Forthcoming Edinburgh Lecture: Microsoft

I am delighted to invite you all to the following hosted by the Europa Institute and the AHRC Research Centre in Intellectual Property & Technology Law at the University of Edinburgh on 28 February 2008.


"Lessons of the Microsoft Case" by Ian Forrester QC, White & Case LLP, Brussels.
6pm Playfair Library, Old College, South Bridge, Edinburgh

There IS a WIPO Development Agenda

Thanks to IP-Watch for this comprehensive commentary and series of links. I think this is a real achievement for all involved, and the adoption of the Development Agenda will impact on attitudes to IP in the future. Whether it goes further into substantive action, remains to be seen. Hope so.

And so it begins...

The EC Commission has announced an investigation into Qualcomm. It is concerned that Qualcomm's licensing practices in respect of patents which are part of the European 3G mobile phone standards are not fair, reasonable and non discriminatory, and that this is abuse of a dominant postition.

An example of the EC Commission flexing its muscles after the CFI decision in Microsoft (see previous posts)? It will be a long road ahead - but full analysis of article 82, IP and standards will be welcome.

And after all that

The decision of the Court of First Instance upholding the Commission's decision against Microsoft save regarding the appointment of the trustee is likely to be the subject of LOTS of commment elsewhere. Personally, I'm a bit disappointed that there isn't more guidance on whether for refusal to licence to be abusive, we are back to the Volvo esque flexibility or whether the IMS/Magill restrictions still apply. Nice little duck by the court finding that these restrictions were satisfied anyway.

I expect to be reading this decision again and again over the next while so might post further. Discussions of my recent papers at SLS ("Patents, competition and human rights") and Gikii (which was FAB - thanks everyone) ("Playing to win or the game's the thing; competition and human rights in Virtual Worlds") suggest that competition will be a key part of IP and IT (even virtual worlds) for some time.

And just when it looked like the debate had moved on...

Thanks to IPWatch for this report of a letter by Peter Mandelson, EC Commission complaining to Bangkok about Thai compulsory licensing consistent with TRIPS. If this wasn't problematic enough, there is that new proposed EC legilsation on compulsory licensing and access to medicines........I foresee a few sparks

India and TRIPS - the question remains

Thanks again to IP-Watch for this report on the Indian decision in a challenge to Indian patent legislation by Novartis.

The aspect of the case of most interest to us was the argument by Novartis that the legislation, which limited patenting in the case of evergreening was inconsistent with India's obligations under TRIPS. But the court made it very clear that it did not have jurisdiction to consider whether national law was consistent with the international treaty, and that this question would need to be considered by the WTO dispute settlement body.

A mouth watering prospect - but it seems that Switzerland, home of Novartis is unlikely to make a complaint. Perhaps another pharmaceutial company, and another country will take a different view?

WHO and IP: and slowly it goes on

Thanks to IP Watch for this excellent and comprehensive summary of the latest proposal building on the WHO CIPIH report - seems that the proposal might be rather too comprehensive to be workable. I am interested in the comments on monitoring FTAs which do not include TRIPS PLUS provisions and a patent pool in respect of essential medicines. As long as it is clear what those are....

**New survey on use of open content licences by cultural heritage organisations **

The Eduserv Foundation is funding a study into the use of Creative Archive, Creative Commons and similar open content licences by cultural heritage organisations in the United Kingdom. The study is being led by legal consultant Jordan Hatcher of opencontentlawyer.com and friend of ipedinburgh. The survey is available here: https://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=L3x_2b1lQJxqu7KdfK587AeA_3d_3d

This survey is open to UK-based cultural heritage organisations such as museums, libraries, galleries, archives, film and video organisations, broadcasters, and other organisations that conduct cultural heritage activities. The goal of this study is to provide information on the actual use of Creative Archive, Creative Commons, and similar licences. This information will be useful to decision makers and interested professionals in the cultural heritage sector, and for local and national government and the HE and FE sector. The study will be conducted from now through to the middle of September and a report will be made available in October. If you are a member of a cultural heritage organisation, whether or not you currently use Creative Commons or Creative Archive licences (or even know what they are!), your participation is needed to make this study a success.

AND

iPod Shuffle giveaway!!

As a bonus for completing the survey, respondents will get the chance to enter a drawer to win one of three iPod Shuffles that come pre-loaded with music! See the survey for full details.

Rwanda, TRIPS and Health

Thanks in particular to IP Watch for details of Rwanda's notice that it will take advantage of the flexibilities in TRIPS. http://www.ip-watch.org/weblog/index.php?p=696&res=1024&print=0 . Rwanda is utilising Paragraph 6 of the Doha Declaration 2001 regarding import/export which was considered in the General Council Decision of 2003; however, Rwanda has also stated that pursuant to Paragraph 7 of the Doha Declaration, it will not enforce relevant patents granted in Rwanda.

This is the first instance of a smaller, least developed country taking advantage of these opportunities. It will be interesting to compare future developments with the criticism from patent owners faced by, say Brazil, when it sought to issue compulsory licenses in respect of HIV/AIDS treatments. The impact of the non enforcement declaration on patent owners and courts might also be one to watch.