Too-stringent intellectual property protection in the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) continues...
Too-stringent intellectual property protection in the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) continues to be a concern of various advocacy groups. Sherwin Siy, Public Knowledge vice president-legal affairs, said in an interview Friday that he isn’t against abolishing intellectual property protections, but what’s…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
being pushed in international trade agreements like the TPP goes beyond baseline protection. “We're seeing a much more specific type of agenda with regard to particular types of enforcement.” Siy gave the example of countries creating penalties for circumventing technological protection measures, then requiring those penalties to be a separate offense, independent of whether there is any actual intellectual property infringement. Another danger with the TPP, Siy said, is pushing intellectual property protections in an international setting, where countries can take a controversial idea at home and try to “push it in a trade agreement where there’s going to be less debate.” Speakers at a Thursday U.S. Chamber of Commerce-organized discussion said they were encouraged by the chance to spread intellectual property protections globally, especially in developing countries. TPP is also a chance for the U.S. to reclaim trade supremacy, lost to Europe and Asia in the years since 2001, said Patrick Kilbride, senior director-the Americas at the chamber. “We've seen the cost of not being competitive,” he said. TPP can change that, and “intellectual property protection is going to be critical to this.”