developments, judgments or settlements. This information is not offered as legal or any other advice on any particular matter. The Firm and the contributing authors expressly disclaim all liability to any person in respect of anything and in respect of the consequences of anything done or omitted wholly or partly in reliance upon the whole or any part of the contents of Baker McKenzie’s “Doing Business in Kazakhstan” brochure. No client or other reader should act or refrain from acting on the basis of any matter contained in this brochure without seeking the appropriate legal or other professional advice on the particular facts and circumstances. Doing Business in Kazakhstan Table of Contents 1 Kazakhstan — an overview ..................................................... 1 1.1 Geography .................................................................... 1 1.2 Population .................................................................... 1 1.3 History.......................................................................... 1 1.4 Government and political system ................................. 2 1.5 Economy .....................................................................
  • INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY Patent Cooperation

    INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY Patent Cooperation

    TREATIES AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL ACTS SERIES 13-1218.1 ________________________________________________________________________ INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY Patent Cooperation Treaty Between the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and OTHER GOVERNMENTS Adopted at Geneva June 1, 2000 with Amended Schedule Adopted May 15, 2008 NOTE BY THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE Pursuant to Public Law 89—497, approved July 8, 1966 (80 Stat. 271; 1 U.S.C. 113)— “. .the Treaties and Other International Acts Series issued under the authority of the Secretary of State shall be competent evidence . of the treaties, international agreements other than treaties, and proclamations by the President of such treaties and international agreements other than treaties, as the case may be, therein contained, in all the courts of law and equity and of maritime jurisdiction, and in all the tribunals and public offices of the United States, and of the several States, without any further proof or authentication thereof.” MULTILATERAL Intellectual Property: Patent Cooperation Treaty adopted at Geneva June 1, 2000; Transmitted by the President of the United States of America to the Senate September 5, 2006 (Treaty Doc. 109-12, 109th Congress, 2d Session); Reported favorably by the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations September 11, 2007 (Senate Executive Report No. 110-6, 110th Congress, 1st Session); Advice and consent to ratification by the Senate December 7, 2007; Ratified by the President May 6, 2008; Ratification deposited September 18, 2013; Entered into force December 18, 2013. With Amended Schedule adopted May 15, 2008. PATENT LAw TREATY (PLT) PATENT LAW TREATY (PLT) and REGULATIONS UNDER THE PATENT LAW TREATY Done at Geneva on June 1, 2000 and EXPLANATORY NOTES ON THE PATENT LAW TREATY and THE REGULATIONS UNDER THE PATENT LAW TREATY 2 NOTE: This page appears to be intentionally blank, except for page number.
  • RESTRICTED WT/TPR/S/390 11 June 2019 (19-3978)

    RESTRICTED WT/TPR/S/390 11 June 2019 (19-3978)

    RESTRICTED WT/TPR/S/390 11 June 2019 (19-3978) Page: 1/127 Trade Policy Review Body TRADE POLICY REVIEW REPORT BY THE SECRETARIAT THE REPUBLIC OF NORTH MACEDONIA This report, prepared for the second Trade Policy Review of the Republic of North Macedonia, has been drawn up by the WTO Secretariat on its own responsibility. The Secretariat has, as required by the Agreement establishing the Trade Policy Review Mechanism (Annex 3 of the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization), sought clarification from the Republic of North Macedonia on its trade policies and practices. Any technical questions arising from this report may be addressed to Mr. Mark Koulen (tel: 022 739 5224); Ms. Martha Lara Fernandez (tel: 022 739 6033); and Mr. Pierre Latrille (tel: 022 739 5266). Document WT/TPR/G/390 contains the policy statement submitted by the Republic of North Macedonia. Note: This report is subject to restricted circulation and press embargo until the end of the first session of the meeting of the Trade Policy Review Body on the Republic of North Macedonia. This report was drafted in English. WT/TPR/S/390 • The Republic of North Macedonia - 2 - CONTENTS SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................ 7 1 ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT ........................................................................................ 13 1.1 Main Features of the Economy .....................................................................................13 1.2 Recent Economic
  • EPC 2000 the Revised European Patent Convention + the London Agreement

    EPC 2000 the Revised European Patent Convention + the London Agreement

    EPC 2000 The Revised European Patent Convention + The London Agreement 2nd edition Königstraße 70 Am Literaturhaus 90402 Nürnberg Telefon: (0911) 89138-0 Telefax: (0911) 89138-29 Am Stein 12 D-97080 Würzburg Telefon: (0931) 286410 Telefax: (0931) 282597 E-Mail: [email protected] Internet: www.ip-goetz.eu 1 What is the EPC? A multilateral treaty (34 contracting states) for a centralised patent grant procedure before a single patent office (EPO). To modernize the European patent system and adapt it to TRIPS (Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights) and PLT (Patent Law Treaty), the revised EPC 2000 has entered into force on 12/13/2007. 2 What is the London Agreement? A multilateral sub-treaty (14 contracting states) to the EPC for the purpose to save translation costs (see at the end). 3 EPC 2000: Highlights at first glance (I) Changes in substantive patent law ➔ inventions in „all fields of technology“ (adaptation to TRIPS) no substantial change of current practise ➔ use-limited product protection for a second or further medical use of a kown substance (see example below) ➔ novelty-destroying effect of subsequently published EP application having an earlier priority date independent of country designation (see examples below) ➔ strengthening of extent of protection (see below) 4 EPC 2000: Highlights at first glance (II) Procedural „innovations“: ➔ Drastically decreasing requirements for the filing date (adaptation to PLT – see below) ➔ Re-establishment of rights and corrections in respect of priority claim ➔ Further processing of an application as standard legal remedy in respect of observing time limits ➔ Request by patent owner for centralised limitation or revocation of the EP patent ➔ Introduction of a third instance (Enlarged Board of Appeal) for the case of fundamental procedural defects in appeal proceedings (e.g.
  • Restructuring Intellectual Property Jurisdictions Post-Brexit: Strategic Considerations for the EU and Britain Alexandra George

    Restructuring Intellectual Property Jurisdictions Post-Brexit: Strategic Considerations for the EU and Britain Alexandra George

    Brooklyn Journal of International Law Volume 43 | Issue 1 Article 27 12-12-2017 Restructuring Intellectual Property Jurisdictions Post-Brexit: Strategic Considerations for the EU and Britain Alexandra George Follow this and additional works at: https://brooklynworks.brooklaw.edu/bjil Part of the European Law Commons, Intellectual Property Law Commons, International Law Commons, International Trade Law Commons, Jurisdiction Commons, Law and Politics Commons, and the Transnational Law Commons Recommended Citation Alexandra George, Restructuring Intellectual Property Jurisdictions Post-Brexit: Strategic Considerations for the EU and Britain, 43 Brook. J. Int'l L. 131 (2017). Available at: https://brooklynworks.brooklaw.edu/bjil/vol43/iss1/27 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at BrooklynWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Brooklyn Journal of International Law by an authorized editor of BrooklynWorks. RESTRUCTURING INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY JURISDICTION POST- BREXIT: STRATEGIC CONSIDERATIONS FOR THE EUROPEAN UNION AND BRITAIN Alexandra George* INTRODUCTION ........................................................................ 132 I. TERMINOLOGY AND ASSESSING OUTCOMES: A HARD OR SOFT BREXIT?................................................................................... 138 II. GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS AFFECTING INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW-MAKING IN EUROPE....................................... 140 ". TBF 6J.+F .D ‘I/&F>>FJ&%_> 8(.+F(&Z’ ................................ 141 B. Territorial Rights
  • Patent Law Treaty: Promises Not Deliveredhow the Negotiations

    Patent Law Treaty: Promises Not Deliveredhow the Negotiations

    The Journal of World Intellectual Property (2014) Vol. 17, no. 5–6, pp. 160–190 doi: 10.1002/jwip.12028 Patent Law Treaty: Promises Not Delivered-How the Negotiations Resulted in Ambiguities in the Treaty Cees Mulder Maastricht University, The Netherlands The Patent Law Treaty was drafted with the aim to “streamline and harmonize” formal requirements set by national or regional Patent Offices for the filing of national or regional patent applications and the maintenance of patents. In this Article, a number of core issues of the Patent Law Treaty has been selected: requirements for the accordance of a filing date, relief in respect of time limits and restoration of priority. A conclusion of this Article is that the goals of the Patent Law Treaty were not achieved by the Treaty as concluded. One of the reasons is that the Treaty contains too many optional requirements (“may require”), which may be implemented as compulsory by the Contracting Parties, allowing them too much freedom when implementing requirements of the Treaty into their national and regional patent laws. This defies the aim of harmonization and streamlining of the Patent Law Treaty. The negotiation history is described and discussed with emphasis on what went wrong during the negotiations. Reasons for the failure of the Patent Law Treaty are discussed and recommendations for repair are given. Keywords patent law treaty; negotiations; effect of PLT; filing date requirements; relief in respect of time limits; continued processing; reinstatement of rights; restoration of priority
  • Overcoming Transatlantic Differences on Intellectual Property

    Overcoming Transatlantic Differences on Intellectual Property

    Overcoming Transatlantic differences on intellectual property This publication aims to provide an overview of the regulation of intellectual property rights in the United States and the European Union, as well as presenting the debate around the inclusion of an intellectual property chapter in the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Treaty, currently under negotiation. Manuscript completed in July 2014. Disclaimer This publication does not necessarily represent the views of the author or the European Parliament. Reproduction and translation of this document for non-commercial purposes are authorised, provided the source is acknowledged and the publisher is given prior notice and sent a copy. © European Union, 2014. Photo credits: © Michael Brown / Fotolia. [email protected] http://www.eprs.ep.parl.union.eu (intranet) http://www.europarl.europa.eu/thinktank (internet) http://epthinktank.eu (blog) IPR issues in EU-US trade relations Page 1 of 32 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Recent studies demonstrate the important contribution of intellectual property rights (IPR) to the American and EU economies. Royalties and licence fees based on IPR figure high among the exports of both, and applications, and grants, for IPR protection made by Europeans in the US and vice-versa represent an important share of the totals. The differences between the respective IPR systems are comparatively small, yet seen as hard to overcome. The negotiation of the EU-US Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) may present the opportunity for a step change in EU-US relations in respect of IPR. Protection of intellectual property (IP) and IPR is justified as a necessity for encouraging innovation, creativity and investment in research and development activities.
  • PATENT LAW TREATY Page 2

    PATENT LAW TREATY Page 2

    PATENT LAW TREATY page 2 PATENT LAW TREATY TABLE OF CONTENTS Article 1 Abbreviated Expressions Article 2 General Principles Article 3 Applications and Patents to Which the Treaty Applies Artic le 4 Security Exception Article 5 Filing Date Article 6 Application Article 7 Representation Article 8 Communications; Addresses Article 9 Notifications Article 10 Validity of Patent; Revocation Article 11 Relie f in Respect of Time Limits Article 12 Reinstatement of Rights After a Finding of Due Care or Unintentionality by the Office Article 13 Correction or Addition of Priority Claim; Restoration of Priority Right Article 14 Regulation s Article 15 Relation to the Paris Convention Article 16 Effect of Revisions, Amendments and Modifications of the Patent Cooperation Treaty Article 17 Assembly Article 18 International Bureau Article 19 Revisions Art icle 20 Becoming Party to the Treaty Article 21 Entry into Force; Effective Dates of Ratifications and Accessions page 3 Article 22 Application of the Treaty to Existing Applications and Patents Article 23 Reservations Article 24 Denunciation of the Treaty Article 25 Languages of the Treaty Article 26 Signature of the Treaty Article 27 Depositary; Registration page 4 Article 1 Abbreviated Expressions For the purposes of this Treaty, unless expressly state d otherwise: (i) “Office” means the authority of a Contracting Party entrusted with the granting of patents or with other matters covered by this Treaty; (ii) “application” means an application for the grant of a patent, as referred to in Article 3;
  • Handbook Resources for Teaching IP Law Western Balkans Turkey

    Handbook Resources for Teaching IP Law Western Balkans Turkey

    REGIONAL PROGRAMME ON INDUSTRIAL AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS IN THE WESTERN BALKANS AND TURKEY Handbook on Resources for Teaching IP Law in the Western Balkans and Turkey Prepared by Professor Michael Blakeney Queen Mary University of London (November 2010) An EU-funded project managed by DG Enlargement and implemented by the European Patent Offi ce This document has been produced with the fi nancial assistance of the European Union. The views expressed herein can in no way be taken to refl ect the offi cial opinion of the European Union. Table of contents 1. Introduction .............................................................................................................13 2. Teaching of intellectual property ...........................................................................14 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 14 Why do we teach IP? ...................................................................................................................... 14 The changing IP constituency......................................................................................................... 15 What subjects should be taught?.................................................................................................... 16 Interdisciplinarity ............................................................................................................................. 17 What types of intellectual property programmes