Wednesday, 1 July 2015

Innovación, cuenta pendiente de Latinoamérica

A pesar de que las economías latinoamericanas han gozado de buena salud durante la última década, con crecimientos económicos superiores a la media mundial,  Latinoamérica tiene un una importante cuenta pendiente. La falta absoluta de innovación

Si bien medir la innovación no es una tarea del todo sencilla, existe un indicador que es muy revelador para conocer el nivel de innovación en un país. El número de patentes registradas por cada país.

Resulta lógico creer que cuando un inventor hace un descubrimiento que tiene un importante potencial comercial, por lo general lo registra, además de en su país, en la Oficina de Patentes y Marcas de Estados Unidos (USPTO), o a nivel internacional ante la Organización Mundial de Propiedad Intelectual de las Naciones Unidas (OMPI).

Las últimas estadísticas de ambos registros de patentes muestran que los países de América Latina, aunque están aumentando su número de patentes internacionales, no lo están haciendo al ritmo que debieran para cerrar la brecha que los separa de otras partes del mundo.

Según nuevos datos de la USPTO, que clasifica las patentes por el país de origen de los inventores, Estados Unidos registró 159,000 patentes el año pasado, Japón 56,000, Corea del Sur 18,000, Alemania 17,000, China (incluyendo Hong Kong) alrededor de 8,700, Gran Bretaña y Francia 7,100 cada uno, Israel 3,600, India 3,000, Singapur 1,000 y España 900.

Los 32 países de América Latina y el Caribe en conjunto registraron alrededor de 836 patentes. 

Dato que resulta muy llamativo dado que América Latina y el Caribe, con una población de casi 600 millones y dos países — Brasil y México — que respectivamente son la séptima y decimoquinta economías del mundo, registraron menos del 5 por ciento de las patentes registradas por Corea del Sur, y apenas el 23 por ciento de las registradas por Israel. Las estadísticas de la OMPI reflejan una disparidad similar.

La mayor parte de las patentes de América Latina fueron registradas por Brasil (362) y México (222). Le siguen Argentina (81), Chile (64), Colombia (25), Costa Rica (32), Cuba (19), Venezuela (14), Trinidad y Tobago (8), Perú (5), Ecuador (3) y Bolivia (1).

Algunos países latinoamericanos como Brasil, México y Chile, han más que duplicado sus patentes internacionales en los últimos cinco años, pero su crecimiento queda muy lejos del de otros países con economías emergentes como la India, que ha logrado triplicar sus patentes internacionales durante el mismo período.

Ojalá que en los próximos años algo cambie en la región y los indicadores revelen un crecimiento en el número de patentes internacionales. La economía crece si la Innovación crece.

Fuente: Artículo de Andrés Oppenheimer (@oppenheimera) publicado aquí y aquí.

Wednesday, 24 June 2015

The New European Patent by Alfredo Ilardi

"On 17 December 2012, following a complex negotiation which lasted 12 years, the
European Parliament adopted Regulations (EU) 1257/2012 and 1260/2012 and the text of the Agreement on a Unified Patent Court (UPC Agreement). These instruments institute the ‘European patent with unitary effect’, the first unified system for the protection of inventions within the European Union. The two Regulations will be applicable after the entry into force of the UPC Agreement, which was signed on 19 February 2013 by 24 Member States of the European Union. This book traces the evolution of the idea behind the institution of the European patent with unitary effect, including a comparative analysis of the existing parallel regional and international procedures for the protection of inventions. It presents a synthesis of the different phases of the negotiations which led to the adoption of the first unitary patent system within the European Union. In addition it examines the provisions of the two Regulations, of the UPC Agreement and of the jurisdictional system under Brussels I Regulation. Finally, it reproduces in the Appendix the texts of Regulations (EU) 1257 and 1260/2012 and of the UPC Agreement."
Image result for hart publishingThe Author
Alfredo Ilardi is former Head of the Collection of Laws and Treaties of the World Intellectual Property Organization.
 Published May 2015
164pp Hbk 9781849468336
RSP: £65 / US$130 / CDN$130
Discount Price: £52 / US$104 / CDN$104
Order Online
UK, EU, ROW: If you would like to place an order you can do so through the Hart Publishing website (link below). To receive the discount please quote the reference ‘EPLAWBLOG’ in the voucher code field and click ‘apply’.
US: If you would like to place an order you can do so through the Hart Publishing website (link below). To receive the discount please quote the reference ‘EPLAWBLOG’ in the special instructions field on the credit card screen.
Hart Publishing Ltd, 16C Worcester Place, Oxford, OX1 2JW
Telephone Number: 01865 517 530
Fax Number: 01865 510 710

Why is this book relevant to the iptango followers?
While the blog is happy to publish any IP material of good quality, one needs to be careful. At the end of the date the blog is for the Latin American market and if one is to endorse a book, it needs to do so with property as to establish a link why the book should be in the Latin American reading list - especially since the book is about the new European Patent system.

Here is my summary: matter that covers the book can be reflected in some discussion heard on the South and Central American continents. The blog has sometimes referred to main trade blocs that do exist in Latin America such as the Andean Community (CAN) and Mercosur. CAN for instance has ‘Decision No. 486 Establishing the Common Industrial Property Regime’ and has a Community trade mark system – similar to the Community trade mark (CTM). The patent system is also regulated and harmonised through Decision 486. In this line when reading the book it was easy to reflect on how the new European Patent can be followed (or not) by the Latin American region.

The book contents and material helpful to have it in your intellect [can I add this to my skills in linkedln?] are: ‘global protection of IPRs. The project for the revision of the Paris Convention for the protection of industrial property and the TRIPS agreement.’ The section gives an overview how certain legislations marked the beginning of the changes to come. Going deeper into the heart of the book and putting aside the negotiation of the unitary patent system one can indulge in the analysis of the legal instrument. In this chapter one can make some comparisons with Decision 486 which for example address priority claims - granting same priority rights as those granted by the Paris Convention. Moreover, a chapter is dedicated to the European Unified Patent Court similar to the one established by CAN [CAN created a uniform court procedure that allows simultaneous actions to be brought for infringements to patents as well as other IPRs]. Indeed one can compare and contrast the expression of ideas found in the book with some cases in Latin America. In my case, I am more aware of CAN but perhaps some of you can also place some similarities with other trade blocs IP system. At the end what is sought with the Unitary Patent is the same aim i.e. ‘regional cooperation on patent harmonization’ and at this stage, going further that just an adoption of a common patent law, by having an agreement on the interpretation and practical application of the law.

Thanks Emma Swinden (Marketing Manager @ Hart Publishing) for the book and for the support and trust given to this blog.

Tuesday, 23 June 2015

Peruvian well-known trade marks

The Peruvian Institute for the Defence of Competition and Protection of Intellectual Property (Indecopi), recently announced the recognition of various national trade marks as well-known trade marks.
These well-known trade marks have achieved such status after a rigorous evaluation made by the Directorate of Distinctive Signs, and based on Article 224 of Decision 486 of the Andean Community.
The criteria followed by the Andean legislation is as followed:  the degree of knowledge about the the mark by the population of the member state; the duration, extent and geographical scope of its use and promotion inside or outside any member country; advertising, presentations at fairs, exhibitions or other events; the value of the investment made to promote the brand.

INDECOPI notes that “recognition of notoriety of a brand is an exceptional situation that very few brands reach.” It adds that such recognition brings “stronger protection not only against risks of confusion but also against the risk of misappropriation of the reputation of the brand and dilution of its distinctive force.”

Attention should be brought to the fact that the Andean legislation regulates the possibility of derogating from the principle of territoriality, protecting well-known marks beyond the country in which they are registered.

Recently recognized brands as notorious in Peru include: Cantol, Inca Kola and Asu Mare. Foreign brands include Coca Cola, McDonalds, Google, among others.
Image result for peru cantol
A final point which is important to raise is that a well-known mark may lose this status over time since notoriety is “conditional upon the owner to develop efforts to keep the degree of brand awareness that allowed him to reach this special recognition.”


Thursday, 18 June 2015

IP Pharmaceutical and Biotechnology Issues in Brazil: a lecture in London

"No Boring Day: IP Pharmaceutical and Biotechnology Issues in Brazil" is the title of a public lecture by Gustavo de Freitas Morais which the Centre for Commercial Law Studies (CCLS), Queen Mary University of London, is hosting in collaboration with the Department of International Development, LSE. This public lecture takes place on 3 July 2015 at 5:00 pm. The venue is the CCLS itself, 67-69 Lincoln's Inn Fields, London WC2A 3JB. According to the organisers:
"The Brazilian intellectual property scene is constantly changing and the source of conflict, particularly with in the life sciences. These conflicts are the result of, among other things, conflicting perspectives regarding the appropriate level of IP rights: some stakeholders regard weaker IP rights as beneficial for local innovation and economic and social development, while some see stronger IP rights as essential for achieving these outcomes. 
These conflicts are manifest in the case of pharmaceuticals, where Brazil has a system whereby the health regulatory agency (ANVISA) also examines patent applications, and in the case of biodiversity, where the legal framework regulating access to and use of genetic resources for biotechnology research is being revised".
Gustavo, a partner of Dannemann Siemsen since 1999, is both an engineer and an attorney at law licensed in Brazil. He has an academic profile too, as a Law Lecturer for the Lato Sensu Post-Graduation Course of Law at the Escola de Direito de São Paulo (GV Law) - Fundação Getúlio Vargas (FGV) and visiting professor at the Escola Superior de Advocacia (ESA) / OAB-SP on Intellectual Property. Gustavo is experienced in Litigation, Licensing, Regulatory and IP Prosecution in various areas but with an emphasis in the Life Sciences and Telecommunications areas.

Attendance is free but prior registration is required if you book by clicking for the registration form here.

Thursday, 4 June 2015

Make Way for Modernization in British Virgin Islands – Complete Overhaul of Current Trademarks Regime as of September 1, 2015

On September 1, 2015, the British Virgin Islands’ new Trade Marks Act, 2013 and Trade Marks Rules, 2015 will go into effect, ending the dual filing system currently in place for trademarks. Once the new laws go into effect, it will no longer be possible to register marks in BVI on the basis of an existing UK registration.

Image result for british virgin islands
I wish I was here
For many years, this has been a relative fast track to registration for UK mark owners. For trademark owners without an existing UK registration, the current regime requires application within the local system. At present, the local system allows new filings for goods only, and all goods must be classified according to the antiquated British classification system.

Long outdated, this classification system does not afford adequate protection for many mark owners. Under the new regime, all applications will be made within the local filing system, and finally it will be possible to register both goods and services according the International Classification system. New fees have not yet been set but should be determined before the September 1st implementation of the new trademark laws.

Post written by Katherine Van Deusen Hely (Caribbean IP).