[governance] TACD Blog on EU-U.S. IPR Enforcement Working Group - Meeting with Private Sector

[Jeffrey A. Williams]

All,

  As a matter of significant condern as to Internet Governance:

EU-U.S. IPR Enforcement Working Group - Meeting with Private Sector.

on TACD Blog:

http://www.tacd-ip.org/blog/2009/09/23/meeting-of-the-u-s-eu-ipr-enforcement-working-group/

Meeting of the U.S.-EU IPR Enforcement Working Group

A meeting organized by the EU-U.S governments on  IPR Enforcement took
place today September 23, 2009 in Washington,DC.  TACD (as well as
TABD) was invited to the ” IPR Enforcement Working Group – Meeting
with Private Sector.”  Below are a few highlights from the meeting on
IPR enforcement, comprehensive notes of the meeting will follow shortly.

The well-attended meeting (about 80 people)  included many industry
and government representatives (from all over the world),  and four
non-profit representatives.  Susan Wilson (US Dept. of Commerce) and
Luc Devigne (EU Commission) were the co-chairs of the meeting (Stan
McCoy and Jennifer Groves (USTR) were also presenting).  They all
reported on various IPR enforcement related activities and answered
questions.

Susan Wilson in her introduction stated the IPR Enforcement Working
Group’s objectives:

- To promote enforcement
- To fight piracy and counterfeits
- To promote public & private partnerships on piracy and counterfeits

A copy of the meeting agenda is here.

a) Government Report on Multilateral fora

- OECD: currently working on phase III of enforcement study. US
government mentioned it is unlikely they will be adding any additional
funding to this.

- As for WHO, Resolution WHA 61.21 and IMPACT initiative were
mentioned and USTR representatives said that counterfeit medicine will
be an issue addressed at the next meeting of the WHA.

- The discussion of ACTA (an item on the agenda) focused more on
practical details such as the dates and location of previous meetings
and upcoming meetings, availability of reports of previous meetings
and  an announcement that for all forthcoming meetings (including the
next meeting in November), a draft agenda would be made available one
to two weeks before the meeting. When I mentioned the TACD resolution
on Enforcement, and asked why the negotiating text had not yet been
made public, Luc Devigne of the European Commission said that they are
releasing as much information as possible, as text on each of the
topics was completed. Kira Alvarez  of the State Department mentioned
two public consultations on ACTA. She also pointed to existing FTAs as
a model and said that the U.S.’s contributions would be modeled after
those. Both EU and U.S. negotiators acknowledged that their aim is to
have ACTA finalized by next year.

b) Engagement of the labor movement

- The U.S. and EU both expressed a desire to engage labor movements in
delivering a “positive and constructive message” about IPR protection
and enforcement. The RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America)
and IIPA (International Intellectual Property Association) were both
very enthusiastic about this proposal. Judit Rius of KEI pointed out
that any effort to engage labor in IP discussions must present a
balanced picture of IP issues, including how poorly-directed
enforcement can hurt businesses; she pointed to Google’s public
submission on ACTA, and Microsoft’s seeking of a compulsory license to
sell its Word products in a recent (and still pending) lawsuit. She
also highlighted that some of the EU’s demands on ACTA about
injunctions and damages could hurt innovation and U.S and EU jobs.
Susan Wilson of the Department of Commerce said the U.S. is
considering a public event on the topic and they welcome all views on
how to do this better.

c) On Co-operation with third countries on IPR enforcement

- EU and U.S. governments highlighted the following countries and
regions: Brazil, China, India, Russia, Canada and ASEAN.

- On Canada: US/EU governments & industry in the room: All share
concerns on Canada IPR enforcement. The Electronic Software
Association suggested using ACTA as a means of “raising the bar” in
Canada to force Canadian government to respect TPMs and uphold its IPR
commitments. U.S. representatives responded by stating that they
expect all parties involved in ACTA to uphold the provisions put forth
in ACTA, and will not accommodate the “lowest common denominator.”

- The EU and U.S. have been working extensively with China on IP
issues, including its new patent law, which was an issue of great
concern among the business interests present.

- The EU has not been working with India directly on IP programs,
characterizing FTA negotiations as “difficult.” Industry
representatives asked the U.S. and EU governments to push India to
implement digital obligations.

- The U.S. and EU have been working extensively in Russia, training
judges and law enforcement in IP issues. Rashmi Ragnath of Public
Knowledge asked that civil society be consulted when developing these
training programs, as they run the risk of training judges with a
stringent, uniquely U.S./EU perspective on the law, but without the
balances included in U.S./EU law. Devigne was dismissive of this
concern: “We train them in Russian law.”

- The RIAA raised Mexico as a point of concern. The U.S. responded
that they had an ongoing dialogue with Mexico.

- General Electric representative Thaddeus Burns expressed concern
about emerging markets “eager to gain access to our technology” by
“weakening IP measures.”

- In general, industry representatives expressed satisfaction with the
workshops on IPR enforcement that US/EU governments are organizing on
China and Russia.

E) Government report on CUSTOMS

- In response to a question raised by Malini Aisola of KEI on the
effects of ACTA & custom IPR enforcement on legitimate trade of
medicines (such as the recent seizure of generics in Europe) Devigne
(of the EC) dismissed the outcry over the European Custom authority
seizures of legitimate, generic medicines in transit to developing
countries as “much ado about nothing.” He said that, when compared to
the volume of trade, the occurrence of such incidents is minuscule. He
also said that customs regulations gave an overall benefit, they save
lives by stopping counterfeits and that it was not EU policy to detain
legitimate generic medicines. The EU is engaged in talks with two
countries affected by the seizures (India and Brazil). Further, some
pharmaceutical industries have pledged on their websites not to
request customs officials’ interventions in cases where patents are
valid.

- The World Customs Organization recently formed a Counterfeiting And
Piracy (CAP) group, which will meet at the end of October. According
to a U.S. Customs representative, many member nations did not want
businesses to play a major role in the group; the U.S. and EU,
however, pushed hard for business inclusion.

F) FUTURE WORK

- The discussion on future work mostly focus on climate change.
General Electric and Microsoft were particularly outspoken in
highlighting their fear that some current negotiations over green
technology and IPR would weaken IPR. They also denounced the inclusion
of proposals that limit patentability subject matter and recommend
compulsory licenses or licenses of rights. General Electric
highlighted that discussions on climate change and IPR should be
differentiated from those concerning pharmaceutics and IPR. The EU
representative agreed with industry and even mentioned that there is
no need for a measure resembling “a Doha Declaration on public health”
for climate change & IPR.  Some industry representatives mentioned
that the discussions on climate change are sometimes more about
industrial policy by emerging developing countries.

The meeting concluded with the U.S. government asking for proposals of
topics to be included in the next October meeting. Proposals should be
sent by the end of next week (by October 2) to Susan Wilson at
Commerce &  Jennifer Groves at USTR.


Regards,

Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Phone: 214-244-4827
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance