TRIPS, from the WTO to. Presented by: Catherine Mateu

Similar documents
MODULE. Conclusion. ESTIMATED TIME: 3 hours

MARRAKESH AGREEMENT ESTABLISHING THE WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION ANNEX 1C: AGREEMENT ON TRADE-RELATED ASPECTS OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS *

Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS Agreement) (1994)*

ANNEX XVII REFERRED TO IN ARTICLE 5 PROTECTION OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY

Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights, 33 I.L.M (1994)

ANNEX XV REFERRED TO IN ARTICLE 7 PROTECTION OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY

The Trans-Pacific Partnership

ANNEX VII REFERRED TO IN ARTICLE 25 PROTECTION OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY

ANNEX VI REFERRED TO IN ARTICLE 24 PROTECTION OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY

WIPO-ESCAP-IIUM Regional Workshop on Intellectual Property and Public Health and Environment Policy for Asia and Pacific

DRAFT AGREEMENT ON TRADE-RELATED ASPECTS OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS

AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND THE SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF VIETNAM ON TRADE RELATIONS CHAPTER II INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS

AGREEMENT. On trade and economic cooperation between the Government of the Republic of Armenia and the Swiss Federal Council

CHAPTER TEN INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY

Global Access to Medicines Program Compiled by Stephanie Rosenberg. December 2, This chart compares provisions from the following texts:

Reports of Cases OPINION OF ADVOCATE GENERAL CRUZ VILLALÓN 1. presented on 31 January Case C-414/11

A I P P I ASSOCIATION INTERNATIONALE POUR LA PROTECTION DE LA PROPRIETE INTELLECTUELLE

Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership. Intellectual Property Chapter and the Impact on Access to Medicines

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY BILL

Intellectual Property Laws Amendment Bill 2013 No., 2013

ANNEX V REFERRED TO IN ARTICLE 23 PROTECTION OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY

Intellectual Property Laws Amendment Act 2015

MULTILATERAL TRADE NEGOTIATIONS THE URUGUAY ROUND

OFFICIAL GAZETTE OF THE REPUBLIC OF KOSOVA / No. 12 / 29 AVGUST 2011, PRISTINA. LAW No. 04/L-029 ON PATENTS LAW ON PATENTS

CRS Report for Congress

Proposal for a COUNCIL DECISION

Proposal for a COUNCIL DECISION

T H E W O R L D J O U R N A L O N J U R I S T I C P O L I T Y. BOLAR EXEMPTION VS. DATA EXCLUSIVITY: RIGHT TO HEALTH vs RIGHT OF PATENT HOLDER

International Regulation: Lessons from the IP Experience for the Internet

CONSOLIDATED TEXT REFLECTS CHANGES MADE DURING THE SEPTEMBER 2010 TOKYO ROUND. Consolidated Text. Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement

Denmark and Italy Trade-related intellectual property rights, access to medicines and human rights

(1971)" refers to the Paris Act ofthis Convention of 24 July "Rome Convention" refers to the International Convention for the Protection of Perf

Intellectual Property in WTO Dispute Settlement

FINLAND Patents Act No. 550 of December 15, 1967 as last amended by Act No. 101/2013 of January 31, 2013 Enter into force on 1 September 2013

MULTILATERAL TRADE. NEGOTIATIONS 23 July 1990 RESTRICTED. Special Distribution THE URUGUAY ROUND. Negotiating Group on Trade-Related

THE PATENT LAW 1 I INTRODUCTORY PROVISIONS. 1. Subject Matter of Regulation and Definitions. Subject Matter of Regulation.

IN THE INTERNATIONAL COURT OF ARBITRATION GOOD HEALTH COMPANY DIRECTOR OF IP, STATE OF MARU SUBMISSIONS OF COUNSEL FOR THE CLAIMANT

Intellectual Property Department Hong Kong, China. Contents

Answer of the Canadian National Group

Young EPLAW Congress. Bolar provision: a European tour. Brussels, 27 April 2015 Guillaume Bensussan Kathy Osgerby Agathe Michel de Cazotte

AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND THE HASHEMITE KINGDOM OF JORDAN ON THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A FREE-TRADE AREA

Report Special Committee Q94

MODULE X CURRENT TRIPS ISSUES*

The (Non)Use of Treaty Object and Purpose in IP Disputes in the WTO Henning Grosse Ruse - Khan

THE ISSUE OF BALANCING RIGHTS IN THE PATENT PROTECTION

A I P P I ASSOCIATION INTERNATIONALE POUR LA PROTECTION DE LA PROPRIETE INTELLECTUELLE

MULTILATERAL TRADE NEGOTIATIONS THE URUGUAY ROUND

EN Official Journal of the European Union L 157/ 45. DIRECTIVE 2004/48/EC OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 29 April 2004

THE LAW ON PROTECTION OF UNDISCLOSED INFORMATION

THE PATENT LAW 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS. Article 1. This Law shall regulate the legal protection of inventions by means of patents.

Patent Enforcement in India

Int l IP. Module 3 Patent Law

The Consolidate Utility Models Act 1)

TRIPS Article 28 Rights Conferred. 1. A patent shall confer on its owner the following exclusive rights:

TRADE MARKS ACT 1996 (as amended)

New IP Code changes regarding patents, new post-grant opposition and enforcement provisions

SWITZERLAND: Patent Litigation CHAMBERS 2017 DOING BUSINESS IN BRAZIL: Global Practice Guides. Switzerland LAW & PRACTICE: p.<?> p.3. p.<?> p.

BRUNEI Patent Order 2011

P1: IBE CY CY564-Unctad-v1 November 27, :24 Char Count= 0. 4: Basic Principles

Chapter Ten: Initial Provisions Comparative Study Table of Contents

Recognized Group Thailand Report

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY

of 25 June 1954 (Status as of 1 January 2017) para. 2) is not patentable as an invention. 7

PATENT ACT, B.E (1979) 1. BHUMIBOL ADULYADEJ, REX; Given on the 11 th Day of March B.E. 2522; Being the 34 th Year of the Present Reign

Int l IP. Module 3 Patent Law

INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY ACT, No. 8 of 2010 ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS. PART II Patents

PATENT ACT (UNOFFICIAL CLEAR TEXT) I. GENERAL PROVISIONS

Act No. 2 of the Year A.D relating to Patents, Utility Models, Integrated Circuit Layouts and Undisclosed Information

DEVELOPING COUNTRIES AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ENFORCEMENT MEASURES: IMPROVING ACCESS TO MEDICINES THROUGH WTO DISPUTE SETTLEMENT

SWITZERLAND Patent Law as last amended on March 20, 2009 ENTRY INTO FORCE: January 1, 2012

Cover Page. The handle holds various files of this Leiden University dissertation

The Principle of Integration in WTO/TRIPS Jurisprudence Henning Grosse Ruse - Khan

The Third Amendment to the Patent Law of China. On December 27, 2008, the Standing Committee of the National People's

A RE-LOOK INTO COMPULSORY LICENSING: AFTER NATCO

AUSTRALIA Patents Act 1990 Compilation date: 24 February 2017 Includes amendments up to: Act No. 61, 2016 Registered: 27 February 2017

Article 12 Geographical Indications. Article 12.1 Protection of Geographical Indications

Thailand. Alan Adcock, Clemence Gautier, and Areeya Pornwiriyangkura Tilleke & Gibbins International Ltd Bangkok, Thailand

Bipartisan Congressional Trade Priorities and Accountability Act of 2015: Section-by-Section Summary

2 WTO IN BRIEF. Global trade rules

Comparative Analysis of the U.S. Intellectual Property Proposal and Peruvian Law

IP IN A POST-BREXIT EUROPE ENSURING YOUR EUROPEAN IP RIGHTS ARE PROTECTED DATE: 10 NOVEMBER 2016 PRESENTERS: CHRIS FINN, BEN GRAU AND GRAHAM MURNANE

Questionnaire 2. HCCH Judgments Project

CANCUN SESSION OF THE PARLIAMENTARY CONFERENCE ON THE WTO Cancún (Mexico), 9 and 12 September 2003

WIPO Seminar, Geneva, 23 June

4. COMPARISON OF THE INDIAN PATENT LAW WITH THE PATENT LAWS IN U.S., EUROPE AND CHINA

Law on the protection of inventions No. 50/2008 of the Republic of Moldova can be found at:

THE INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY BILL (No... of 2016) Explanatory Memorandum

WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION

Official Journal of the European Union. (Legislative acts) REGULATIONS

Anti-counterfeiting laws and access to essential medicines in East and Southern Africa

CAMBODIA Trademark Law The Law Concerning Marks, Trade Names and Acts of Unfair Competition as amended on February 07, 2002

Mongolia Trade Relations Agreement AGREEMENT ON TRADE RELATIONS BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE

Trade-related intellectual property rights, trade in services and the fulfilment of children s rights - Botswana September 2004

Compilation date: 24 February Includes amendments up to: Act No. 61, Registered: 27 February 2017

Trademark Rights; Overview of Provisions in the Paris Convention and the TRIPS Agreement

Supported by. A global guide for practitioners

Council of the European Union Brussels, 28 October 2015 (OR. en)

Combating the Anti-trade Movement: Evaluating the Trans-Pacific Partnership s Place in International Patent Law

DECISION 486 Common Intellectual Property Regime (Non official translation)

The Republic of Turkey and the Republic of Bulgaria (hereinafter called the "Parties");

Transcription:

TRIPS, from the WTO to businesses Presented by: Catherine Mateu 1

Partner at Armengaud Guerlain Chair of the TRIPS Standing Committee (AIPPI) www.aippi.org Fluent in French, Spanish, English, and Basque Catherine Mateu c.mateu@armengaud-guerlain.com guerlain com 2

BACKGROUND ON TRIPS AGREEMENT History: Outcome of the Uruguay Round Negotiations; Annex 1C of the Marrakesh Agreement creating the WTO (entry into force: 01.01.1995) Notable content for patent practitioners: General provisions & standards Provisions on Patent law Protection of undisclosed information Enforcement WTO disputes

TRANSITIONAL ARRANGEMENTS for the least-developed countries (1) Art. 66 TRIPS Least-Developed Country Members 1. In view of the special needs and requirements of least-developed country Members, their economic, financial and administrative constraints, and their need for flexibility to create a viable technological base, such Members shall not be required to apply the provisions of this Agreement, gee ent, other than Articles 3, 4 and 5, for a period of 10 years from the date of application as defined under paragraph 1 of Article 65. The Council of TRIPS shall, upon duly motivated request by a least-developed country Member, accord extensions of this period. 2. Developed country Members shall provide incentives to enterprises and institutions in their territories i for the purposep of promoting and encouraging technology transfer to least-developed country Members in order to enable them to create a sound and viable technological base. (

TRANSITIONAL ARRANGEMENTS for the least-developed countries DECLARATION ON THE TRIPS AGREEMENT AND PUBLIC HEALTH - Ministerial Conference, Fourth Session - DOHA, 14.11.2001 (WT/MIN(01)/DEC/2) Art. 7 [ ]Wealsoagreethattheleast-developped agree the least-developped country Members will not be obliged, with respect to pharmaceutical products, to impliment or apply ppysection 5 and 7 of Part II of the TRIPS Agreement or to enforce rights provided under these Sections until 1 January 2016, without prejudice to the right of least-developed country Members to seek other extensions of the transition i periods as provided d for in Article 66.1 of the TRIPS Agreement. [...]

TRANSITIONAL ARRANGEMENTS for the least-developed countries DECISION OF THE COUNCIL FOR TRIPs IP/C/40 of 30.11.2005 I. Extension of the transition period under Article 66.1 of the Agreement for the least-developed country Members 1. Least-developed country Members shall not be required to apply the provisions of the Agreement, other than Articles 3, 4 and 5, until 1 July 2013, or until such a date on which they cease to be a least-developed country Member, whichever date is earlier.

TRANSITIONAL ARRANGEMENTS for the least-developed countries DECISION OF THE COUNCIL FOR TRIPS IP/C/64 of 11.06.2013 1. Least-developed country Members shall not be required to apply the provisions of the Agreement, other Articles 3, 4 and 5, until 1 July 2021, or until such a date on which they cease to be a least-developed country Member, whichever date is earlier.

TRANSITIONAL ARRANGEMENTS for the least-developed countries Look back into the Nairobi Ministerial Declaration of 19.12.2015 E-News NwsN. No.47,,WTO 10th Ministerial Conference in Nairobi December 15-19, 2015, by Manoj Menda, Co-Chair of the Standing Committee on TRIPS

A REFERENCE IN IP LAW Widely quoted in the Report of the UN Secretary-General General shighlevel high-level panel on access to medecines, September 2016.

DIRECT EFFECT (1) ECJ 11.09.2007, Merck Genericos Produtos Farmaceuticos v. Merck & Co Inc., Merck Sharp & Dohme. No. C-431/05 As Community legislation in the sphere of patents now stands, it is not contrary to Community law for Article 33 of the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights ( ) to be directly applied by a national court subject to the conditions provided for by national law.

DIRECT EFFECT (2) ECJ, 18.07.2013, Daiichi Sankyo Co. Ltd., Sanofi-Aventis Deutschland GmbH v. DEMO Anonimos Viomikhaniki Kai Emporiki Etairia Farmakon. No. C-414/11 Article 27 of the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights [ ], falls within the field of the common commercial policy. Article 27 [...] must be interpreted as meaning that the invention of a pharmaceutical product [...] is, in the absence of a derogation in accordance to article 27(2) or (3), capable of being the subject- matter of a patent [...].

DIRECT EFFECT (3) AIPPI E-News No.46 TRIPS Agreement influenced interpretation of patent law in Finnish patent dispute (J. Palm) (Decision No.821/15 dated 25.11.2015). The Article 34 of TRIPS Agreement obligates the member states to ensure that the judicial authorities shall have the authority to order the defendant to prove that the process to obtain an identical product is different from the patented process The TRIPS Agreement did not contain any specific restriction i according to which the reversed burden of proof in Article 34 could not be applied in temporary injunction proceedings.

DIRECT EFFECT (3) AIPPI E-News No.46 TRIPS Agreement influenced interpretation of patent law in Finnish patent dispute (J. Palm) (Decision No.821/15 dated 25.11.2015). The Article 34 of TRIPS Agreement obligates the member states to ensure that the judicial authorities shall have the authority to order the defendant to prove that the process to obtain an identical product is different from the patented process The TRIPS Agreement did not contain any specific restriction i according to which the reversed burden of proof in Article 34 could not be applied in temporary injunction proceedings.

DIRECT EFFECT (3) AIPPI E-News No.47 The Finnish Market Court Considered the Meaning of Identical under Article 34 of the TRIPS Agreement by Juhani Sinkkonen n n (Roschier, Attorneys Ltd. Finland) nd) The defendant argued that the product obtained by its process was not identical because different starting materials and a different process resulted in a different product. The defendant stated that its product contained a mixture of a wide range of hydrocarbons (C1 to C21) as well as other side products and water, and had been registered as a new product by the European Chemicals Agency. Furthermore, the defendant d claimed that t the patented t process gave anhydrous middle distillate the main component of which was C18 n-paraffin. The Court stated that, in light of the TRIPS Agreement, the product obtained by the allegedly infringing process does not have to be fully identical with the new product obtained by the patented process in order to be considered identical within the meaning of Section 57a FPA. Instead, the refinery products in question were to be deemed identical if they were identical as to their essential composition, purpose of use and qualities.

DIRECT EFFECT (4) Supreme Court, December 21, 2015, Resolution No 722/2015 Barcelona Court of Appeals, Juzgado Mercantil No 4, Sentencia No 338/14 of 20.10.2014 Barcelona Court of Appeals, Juzgado Mercantil No 7, Sentencia No174/2016 of 20.07.2016

MOST-FAVORED-NATION Art. 4 TRIPS - Most-Favoured-Nation Treatment With regard to the protection of intellectual property, any advantage, favour, privilege or immunity granted by a Member to the nationals of any other country shall be accorded immediately and unconditionally to the nationals of all other Members. Exempted from this obligation are any advantage, favour, privilege or immunity accorded by a Member: (a) () deriving from international agreements on judicial assistance or law enforcement of a general nature and not particularly confined to the protection of intellectual property; (b) granted in accordance with the provisions of the Berne Convention (1971) or the Rome Convention authorizing that the treatment accorded be a function not of national treatment but of the treatment accorded in another country; (c) in respect of the rights of performers, producers of phonograms and broadcasting organizations not provided under this Agreement; (d) deriving from international agreements related to the protection of intellectual property which entered into force prior to the entry into force of the WTO Agreement, provided that such agreements are notified to the Council for TRIPS and do not constitute an arbitrary or unjustifiable discrimination against nationals of other Members.

NON-DISCRIMINATION Art. 27 TRIPS - Patentable Subject Matter 1. Subject to the provisions of paragraphs 2 and 3, patents shall be available for any inventions, whether products or processes, in all fields of technology, provided that they are new, involve an inventive step and are capable of industrial application.5 Subject to paragraph 4 of Article 65, paragraph 8 of Article 70 and paragraph 3 of this Article, patents shall hllbe available and patent rights ih enjoyable without ih discriminationi i i as to the place of invention, the field of technology and whether products are imported or locally produced. 2. Members may exclude from patentability inventions, the prevention within their territory of the commercial exploitation of which is necessary to protect ordre public or morality, including to protect human, animal or plant life or health or to avoid serious prejudice to the environment, provided that such exclusion is not made merely because the exploitation is prohibited by their law.

TRADE SECRETS (1) Section 7, Art. 39 TRIPS 1. In the course of ensuring effective protection against unfair competition as provided in Article 10bis of the Paris Convention (1967), Members shall protect undisclosed information in accordance with paragraph 2 and data submitted to governments or governmental agencies in accordance with paragraph 3. 2. Natural and legal persons shall have the possibility of preventing information lawfully within their control from being disclosed to, acquired by, or used by others without their consent in a manner contrary to honest commercial practices so long as such information: (a) is secret in the sense that it is not, as abody orintheprecise configuration and assembly of its components, generally known among or readily accessible to persons within the circles that normally deal with the kind of information in question; (b) has commercial il value because it is secret; and (c) has been subject to reasonable steps under the circumstances, by the person lawfully in control of the information, to keep it secret. [ ]

TRADE SECRETS (2) Directive 2016/943 of the European Parliament and of the Council - 08.06.2016 - On the protection of undisclosed know-how and business information (trade secrets) against their unlawful acquisition, use and disclosure Article 2 : Definitions For the purposes of this Directive, the following definitions apply: (1) trade secret means information which meets all of the following requirements: (a)itissecretinthesensethatitisnot,asabodyorinthepreciseconfigurationandassembly of its components, generally known among or readily accessible to persons within the circles that normally deal with the kind of information in question; (b) it has commercial value because it is secret; (c) it has been subject to reasonable steps under the circumstances, by the person lawfully in control of the information, to keep it secret; [ ]

TRADE SECRETS (3) Judgment of the Court of First Instance of Montpellier, 17.09.2015 No. 13/05047, MVF3 APS, Vestergaard Frandsen & Disease Control Textiles v. Intelligent Insect Control & M. Ole Skovmand. Direct implementation of articles 39-1 and 39-2 of the TRIPS Agreement. Control of the conditions laid down by article 39-2. Extension of the responsability further than unfair competition solely (breach of confidentiality obligation in a non formal contract). Is reference to art. 39 TRIPS by a national court to remain an exception? (EU Directive 2016/943)

COMPULSORY LICENSES (1) Art. 30 TRIPS - Exceptions to Rights Conferred Members may provide limited exceptions to the exclusive rights conferred by a patent, provided that such exceptions do not unreasonably conflict with a normal exploitation of the patent and do not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the patent owner, taking account of the legitimate interests of third parties. Art. 31 TRIPS - Other Use Without Authorization of the Right Holder Where the law of a Member allows for other use of the subject matter of a patent without the authorization of the right holder, including use by the government or third parties authorized by the government, the following provisions shall be respected: [ ]

COMPULSORY LICENSES (2) DECLARATION ON THE TRIPS AGREEMENT AND PUBLIC HEALTH - Ministerial Conference, Fourth Session - DOHA, 14.11.2001 (WT/MIN(01)/DEC/2) Art. 5. Accordingly and in the light of paragraph 4 above, while maintaining our commitments in the TRIPS Agreement, we recognize that these flexibilities include: [ ] (b) Each Member has the right to grant compulsory licences and the freedom to determine the grounds upon which such licences are granted. (c) Each Member has the right to determine what constitutes a national emergency or other circumstances of extreme urgency, it being understood that public health crises, including those relating to HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, malaria and other epidemics, can represent a national emergency or other circumstances of extreme urgency.

COMPULSORY LICENSES (3) Paragraph 6 Decision: Amendment of the TRIPS Agreement - Decision of December 6 th, 2005 (WT/L/641). Import/Export system for LDCs Member regarding pharmaceutical products under compulsory licenses. See Also : Report of the United Nations Secretary-General s High Level Panel on Access to Medicines (Sept. 2016). 2. Intellectual property laws and access to healthtechnologies. 2.2.2. 2 2 Compulsory Licenses. AIPPI E-News No. 47 WTO 10th Ministerial Conference in Nairobi - 15-19.12.2015 (Manoj Menda) First notification of compulsory license (ApoTriavir) by Canada for export to Rwanda (4.10.2007) Columbia s declaration to grant a compulsory license on Imatinib ( Glivec ) by Novartis (April 2016)

RESEARCH EXCEPTION (1) Article 30 TRIPS - Exceptions to Rights Conferred Members may provide limited exceptions to the exclusive rights conferred by a patent, t provided d thatt such exceptions do not unreasonably conflict with a normal exploitation of the patent and do not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the patent owner, taking account of the legitimate interests of third parties.

RESEARCH EXCEPTION (2) See: Roche Products, Inc. c. Bolar Pharmaceutical Co., Inc., 733 F.2d 858 (1984) Canada - Patent protection of pharmaceutical products - Arbitration - 18.08.2000 (WT/DS114/13) First French evocation (defense argument) : Paris Court of first Instance, Sanofi-Aventis Deutschland GmbH v. Lilly France SA, 15.12.2014, No.14/58023 Poland Supreme Court, Astellas c. Polypharma (CSK 92/13) Art. 27 Agreement on a Unified Patent Court Decision of the Spanish Supreme Court No. 7269/2011 (11.11.2011)

GOODS IN TRANSIT (1) Article 51 TRIPS - Suspension of Release by Customs Authorities Members shall, in conformity with the provisions set out below, adopt procedures to enable a right holder, who has valid grounds for suspecting that the importation of counterfeit trademark or pirated copyright goods may take place, to lodge an application inwriting with competent pt tauthorities, administrative i ti or jdiilf judicial, for the suspension by the customs authorities of the release into free circulation of such goods. Members may enable such an application to be made in respect of goods which involve other infringements of intellectual property rights, provided that the requirements of this Section are met. Members may also provide for corresponding procedures concerning the suspension by the customs authorities of the release of infringing goods destined for exportation from their territories.

GOODS IN TRANSIT (2) Article 52 TRIPS - Application Any right holder initiating the procedures under Article 51 shall be required to provide adequate evidence to satisfy the competent authorities that, under the laws of the country of importation, there is prima facie an infringement of the right holder s intellectual property right and to supply a sufficiently detailed description of the goods to make them readily recognizable by the customs authorities. The competent authorities shall inform the applicant within a reasonable period whether they have accepted the application and, where determined by the competent authorities, the period for which the customs authorities will take action.

GOODS IN TRANSIT (3) See: Brazil and India s complaints to the WTO against the Netherlands and the EU for seizure of generic drugs in Transit - 19.05.2010. (WT/DS408/1 & WT/DS409/1) AIPPI Question Q208 Working Guidelines Border Measures and other Measures of Customs Intervention against Infringers AIPPI Question Q230 Summary Report Infringement of Trademarks by Goods in Transit

TRANS-PACIFIC PARTNERSHIP Final proposal signed in Auckland, New Zealand (4.02.2016) 2016) CHAPTER 18 - INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY Art. 18.6 - Understandings Regarding Certain Public Health Measures 1.The Parties affirm their commitment to the Declaration on TRIPS and Public Health ( ) Art. 18.41 - Other Use Without Autorisation of the Right Holder The Parties understand that nothing in this Chapter limits a Party s rights and obligations under Article 31 of the TRIPS Agreement, any waiver or any amendment to that Article that the Parties accept CHAPTER 30 - FINAL PROVISIONS Art. 30.3 - Amendment of the WTO Agreement In the event of an amendment of the WTO Agreement thatt amends a provision that the Parties have incorporated into this Agreement, the Parties shall, unless otherwise provided for in this Agreement, consult on whether to amend this Agreement.

NAGOYA PROTOCOL NAGOYA PROTOCOL on Acces to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from their Utilisation (d (adoption on 29.10.2010 2010 ; entry into force on 12.10.2014) 10 2014) See also: AIPPI Question Q94 & Q166 The requirement of indicating in patent applications the sources or country of origin of genetic resources and traditional knowledge involved in the making of the invention. AIPPI Question Q232 The relevance of traditional knowledge to intellectual property law

IP & AI AIPPI E-News No. 47 IP of A.I. - New type of intellectual property? How the TRIPS Agreement is involved? (T.S. Komatani).

Merci. Gracias. Thank you.