Putting China in charge of the world’s intellectual property is a bad idea; The Washington Post, Janaury 30, 2020

Josh Rogin , The Washington Post; Putting China in charge of the world’s intellectual property is a bad idea

"Beijing is lobbying hard to take over leadership of the international organization that oversees intellectual property, which could result in dire consequences for the future of technology and economic competition. But the U.S.-led effort to prevent this from happening faces a steep uphill climb.

In March, 83 countries will vote to elect the next director general of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), a U.N.-created body founded in 1967 “to promote the protection of intellectual property throughout the world.” The Chinese candidate, Wang Binying, currently serves as one of its four deputy director-generals and is widely seen as the front-runner.

On its face, allowing China to assume leadership of the WIPO poses a clear risk to the integrity of the institution, given that the U.S. government has singled out China as the leading source of intellectual property theft in the world."

As Kit Kat, Starbucks and Posh Spice rulings show, intellectual property is big but bittersweet business; South China Morning Post, August 1, 2018

Stephen Vines, South China Morning Post; As Kit Kat, Starbucks and Posh Spice rulings show, intellectual property is big but bittersweet business

"Chinese trademark law is still very much in the process of evolution and the time it is taking to develop is causing much vexation among international branded goods companies. They are also still engaged in attempts to curb outright trademark and intellectual property theft, which is supposed to have been largely stamped out, but as anyone familiar with hawkers on streets of mainland cities knows, this battle is far from over.

Hong Kong has better established and less complex trademark laws and rules but the local regime is hardly exemplary, as applications for trademarks are known to drag on for a long time and there seems to be a rather quixotic approach to what are regarded as being generic names, as opposed to specific names that apply to individual brands...

The issue of trademarks is one of the biggest aspects of intellectual property protection, which is climbing the agenda of both global trade talks and the concerns of individual companies."

James Grimmelmann Dec. 2nd Talk at Drexel University

James Grimmelmann Dec. 2nd Talk at Drexel University, "The Google Books Settlement: Books, Computers, and the Law":

Date: 12/2/2009
Start Time: 2:00 PM
Location: Rush Building, Room 014

Joint lecture: "The Google Books Settlement: Books, Computers, and the Law” by James Grimmelmann

The iSchool at Drexel, College of Information Science and Technology, and the Earle Mack School of Law will co-sponsor the lecture "The Google Books Settlement: Books, Computers, and the Law” by James Grimmelmann on Wednesday, December 2, 2009, at 2 p.m. in room 014, Rush Building (30 N. 33rd Street).Mr. Grimmelmann will review the history of the Google Books project, lawsuit, and proposed settlement, then discuss the questions it raises for information policy and the rule of law. These touch on issues of copyright, antitrust, privacy, free speech, and civil procedure, and are connected to bigger themes in public policy. He is an Associate Professor at New York Law School and a member of its Institute for Information Law and Policy.

Background: http://www.nyls.edu/centers/harlan_scholar_centers/institute_for_information_law_and_policy/events/d_is_for_digitize/programhttp://thepublicindex.org/

http://www.ischool.drexel.edu/home/about/calendar/details/?event=1569