- Obtain commitments to ratify or accede to international treaties reflecting best practices in intellectual property protection and enforcement.
- Provide a framework for effective cooperation between Parties on matters related to the adequate and effective protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights.
- Promote transparency and efficiency in the procedures and systems that establish protection of intellectual property rights, including making more relevant information available online.
- Seek provisions governing intellectual property rights that reflect a standard of protection similar to that found in U.S. law, including, but not limited to protections related to trademarks, patents, copyright and related rights (including, as appropriate, exceptions and limitations), undisclosed test or other data, and trade secrets.
- Provide strong protection and enforcement for new and emerging technologies and new methods of transmitting and distributing products embodying intellectual property, including in a manner that facilitates legitimate digital trade, including, but not limited to, technological protection measures.
- Ensure standards of protection and enforcement that keep pace with technological developments, and in particular ensure that rights holders have the legal and technological means to control the use of their works through the Internet and other global communication media, and to prevent the unauthorized use of their works.
- Prevent or eliminate government involvement in the violation of intellectual property rights, including cyber theft and piracy.
- Secure fair, equitable, and nondiscriminatory market access opportunities for United States persons that rely upon intellectual property protection.
- Prevent or eliminate discrimination with respect to matters affecting the availability, acquisition, scope, maintenance, use, and enforcement of intellectual property rights.
- Respect the Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health, adopted by the World Trade Organization at the Fourth Ministerial Conference at Doha, Qatar on November 14, 2001, and to ensure that trade agreements foster innovation and promote access to medicines.
- Prevent the undermining of market access for U.S. products through the improper use of a country’s system for protecting or recognizing geographical indications, including such systems that fail to ensure transparency and procedural fairness, or adequately protecting generic terms for common use.
- Provide the means for adequate and effective enforcement of intellectual property rights, including by requiring accessible, expeditious, and effective civil, administrative, and criminal enforcement mechanisms. Such mechanisms include, but are not limited to, strong protections against counterfeit and pirated goods.
Does it not seem worth mentioning that our own negotiators are so badly messing up the negotiations that likely nothing (including the above list) is likely to be resolved in these talks? At this point, it will be a lucky outcome if we can merely withdraw from the talks and go back to the status quo ante.
Anyone can list a set of things that they would like to see happen (“1) Cessation of all aggressive violence in the world; 2) Remediation of all environmental pollution from the last twenty years; 3)….). When, however, the list is just a list, with little to no likelihood of any follow-through to put the list items into action, it seems like rather a waste of everyone’s time to publish the list.
Several of these items are clearly disparate with IP trends in the US – and we really should clean up our own mess before seeking to bring others “up” to our standards.
Was this a document that was created *for* the President or *by* the President?
Too true.
My thoughts exactly. Do you think we would protest a post trial – poltiical void ab inito procedure – if someone like China was invaliding post judgment patents? You bet we would, complaining about corruption and the rule of law all the way. Someone needs to get a memo to the USTR and W.Ross, as they are going to put foot directly into mouth, when current IPR law is put back in their face.
Comments are closed.