Lorenzo Montanari, Forbes; IP is the G20 Issue
"The official priorities at the G20 Summit
in Argentina include worrying about soil erosion, mainstreaming
public-private partnerships, and voicing anxiety over whether government
run schools can equip kids with employable skills.While those certainly
are complex issues, they miss the urgency of a real global crises that
President Trump has brought to the table.
The new agenda is intellectual property, intellectual property, and intellectual property.
President Trump has not shied away from the complex issue that Obama
and other world leaders preferred to ignore. At the summit the United
States, Mexico, and Canada are expected to sign the new USMCA trade
agreement- an agreement that has the strongest IP protections than any
other trade agreement in history."
Showing posts with label NAFTA. Show all posts
Showing posts with label NAFTA. Show all posts
Thursday, November 29, 2018
Thursday, November 8, 2018
U.S.-Mexico-Canada Trade Agreement: Intellectual Property Provisions for the Modern Age; Lexology, November 6, 2018
"The intellectual property (IP) chapter of the new U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), in particular, reflects significant updates. While NAFTA included IP provisions – and was, in fact, the first trade agreement to do so – the USMCA reflects a more comprehensive approach to ensuring the United States’ most important trading partners respect and enforce IP rights at a high level."
Thursday, May 31, 2018
NAFTA negotiators must protect U.S. intellectual property; Dallas News, May 30, 2018
Tom Giovanetti, Dallas News; NAFTA negotiators must protect U.S. intellectual property
"When the North American Free Trade Agreement came into effect, the U.S. economy was already more dependent on innovation than upon traditional manufacturing. And in the 30 years since, that trend has only continued. Today, the U.S. is a creators' economy; we patent new inventions, copyright new creative works, and trademark strong new brands.
These industries, identified as the intellectual property-intensive industries by the Commerce Department, are responsible for nearly one-third of all U.S. jobs and for more than 38 percent of U.S. gross domestic product. So there's a good chance you or someone close to you works in these industries, which include software, music and book publishing, movies and entertainment, pharmaceuticals, chemicals and enzymes, patented and hybridized plants and seeds, microchip design or aircraft manufacturing.
In any given year, the intellectual property-intensive industries are responsible for around 60 percent of all U.S. exports. In other words, the majority of what the rest of the world wants from the U.S. is our creative output."
"When the North American Free Trade Agreement came into effect, the U.S. economy was already more dependent on innovation than upon traditional manufacturing. And in the 30 years since, that trend has only continued. Today, the U.S. is a creators' economy; we patent new inventions, copyright new creative works, and trademark strong new brands.
These industries, identified as the intellectual property-intensive industries by the Commerce Department, are responsible for nearly one-third of all U.S. jobs and for more than 38 percent of U.S. gross domestic product. So there's a good chance you or someone close to you works in these industries, which include software, music and book publishing, movies and entertainment, pharmaceuticals, chemicals and enzymes, patented and hybridized plants and seeds, microchip design or aircraft manufacturing.
In any given year, the intellectual property-intensive industries are responsible for around 60 percent of all U.S. exports. In other words, the majority of what the rest of the world wants from the U.S. is our creative output."
Monday, July 3, 2017
‘Bombshell’ Canadian Patent Ruling Seen Favoring Foreign Companies; Bloomberg, June 30, 2017
Josh Wingrove, Bloomberg; ‘Bombshell’ Canadian Patent Ruling Seen Favoring Foreign Companies
"“It’s a bombshell of a decision,” said Richard Gold, a law professor at Montreal’s McGill University who studies intellectual property. He’s a member of the university’s Centre For Intellectual Property Policy, which intervened in the case. “We’re now the only country in the developed world that when an inventor says, ‘my invention does X,’ it doesn’t actually have to do X.”
"“It’s a bombshell of a decision,” said Richard Gold, a law professor at Montreal’s McGill University who studies intellectual property. He’s a member of the university’s Centre For Intellectual Property Policy, which intervened in the case. “We’re now the only country in the developed world that when an inventor says, ‘my invention does X,’ it doesn’t actually have to do X.”
The Supreme Court ruled that a current standard, known as the “promise doctrine,” goes too far, because it allows for patents to be invalidated if an invention doesn’t do any of the things it promised."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)