1 THE EFFECTS OF BIOPIRACY ON THE NATURAL PLANT PRODUCT MARKET: A PERUVIAN CASE STUDY A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of San Diego State University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degrees Master of Business Administration and Master of Arts in Latin American Studies by Ashley Lynn Smallwood Summer 2011
3 iii Copyright 2011 by Ashley Lynn Smallwood All Rights Reserved
4 iv ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS The Effects of Biopiracy on the Natural Plant Product Market: A Peruvian Case Study by Ashley Lynn Smallwood Master of Business Administration and Master of Arts in Latin American Studies San Diego State University, 2011 This work is a study of the effects of biopiracy on those participating in the natural plant product market. Many supporters of intellectual property would contend that the ability to have protection over a value added process or invention is essential. This study seeks to understand how biopiracy, or the mis-appropriation of basic biological resources or the traditional knowledge of those biological resources, and its effects are conceptualized by those who are working in the field of natural plant products. All data was collected through in depth interviews where a series of open ended questions were asked about the function of the participant s business and their perception of biopiracy. There were fourteen interviews conducted in total, ten of whom were natural plant product exporters residing in Lima, Peru. Three of the participants interviewed were public servants actively working to combat biopiracy, and the last participant was a non-peruvian businessman exporting natural plant products to their home country. The findings of this study emphasize that the meaning of biopiracy is subjective and in some cases takes on several meanings. The inconsistency of the term does not indicate that the term is being used incorrectly, but rather it is being conceptualized by those in the field in different ways, each of which have implications associated with it.
5 v TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE ABSTRACT... iv LIST OF TABLES... vii LIST OF FIGURES... viii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS... ix CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION LITERATURE REVIEW...4 Background and History of Intellectual Property...6 Intellectual Property in the United States...7 Intellectual Property in Europe...8 International Treaties and Organizations Supporting Intellectual Property...9 Theory of Intellectual Property...15 Historical Intellectual Property Theory...15 Industrial Perspective on Intellectual Property...16 Counter-Industrial Views on Intellectual Property...20 Biopiracy...22 Cases of Biopiracy...26 Statement of the Problem METHODS THEMES FROM RESEARCH...43 Peruvian Case Studies...43
6 vi Factors that Affect the Natural Plant Product Market in Peru...49 Informal Competition...50 Supply Chain Issues...61 Perceptions of Biopiracy...73 Bio-Security...73 Contraband...78 Trademark Infringement...83 Informality as Biopiracy...84 Traditional Notions of Biopiracy...86 Naturex Maca Patent...91 Cultural Aspects of Biopiracy DISCUSSION OF THEMES An Outsider s Perspective on the Ways Biopiracy Can Occur Informality Supply Chain Issues Effects of Biopiracy IMPLICATIONS OF STUDY REFERENCES APPENDIX A GREENTECH PATENT APPLICATION INFORMATION B SPANISH GREENTECH PATENT APPLICATION INFORMATION...122
7 vii LIST OF TABLES PAGE Table 1. Summary of Participants...39 Table 2. Case Study of Biopiracy with Company Table 3. Quotations on Informality...52 Table 4. Supply Chain Issues...62 Table 5. Bio-security as Biopiracy...73 Table 6. Contraband Issues...79 Table 7. Biopiracy in the Traditional Sense as Conceptualized by Company Table 8. Traditional Views of Biopiracy by Company Table 9. Traditional Views of Biopiracy by Company Table 10. Knowing or Unknowing Accomplice?...107
8 viii LIST OF FIGURES PAGE Figure 1. Supply chain of natural plant products Figure 2. Interview questions....42
9 ix ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would first like to thank all participants for donating their time to be a part of this study. Muchisimas gracias a todos los participantes, por recibirme con sonrisas y por apoyar a este proyecto que sin ustedes no hubiese podido capturar la perspectiva que más vale. This thesis would not have been possible without first thinking of a topic. I would like to thank my advisor Dr. James Gerber for sparking my interest on the topic of biopiracy, connecting me with the possibility to do research in Peru, and pushing me toward excellence throughout the process that followed. Dr. Douglas Sharon has been an invaluable member of my thesis committee, not only being present in the field to aid me in my thought process, but also for his scrutinous eye in copy-editing the entirety of this thesis. Dr. Chamu Sundaramurthy and Dr. David Ely also both gave me valuable advice as to how best to construct this work. I also would like to thank Dr. Ramona Perez for introducing me to Chantal Morgan D'Apuzzo, a practicing patent attorney, who made intellectual property rights a little less intimidating. I would also like to thank my colleagues for giving me valuable advice on my thought process while constructing this thesis, and never ending support when I wanted to discuss details about my work that were less than pertinent to their own lives. Mirian Mamani, a geologist by trade, was crucial for my mental health while conducting interviews in Lima. Gracias Mirian. A special thanks to Cynthia Rodriguez for being there every step of the way and for acting as a volunteer proofreader. I would also like to thank my French translators, Damien Caumient and Lisa Wright, without whom, this thesis would be missing an important perspective. And lastly, a special thank you to my brother, Blaze Smallwood, who came
10 x through, as he always has, and dedicated long hours (without compensation) to formatting this thesis. Blaze, I will never be able to thank you enough.
11 1 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION In its simplest definition, biopiracy is the appropriation of biological resources by an inventor who claims to have added value to this natural resource, when in reality the medicinal or useful properties of that resource are based in traditional knowledge. The appropriation of the resource happens when an inventor applies for and is granted intellectual property protection over a novel, non-obvious and commercially applicable invention. Biopiracy has its roots in intellectual property, the convention for individual ownership of the plant resource or the traditional knowledge of that resource. This study attempts to explore the perceptions of the term biopiracy and the perceived effects from it. The molecular structures of plants will not be discussed, nor the specifics of patent law at neither national or universal level; nor will there be an in-depth discussion on the various governing bodies of intellectual property. The intention is to discuss the phenomenon of biopiracy in an interdisciplinary way which does not require one to be a patent attorney or a biologist to understand the topic. In order to better understand biopiracy, one must first understand the history of intellectual property and theories about the phenomenon of property ownership in general, as well as theories of intellectual property itself. One must also understand how the modern intellectual property system functions, and how various international organizations work together to promote intellectual property. To make the idea of biopiracy more tangible, various biopiracy cases from around the world will be presented.
12 2 Although biopiracy has been occurring for centuries, beginning with the exploitation of natural resources during the colonial period, biopiracy is a relatively new subject and does not have a plethora of literature associated with it. International trade became linked with international intellectual property rights in the late 1970s and early 1980s in the United States (Sell, 2003). In the 1990s, innovation became the focus of businesses that were looking to set themselves apart from the competition and create a competitive advantage for their firm (Dent, Fenwick, & Newitt, 2010). In the late 1980s, many life science firms developed a special interest in using traditional knowledge as their base for innovative pharmaceuticals. This phenomenon was demonstrated through the increasing bioprospecting contracts signed by indigenous groups in that time period (Hayden, 2003). Biopiracy is thus a somewhat new phenomenon that has resulted from a revitalized interest in basing new and inventive medicines on the traditional knowledge of indigenous groups. The researcher travelled to Lima, Peru to try and understand how exporters of natural plant products have been affected, if at all, by the phenomenon of biopiracy. In-depth interviews were conducted with ten exporters of natural plant products, in order to discover if their businesses are affected by biopiracy. The attempt was then made to discover how the exporters choose to understand the question of biopiracy, how their business may be affected, and how they understand and utilize the term biopiracy. Along with exporters of natural plant products, I also interviewed government affiliated workers who are actively fighting biopiracy to find out what process they use to protect Peru as a nation state from the phenomenon. In the chapters to come, the reader will share the researcher s journey in learning about biopiracy, how it functions and how it is appropriated and defended against in Peru.
13 3 This study is meant to describe the current flaws in the patent system to policy makers, so they may take action to prevent future cases of biopiracy. Intellectual property and biopiracy are illustrated in a way that assumes the reader has no background in the subject, so that future policy makers may become cognizant of the subject matter.
14 4 CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW In the United States there are four main types of protection for intellectual property: copyright law, trademark law, trade secret law and patent law. Attorney Richard Stim (2007) makes clear that copyrights are granted to creative tangible and original works, such as books or films. Copyright protects the owner from unauthorized use of a work, such as the distribution or sale thereof, but does not protect the ideas that are expressed within that work. Trademarks are protection for a distinctive word, phrase, logo, [or] graphic symbol, but can also include other nonfunctional but distinctive aspects of a product or service that tend to promote and distinguish it in the marketplace, such as shapes, letters, numbers, sounds, smells or colors (Stim, 2007, p. 344). Trademarks are typically used by businesses so that what distinguishes them or their products is not used by a business in a similar trade, thereby preventing a competitor from using a business highly recognizable logo, graphic symbol, or one of the other aforementioned trademarkable expressions to sell their own products. Information that has commercial value and has been kept undisclosed from competitors is considered a trade secret. Material which often qualifies as trade secrets are: unpatented inventions, customer lists, and processes and techniques used within a business (Stim, 2007, p. 486). The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), founded in 1802, grants a patent to an inventor and ensures a monopoly for a limited amount of time, depending on the type of patent granted. Utility patents are granted for a process, a machine, a manufacture, a
15 5 composition of matter, or an improvement of an existing idea (Stim, 2007, p.14), and its duration is seventeen to eighteen years. Design patents are new and original designs that do not serve or improve the functionality of the product and last for fourteen years. Plant patents allow the owner twenty years of protection of their asexually or sexually reproducible plants (Stim, 2007), and are based on the US Plant Patent Act of 1930, prior to which plants and other organisms were regarded as common property (Tupper, 2009). The European Patent Office (EPO) established in 1977, does not allow for genetically modified plant varieties, but article 53(b), does allow for plants to be patented as long as the specific variety is not individually claimed (as cited in Rajotte & Tansey, 2008, p. 39). Sangeeta Udgaonkar explains in her work The Recording of Traditional Knowledge: Will it Prevent Bio-piracy, (2002) that three fundamental conditions need to be met in order for a patent to be granted in most jurisdictions around the world: novelty, nonobviousness and utility. In order to prove that the invention is novel, the inventor must disclose prior work done in the field or prior art to show that the invention does not already exist. Udgaonkar (2002) highlights that only a small change in the existing prior art could constitute the novelty of an invention. The invention must also be non-obvious, which is tested by showing that the invention under scrutiny is something that a person working in the field would not have ordinarily done. The third condition that must be satisfied is utility, or demonstrating that the invention has an industrial use (Udgaonkar, 2002, p. 414). The philosophy behind the industrial sector s need to claim individual ownership of an intangible property will be discussed later in this chapter. First, however, it is necessary to understand the modern concept of what constitutes intellectual property and how nations interact internationally to coordinate this concept.
16 6 BACKGROUND AND HISTORY OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY The idea of intellectual property is a Western concept originating in Florence, Italy in Filippo Brunelleschi was granted exclusive rights to the Badalone, a sea vessel coated with iron which was intended to transport marble across Lake Arno. Brunelleschi would not allow the disclosure of the process of the invention for his vessel unless he was granted the exclusive right to commercialize it in the city of Florence. The city did grant Brunelleschi the exclusive right to commercialize his invention, even though the vessel failed and sank to the bottom of Lake Arno. From Florence, the patent system moved to Venice where a patent statute was granted on March 19, This statute gave protection to all inventions for a ten-year duration. The Venetian patent system also established punishment for violations of protected intellectual property, as well as a registry of patents granted by the city (Mgbeoji, 2006, p. 16). Although Venice had the first patent statute, England is credited with giving birth to the first copyright protection with the Act of Anne of 1709 (Drahos, 1996). While the notion of intellectual property is often deemed Western because of the concept of individual ownership of an intangible process or idea, or the copying of a work of art, there is evidence in Robert Lowie s anthropological work that property rights for intangible property were highly developed amongst the Andaman Islanders, the Kai, the Koryak and the Plains Indians. The distinction of intellectual property for Westerners is that these indigenous groups were more concerned about the transfer of rights rather than individual ownership (Drahos, 1996).
17 7 Intellectual Property in the United States As mentioned earlier, the USPTO was formed in 1802, nearly three hundred and thirty years after the first Venetian patent statute, but only a short period after the United States Constitution was ratified in 1788 (Malone, 2002). Graham Dutfield explains that the phenomenon of the intellectual property of seed did not become widespread in the United States until after westward expansion. Dutfield notes that, for almost all of human history, farming and crop improvement were carried out by the same people and in the same places, by farmers and indigenous peoples on their own land (as cited in Rajotte & Tansey, 2008, p. 27). Farmers would breed their own seed for a variety of reasons, which probably included higher yields, extreme weather resistance, or disease resistance. To encourage settlement in western lands, the USPTO and the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) supplied farmers with free seed packets for experimentation. Farmers used the seed provided for them along with seed brought to the United States by recent immigrants to create new breeds (as cited in Rajotte & Tansey, 2008, p. 29). Dutfield goes on to explain that by 1890, 596 US firms were commercially producing seed. Around the same time, a business association was formed by these commercial seed producers called the American Seed Trade Association (ASTA) that discouraged the US government from continuing to supply free seed to farmers. The US government responded by only donating common variety seed in the first two decades of the twentieth century, sending the more exotic varieties to government experimental programs and universities. Farmer involvement in plant breeding ceased shortly after the First World War when the US Secretary of Agriculture made the decision that the USDA would begin supporting research for the development of hybrids (as cited in Rajotte & Tansey, 2008, p. 30). Cary Fowler
18 8 (1994) asserts that because most farmers were no longer improving seeds themselves, the attraction of selecting and replanting was declining even before scientifically bred varieties became available (as cited in Rajotte & Tansey, 2008, p. 30). Thus, the production of food and seed was specialized and separated into the commercial farming industry and the commercial seed production industry. Intellectual Property in Europe European farmers, however, were not encouraged by their governments to create new seed varieties because farmers had already been developing seed to satisfy local needs and conditions for centuries. Formal experimentation with seed varieties occurred first by wealthy landowners and then by small family owned seed businesses in the second half of the nineteenth century. As in the United States, universities and public research institutions were breeding plant varieties in the early twentieth century. Great Britain and France focused their seed breeding in their tropical colonial territories, but as their territories became independent, Britain and France began to shift their efforts back to their respective motherlands. France subsequently became the second largest private sector for seed production in the world (as cited in Rajotte & Tansey, 2008, p. 31). The International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV) was created in Paris in 1961 with the intention of providing plant variety protection, a form of intellectual property (as cited in Rajotte & Tansey, 2008, p. 32). The UPOV Convention was ratified by three countries: the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and West Germany. The UPOV Convention was initiated by plant breeders to protect their intellectual property rights regarding the seeds that they produce. The UPOV Convention was meant to provide an alternative to the patent system, and as Dutfield explains, its workable IP (intellectual
19 9 property) protection would require a relaxation of the novelty and inventive step requirements so that varieties reflecting incremental improvements on existing ones (plant varieties) and [those] that were already known about could be nonetheless protected (as cited in Rajotte & Tansey, 2008, p. 33). Dutfield illustrates that the patent system and the UPOV Convention differ in that with UPOV plant variety protection, breeders are allowed to use protected varieties as an initial source of variation for the creation of new varieties and are able to then sell that new variety without permission of the original breeder. Plant variety protection (PVP) under the UPOV also does not require disclosures for prior art as with patents. The patent application process and its administration is more complex than that of PVP, and Dutfield relays that the complex patent process is undesirable for many smaller companies that do not have the financial resources to maintain the legal jurisdiction of their patents (as cited in Rajotte & Tansey, 2008). INTERNATIONAL TREATIES AND ORGANIZATIONS SUPPORTING INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY The Paris Convention of 1883 attempted to diminish discrimination against noncitizens applying for patents outside of their home country, to give priority filing to allow the inventor time to apply for patents in various countries while honoring the original date filed in the original member state and make the stipulation that a patent could not be revoked because the goods produced under the patent were imported from a second country (Kranakis, 2007, p. 672). Ed Kranakis (2007) illustrates that the Paris Convention of 1883 did not seek to establish criteria for novelty and inventiveness of an international patent
20 10 system, nor did it address territorial areas (i.e., nation states) where patents would be available. The Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) of 1978 seems to mirror the function of the Paris Convention of Members of the PCT are essentially given a priority filing grace period in all member countries, based on the date the original patent was filed (Pike, 2005). The principal differences are the amount of time the grace period allotted and the number of participating member countries. The initial participating countries of the Paris Convention of 1883 were Belgium, France, Italy, the Netherlands, Portugal, Serbia, Spain, Switzerland and, surprisingly, Brazil, Guatemala and El Salvador, with the priority deadline for first filing in any one of the aforementioned countries being six months (Kranakis, 2007). The PCT currently has 142 members (WIPO, 2011), with an eighteen-month grace period to file in the national patent offices of member states (Tustin, 2006). Under the PCT, members are required to submit applications in each desired country, while following the host countries rules for patentability as well as paying separate application fees for each country where the inventor chooses to submit an application (Pike, 2005). Paul Oldham (2006) notes that patents filed through the PCT, in theory, are meant to result in patent protection in all one hundred and forty-two member states, but that in practice, patent protection in all contracting states is extremely rare. The European Patent Convention (EPC) was largely motivated because of the approval of the PCT in 1970, and the recognition of the need to ease the burden of the overworked individual patent offices throughout Europe (Kranakis, 2007). The work of patent agents in European countries was being duplicated, because inventors were filing applications for the same invention in multiple countries. Individual European patent offices
21 11 saw the need to harmonize the prior art searches necessary to grant or deny a patent application. After much deliberation about which countries would be member states and how the EPC would function, it was signed in The patent system among the EPC member states would be Europeanized, meaning that the search and examination system for prior art would be standardized among member states. The Europeanized search system was modeled on Germany s strict examination and research method. As with the PCT, those seeking to apply for patents in several European countries would be required to pay the application fees as well as approval within each preferred European country and their respective patent office (Kranakis, 2007). Maria Julia Olivia explains the significance and function of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) in her article Promoting and Extending the Reach of Intellectual Property: The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) (as cited in Rajotte & Tansey, 2008). WIPO, which is a UN Special Agency, connects back to the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property of 1883 and the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works of 1886, the first international attempts to protect IP. WIPO, founded in 1970, replaced the United International Bureau for the Protection of Intellectual Property (BIRIPI), which was created in 1893 to be the administrative body of the Paris and Berne conventions (as cited in Rajotte & Tansey, 2008). WIPO s various functions are to essentially harmonize IP on the international level. Functions that WIPO provides to reach this goal include but are not limited to: publishing information and studies on intellectual property rights (IPR) for any interested parties, administering international treaties, and providing assistance to governments in the area of IP implementation. Seventy-five percent of WIPO s funding is from the Patent Coopertaion
22 12 Treaty (PCT) and fifteen percent is generated from other private IPR systems. Proposed harmonizing rules on IPR are discussed within issue-specific WIPO sub-committees, while the actual governing body through which WIPO decisions are made is the WIPO General Assembly (as cited in Rajotte & Tansey, 2008). While the WIPO serves as a forum for discussion of IP and promotes international IP treaties between regions and countries, the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS), which was passed as part of the Uruguay Round of the General Agreement on Trade and Tariffs (GATT), holds member countries accountable for providing IPR. Pedro Roffe reveals in his work, Bringing Minimum Global Intellectual Property Standards into Agriculture: The Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS), that IPR at the time of the 1883 Paris Convention and the 1886 Berne Convention was not tied to international trade (as cited in Rajotte & Tansey, 2008). Roffe goes on to clarify that it was not until the 1970s that developing countries, such as Africa and Asia, began to question the system of IPR under the Berne and Paris Conventions, including its relevance in developing countries for the dissemination of knowledge, access to advanced technologies and control of abuses of intellectual property by right holders (as cited in Rajotte & Tansey, 2008, p. 49). Roffe also notes that the general director of WIPO initiated a negotiating process from 1984 to 1991 for a patent law treaty under a committee of experts (as cited in Rajotte & Tansey, 2008). This international accordance treaty of IPR was proposed to its members at a diplomatic conference held in The Hague in Because of developing country opposition, the treaty was unsuccessful. A later, all-inclusive version of the IPR treaty was proposed to members of the World Trade Organization (WTO) during the Uruguay Round negotiation of
23 13 TRIPS. Roffe explains that the reason for the TRIPS agreement s success was because it was an all-inclusive agreement that forced members into ratification even if they were not in accord with all of its elements (as cited in Rajotte & Tansey, 2008, p. 50). Developed countries, such as the United States, saw a need to include IP sanctions in the General Agreement on Tarriffs and Trade (GATT), which was placed under the umbrella of the WTO in 1995, because from their perspective, intellectual property has a direct affect on trade. Developing countries took issue with this, however. Roffe writes that Brazil and India advocated for the developing countries; by arguing that the protection of IPRs was a non-gatt issue and that consequently it was outside the realm of trade negotiations and therefore had no place in the deliberations of the Preparatory Committee of the Ministerial Conference (as cited in Rajotte & Tansey, 2008, p. 50). The developing countries succeeded in their resistance to the inclusion of broader protection of IP standards by offering concessions to developing countries in areas such as agriculture and textiles as well as through threats of trade sanctions (as cited in Rajotte & Tansey, 2008). The difference between the TRIPS agreement and WIPO seems to be that where WIPO provides technical assistance and serves as a forum to promote international treaties and IPR, the TRIPS agreement enforces IPR through its sanctions and by tying those sanctions to trade. Under the TRIPS agreement, members are required to provide a minimum standard of IPR within their respective nation states. Member countries must have a system of enforcing the minimum IPR that they establish within their countries. The minimum IP requirements as outlined in the TRIPS agreement must provide that patents shall be available for products and processes, and patents rights enjoyable without discrimination as to the place of invention, the field of technology and whether products are imported or
24 locally produced (as cited in Rajotte & Tansey, 2008, p ), as well as providing IPR for a duration of no less than twenty years. If member countries do not provide the minimum requirement of IPR as well as its enforcement, as outlined in the TRIPS agreement, they are subjected to commercial retaliation in the form of trade sanctions by vested member states (as cited by Rajotte & Tansey, 2008). The most controversial article within the TRIPS agreement, as illustrated by Roffe, is Article 27.3(b). This controversy stems from the contradiction between allowing member states to exclude from patentability plants and animals if they so choose, while at the same time requiring that member states provide for the protection of plant varieties either by patents or by an effective sui generis system or by any combination thereof (as cited in Rajotte & Tansey, 2008, p ). Susan Bragdon, Kathryn Garforth and John E. Haapala Jr. explain the opposition of developing countries to imposed IPR as manifest in The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) (as cited in Rajotte & Tansey, 2008). Bragdon et al. make known that the CBD was born after an ad hoc group of legal and technical experts within the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) met seven times negotiating what would result in the CBD. During the 1996 Earth Summit, the CBD was presented and signed by 156 countries (excluding the United States). The Convention contains three objectives as stated in Article 1: The conservation of biological diversity, the sustainable use of its components, and the fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising out of the utilization of genetic resources, including by appropriate access to genetic resources and by appropriate transfer of relevant technologies, taking into account all rights over those resources and to technologies and by appropriate funding (as cited in Rajotte & Tansey, 2008, p. 85). 14
E WIPO-UNHCHR/IP/PNL/98/INF/4 ORIGINAL: ENGLISH DATE: NOVEMBER 6, 1998 Panel discussion on Intellectual Property and Human Rights Geneva, November 9, 1998 OPENING STATEMENT BY MR. BRIAN BURDEKIN ON BEHALF
Economic Analysis and Statistics Division Directorate for Science, Technology and Industry GLOSSARY OF PATENT TERMINOLOGY Applicant...2 Applicant country...2 Application for a patent...2 Application date...2
International Licensing and Intellectual Property Rights Evidence from U.S. Multinational Firms by Walter G. Park (American University) and Doug Lippoldt (OECD) Issue: Do stronger IPRs encourage technology
18 Intellectual Property The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) levels the playing field for American workers and American businesses, leading to more Made-in-America exports and more higher-paying American
Dear Delegates, It is a pleasure to welcome you to the 2014 Montessori Model United Nations Conference. The following pages intend to guide you in the research of the topics that will be debated at MMUN
Intellectual Property Rights in the USA Intellectual Property Office is an operating name of the Patent Office Contents Intellectual property rights in the USA What are intellectual property rights? International
The Intellectual Property System in Ethiopia By Wondwossen Belete Ethiopian Intellectual Property Office December 2004 Addis Ababa The explanations in this presentation cover: The Legal Framework for the
Today, many of the world s remaining natural resources can be found on or in indigenous peoples territories. This poses great threats to their lands, natural environment and their well being, and often
Intellectual Property Ethics and Computing Chapter 8 Summer 2001 CSE 4317: Intellectual Property 1 Motivation Most new ideas in the computer field involve intellectual property Intellectual property must
GUIDELINES FOR THE CUSTOMIZATION OF THE PATENT GUIDE INVENTING THE FUTURE - AN INTRODUCTION TO PATENTS FOR SMALL AND MEDIUM-SIZED ENTERPRISES Overall objective The main objective of customizing the guide
Common Sense Economics Part II. Seven Major Sources of Economic Progress Practice Test Multiple Choice Questions 1. Why is private ownership an important source of economic prosperity? a. It eliminates
Introduction to Intellectual Property and Technology Transfer Michelle Mulder President, SARIMA Manager: IP & Business Development, MRC ANDI Centre of Excellence for IP Management in Health TT Workshop,
IPR, innovation, patents What is it? What for? In which respect does it concern science? Cornelia Rhomberg Innovation Management University of Innsbruck project.service.office What is IPR? What is an invention?
15 Questions & Answers on TRIPs & Farmers Rights: A Primer by Chubashini Suntharalingam Edited by: Indrani Thuraisingham Published by Southeast Asian Council for Food Security and Fair Trade (SEACON) This
European IPR Helpdesk Fact Sheet Intellectual Property considerations for business websites The European IPR Helpdesk is managed by the European Commission s Executive Agency for Small and Medium-sized
Many people think that Ideas constitute an Invention. In this module, we make the distinction between an idea and an invention more clear. 1 2 The invention process for the successful inventor should start
WIPO-WASME Special Program on Practical IP Rights Issues Geneva, May 3-6, 2004 1 Importance of Managing the Ownership of IP Assets Lien Verbauwhede Consultant, SMEs Division World Intellectual Property
IPR & TECHNOLOGY BULLETIN EROSION OF EXCLUSIVE MARKETING RIGHTS- BOON FOR THE PHARMACEUTICAL SECTOR Contents Introduction...2 1. What is EMR?...2 2. Provisions of TRIPS...3 2.1 TRIPS and India s compliance...3
Content : Victorian Times : The British Empire 1. Historical Background 2. The Victorian era 2.1 Foreign policy (The Empire s conflicts) 2.2 Domestic policy (London during her era) 3. Conclusion 1. Historical
ENFORCEMENT OF IP RIGHTS IN THE DIGITAL ENVIRONMENT CONCERNS, CHALLENGES AND ACTIONS REQUIRED FOR THE PROTECTION OF THE SINGLE MARKET GRUR Workshop Brussels March 7, 2007 Michael Keplinger* Overview: 1.
I. Introduction s ( University ) policy on intellectual property is intended to encourage, support and motivate research, scholarship, creative activities, innovation and the development of new ideas by
Intellectual Property & Technology Commercialization Basics Judith Sheft Assistant Vice President Technology Development NJIT (973) 596-5825 Sheft@njit.edu Disclaimer I am not a lawyer What is Intellectual
AgBioForum Volume 2, Number 3 & 4 1999 Pages 247-252 PUBLIC AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH AND THE PROTECTION OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY: ISSUES AND OPTIONS Mywish Maredia, Frederic Erbisch, Anwar Naseem, Amie Hightower,
Intellectual Property Protection Helpsheet When running a business you need to consider protecting your intellectual property which could be anything from your logo to inventions, products and designs.
Technology Insights The basics of an Intellectual Property Program Inside: Features of an Intellectual Property Program What is intellectual property? Role of CEOs and CFOs Foreign patents or copyrights
Managing Innovation & Intellectual Property Rights Board library reference Document author Assured by Review cycle P107 Liam Stallard Executive Team Company Secretary 3 Years This document is version controlled.
C ENTER FOR I NTERNATIONAL E NVIRONMENTAL L AW BRIEF ON THE TREATMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY IN THE DOHA WTO MINISTERIAL DECLARATION: MANDATED NEGOTIATIONS AND REVIEWS BY DAVID VIVAS EUGUI 1 FEBRUARY,
Protecting Your Ideas: An Introduction to Intellectual Property Rights By Sasha G. Rao and Andrew J. Koning You have an idea. Something that s going to revolutionize the industry. You re excited, but before
European IPR Helpdesk Fact Sheet Intellectual Property considerations for business websites July 2015 1 1. What elements of your website can be protected by intellectual property law?... 2 2. How to protect
WORLD TRADE RESTRICTED IP/C/W/15 20 November 1995 ORGANIZATION (95-3607) Council for Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights NOTIFICATION PROVISIONS OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY CONVENTIONS INCORPORATED
THE GOVERNMENT No. 103/2006/ND - CP THE SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF VIETNAM Independence Freedom Happiness ------------------------------ DECREE Hanoi, September 22, 2006 Making detailed provisions and providing
The Strategic Marketing Institute Working Paper An Introduction to Patents, Brands, Trade Secrets Trademarks, and Intellectual Property Rights Issues William A. Knudson 1-0806 August 2006 An Introduction
The Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust Intellectual Property (IP), Revenue Sharing & Equity Policy Effective Date: April 2011 Review Date: April 2012 1. Introduction This policy is in line
ARTICLE: BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY: AN INDIAN PERSPECTIVE ON NORTH- SOUTH ISSUES G. S. Srividhya * Biodiversity is perhaps one of the few issues in which the North and South uniformly believe in the need for
School of Graduate Studies INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY GUIDELINES INTRODUCTION Ryerson recognizes and is committed to preserving the principles of academic and intellectual freedom and ensuring that all creators
Published by Yearbook 2016 Building IP value in the 21st century Taking a ride on the Birthday Train KUHNEN & WACKER Intellectual Property Law Firm Christian Thomas KUHNEN & WACKER Intellectual Property
Colonial & Revolutionary Periods SAMPLE APUSH ESSAY TOPICS 1) Analyze the cultural and economic responses of TWO of the following groups to the Indians of North America before 1750. British French Spanish
Issues in Brief Business as Usual is Not an Option: Trade and Markets Underinvestment in developing country agriculture including in local and regional market infrastructure, information and services has
Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights Adopted by the UNESCO General Conference, 19 October 2005 The General Conference, Conscious of the unique capacity of human beings to reflect upon their
Comments on the List of Issues from Japan (Traditional Knowledge) [General Remarks] Japan recognizes that the issue of traditional knowledge is important for many member States. However, Japan believes
Advanced Placement (AP ) Social Studies Courses The AP social studies courses are intended to provide a rigorous college level introduction to the social sciences for high school students. While no official
SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY AND INNOVATION FOR THE TRANSFORMATION OF AFRICAN ECONOMIES SESSION I: ELEMENTS OF AN EFFECTIVE AND BALANCED INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY (IP) SYSTEM TO ENABLE INNOVATION The session discussed
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY MARKETING LICENSING ADMINISTRATION L. Staton Noel III, MS, MBA Director http://innovate.uncg.edu/ Who and Where STAFF Staton Noel (Director ) Lisa Goble (Licensing and Research Policy
Inventions & Patents: Marketing a New Idea About Intellectual Property Intellectual Property (IP) refers to the rights assigned to individuals who have created an original work. This can include inventions,
The Bill of Rights did not come from a desire to protect the liberties won in the American Revolution, but rather from a fear of the powers of the new federal government. Assess the validity of the statement.
In association with Unitary patent and Unified Patent Court: the proposed framework Rainer K Kuhnen Patents in Europe 2013/2014 Helping business compete in the global economy Unitary patent and Unified
ORIGINAL: English DATE: May 2001 E THE PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF BULGARIA WORLD INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ORGANIZATION INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY, THE INTERNET, ELECTRONIC COMMERCE
Intellectual Property in Hong Kong Contents Introduction Intellectual Property Protection in Hong Kong Intellectual Property Law Trade Marks Patents Copyrights Registered Designs Layout-Design (Topography)
Jerry Haynes Law registered patent attorney 2 North Oakdale Avenue Medford, OR 97501 Phone: (541) 494-1433 Fax: (206) 222-1641 www.jerryhayneslaw.com Located in Medford, Oregon, Jerry Haynes Law assists
DETERMINING OWNERSHIP OF EMPLOYEE INVENTIONS IN THE U.S. BY: Kenneth J. Rose, Esquire, The Rose Group, San Diego, California* Originally published in English and Japanese in International Legal Strategy,
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS A.Ram Kumar Advocate High Court of Andhra Pradesh Intellectual Property Rights & Information Technology (Copyright ) Inscription on the copula in WIPO HQ Human genius is the
- 1. Introduction...1-1.1 What is "joint ownership"?...1-1.2 What are the rules relating to joint ownership?...1-2. Joint ownership with regard to copyright...2-2.1 When does joint ownership exist?...2
IT 4823 Information Security Administration Legal and Ethical Considerations March 24 Legal and Ethical Aspects Topics include: cybercrime and computer crime intellectual property issues privacy ethical
How to File an International Patent Application Milan Kapadia, IIPI istockphoto / Simon A. Webber, 2007 This report does not constitute legal advice. This document does not establish an attorney-client
Originally Approved 28 April 1999 INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY POLICY OF ASTM INTERNATIONAL ( POLICY ) I. INTRODUCTION. Ownership and use of ASTM International's Intellectual Property (e.g. Standards, Draft Standards,
Marketers must: The Political, Legal, and Regulatory Environments of Global Marketing Global Marketing Chapter 5 Attempt to comply with each nation s laws and regulations. Keep up with laws and regulations
13.1 Efficient alternative dispute resolution (ADR) for intellectual property disputes More and more rights holders are recognizing the benefits of using private neutral mechanisms that allow parties to
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS (IPR) WHAT IS AN IPR? Intellectual Property Rights are legal rights, which result from intellectual activity in industrial, scientific, literary & artistic fields. These rights
2011 Research, innovation and intellectual property in Luxembourg Lecomte & Partners Wildgen Partners in Law Didier Lecomte Lecomte & Partners and Jean-Luc Dascotte Wildgen Partners in Law Luxembourg Research,
Brown University Patent and Invention Policy and Copyright Policy The Corporation of Brown University approved and adopted the Brown University Patent and Invention Policy and Copyright Policy on May 27,
University of the West of England, Bristol Intellectual Property Policy 1 INTRODUCTION...2 1.1 EXTERNAL CONTEXT...2 1.2 CONTENT...2 1.3 STAKEHOLDERS...2 1.4 RAISING ISSUES...3 2 LEGAL OWNERSHIP OF INTELLECTUAL
Unofficial translation Disclaimer 1 Federal Service for Intellectual Property, Patents and Trademarks (ROSPATENT), 2011 CIVIL CODE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION Passed by the State Duma on November 24, 2006
ICC 105 19 Rev. 1 16 October 2012 Original: English E International Coffee Council 109 th Session 24 28 September 2012 London, United Kingdom Strategic action plan for the International Coffee Organization
FLEXIBILITIES IN THE TRIPS AGREEMENT AND ITS IMPACT ON NATIONAL INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY POLICY Alhaji Tejan-Cole Deputy Registrar Belize Intellectual Property Office 1 INTRODUCTION The World Trade Organization
PCT FAQs Protecting your Inventions Abroad: Frequently Asked Questions About the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) April 2015 Overview of the PCT System Inventions are the object of International Authorities
WIPO SCP/14/7. ORIGINAL: English DATE: January 20, 2010 E WORLD INTELLECTUAL PROPERT Y O RGANI ZATION GENEVA STANDING COMMITTEE ON THE LAW OF PATENTS Fourteenth Session Geneva, January 25 to 29, 2010 PROPOSAL
TOWARDS MORE COHERENCE BETWEEN INTERNATIONAL TRADE AND THE RIGHTS OF THE CHILD I. International cooperation, international trade and the Convention on the Rights of the Child Under the Convention on the
Economics World, ISSN 23287144 May 2014, Vol. 2, No. 5, 325332 D DAVID PUBLISHING Competitive Advantage of Libyan Business Environment Salem Abdulla Azzaytuna University, Tripoli, Libya The economic development
ECHOES FROM BARILOCHE: Conclusions, Recommendations and Action Guidelines The Second Latin American Congress on National Parks and other Protected Areas aimed to asses, value and project the contribution
BASIC NOTIONS ABOUT COPYRIGHT AND NEIGHBOURING RIGHTS 1) What is the object of copyright protection? 2) What kind of protection does copyright grant? 3) How can copyright be obtained? Are there any formalities?
Business Models of Innovation Closed Innovation and Open Innovation (Topic 7 (c)) NATIONAL WORKSHOP ON INNOVATION PROMOTION AND TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER Belgrade, June 21 and 22, 2011 What is Open Innovation?
CANADIAN SEED TRADE ASSOCIATION L ASSOCIATION CANADIENNE DU COMMERCE DES SEMENCES 39 Robertson Road Suite 505 Ottawa, Ontario K2H 8R2 Tel: 613-829-9527 Fax: 613-829-3530 www.cdnseed.org Email: firstname.lastname@example.org
PATENT LAW IN SRI LANKA Introduction Patent legislation in Sri Lanka can be traced to the earlier years of this century. As pointed out by T.A. Blanco White "the basic theory of the patent system is simple
Fundamentals of Intellectual Property (IP) Management by Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises (SMEs) Dr. Horst Fischer, Corporate Vice President, Siemens AG Any company wishing to prosper in the next millennium
TABLE OF CONTENTS International Transfer Pricing in the Ethical Pharmaceutical Industry Second edition SUMMARY OF SALIENT POINTS Importance and Competitiveness of the Ethical Pharmaceutical Industry Government
WIPO TRAINING OF TRAINERS PROGRAM ON EFFECTIVE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ASSET MANAGEMENT BY SMALL AND MEDIUM-SIZED ENTERPRISES (SMEs) IP Law and Administration in the State of Qatar by Malik Al-Kammaz Saba
Consolidate Act No. 108 of 24 January 2012 The Consolidate Patents Act 1) Publication of the Patents Act, cf. Consolidate Act No. 91 of 28 January 2009 as amended by section 20 of Act No. 579 of 1 June
What is Intellectual Property? Watch: Courtesy Swatch AG What is Intellectual Property? Table of Contents Page What is Intellectual Property? 2 What is a Patent? 5 What is a Trademark? 8 What is an Industrial
EU Intellectual Property Law and Ownership in Employment Relationships Sanna Wolk 1 Introduction....... 420 2 Different Approaches in Different Law Systems..... 421 3 Ownership and Harmonisation Efforts
IP Valuation WIPO Workshop on Innovation, Intellectual Asset Management and Successful Technology Licensing: Wealth Creation in the Arab Region Muscat, Oman, December 12 and 13, 2011 Topics Intangibles
The Importance of Intellectual Property (IP) for Economic Growth and Business Competitiveness Sub-Regional Workshop on the Effective Use of the IP System for Economic Growth and Business Competitiveness
World Book 1. TRADE MARKS 1.1 INTRODUCTION In, trade marks are protected by Book VII of the French Intellectual Property Code (the Code), the provisions of which were modified by the Act n 91-7 of January
SOCIAL STUDIES TEST for e-lessons day 2 Name Directions: Use your own piece of paper as your answer document. Do not print off the test. You will need to only turn in your answer document. 29. The Cold