United States Trade Representative (USTR) Section 301 Annual Reports (2001-2007) Section 301 of 1984 Trade & Tariff Act (which amended 1974 Trade Act) gave the US President authority to deal with states that failed to provide “adequate and effective” protection for US intellectual property rights. Under Section 301, punishment for a foreign country that fails [...]
Sean Spicer of USTR on ACTA: "The main focus of the discussion was border measures, particularly how to deal with large-scale intellectual property infringements, which can frequently involve criminal elements and pose a threat to public health and safety. ..."
In 2007 a select handful of the wealthiest countries began a treaty-making process to create a new global standard for intellectual property rights enforcement, the proposed Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA). ACTA is spearheaded by the United States, the European Commission, Japan, and Switzerland -- those countries with the largest intellectual property industries. Other countries invited to participate in ACTA’s negotiation process are Canada, Australia, Korea, Mexico and New Zealand. Noticeably absent from ACTA’s negotiations are leaders from developing countries who hold national policy priorities that differ from the international intellectual property industry....
Anti-Consumer and Anti-Public Interest Treaty Proposed by Intellectual Property Industry, US, Europe, Switzerland, and Japan
According to Oct. 2007 USTR "Fact Sheet", the proposed Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) would contain the following provisions: International Cooperation, Enforcement Practices & New Legal Framework....
IP Justice Comments to the U.S.T.R. on the proposed Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA). IP Justice firmly believes that ACTA’s costs to the public far outweigh any public benefit it might provide. The financial expense to tax-payers to fund ACTA would be enormous and steal scarce resources away from programs that deal with genuine public needs like providing education and eliminating hunger. ACTA would burden the judicial system and divert badly needed law enforcement and customs resources away from public security and towards private profit. Unfortunately the zeal to “beef-up†enforcement measures on which ACTA rides often leads to the violation of privacy rights, bypassing due process protections, and cutting-off the free flow of information. ACTA proposes to set new international norms to lock countries into pre-determined policy choices when flexibility is needed.
How the trade group, the International Intellectual Property Association (IIPA) Drives the Agenda at the Office of the US Trade Representative through the "Special 301" Process by Filing Annual Reports on Intellectual Property related trade losses.
There are two principles that influence the interpretation and application of TRIPS and that must be mentioned here: the principle of national treatment and the most favoured nation principle.
IP Justice Santo Domingo Statement: Why the Americas Should Resist Pressure to Adopt the FTAA's Intellectual Property Rights Chapter View statement as PDF document with footnotes View statement as Word document with footnote 28 January 2004 IP Justice Santo Domingo Statement: Why the Americas Should Resist Pressure to Adopt the FTAA's Intellectual Property [...]