Peruvian news and views

Your view needed
The Peruvian National Institute for the Defence of Competition and Protection of Intellectual Property ( INDECOPI),has presented five technical norms on handicrafts.

The projects do intent to properly identify the products and their features. Thus, the aim is “to establish appropriate guidelines on concepts and terminology, classification and product requirements”. The handicrafts project cover handmade filigree, decorative ceramics and handmade textiles.

The proposed projects were submitted by the Technical Committee for Standardization of Crafts, and the purpose is to guide all parties involved i.e. consumers, the industry sector, and all stakeholders involved in this activity.

An open public discussion of the projects will be available for the general public until March 12.

Keeping inform and gaining the right knowledge

Contributing to the development and promotion of patent INDECOPI is opening its doors to national inventors by offering a new program giving information sessions. The sessions will be given by professionals or invited experts --every two weeks on a Thursday and so they are called ‘Inventor’s Thursday’.

The sessions start today, 27 February. They are free of charge. The topics to be covered are various: protection of inventions in Peru through patents; procedures for patenting abroad; importance of patent; and patent defence among others.

INDECOPI’s Directorate of Inventions and New Technologies (DIN) INDECOPI aims to strive for “those interested or involved in inventive activities, research and technological innovation” to find a place where they can “learn, interact, understand and then apply the learned knowledge on issues related to system operation and registration of patents in the country.”
These talks will be given by professionals DIN or invited experts who will touch various topics related to patents, such as: protection of inventions in Peru through patents; procedures for patenting abroad; importance of patent information for the invention and research, negotiating patent, companies and patents, patent defence, among others.

For more info please do contact INDECOPI by e-mail at patenta@indecopi.gob.pe. There is also more information provided regarding the session at www.indecopi.gob.pe / din / lectures.
Indeed, these two different plans seek to protect and enhance the Peruvian intellectual endeavour. Shall we say…charity begins at home? Perhaps charity will not be the correct word to use, yet I am referring to the proverb. In any case, the help and assistance that INDECOPI is providing, is of benefit to its own people and to the country.


Source INDECOPI.

Charity begins at home

The Peruvian IP Institute INDECOPI has sent a warning to those that engage in practices of piracy. The reminder of this illegal act, that is punished by fines and even up to 8 years in prison, comes before the release of the national film ‘El vientre’ (the womb).

In the same line, organizations and parties such as: the Commission to Combat Customs Crimes and Piracy, the Attorney General's Office, and the National Police of Peru, are working together bringing a campaign to combat piracy and to prevent such action that deter the creativity of authors and artists.

In this particular case, INDECOPI “decided that its regional offices in the cities where the film will be shown, implement the necessary actions against piracy. In the same line, the said Institute “urged the public to reject any offer of pirated material from unscrupulous traders who profit from the efforts of others.”


Reading the news, which is pleased to hear, one may wonder why this extra care? What about non-national products? Then I thought of the proverb ‘You should take care of family and people close to you before you worry about helping others’. Indeed, perhaps with this extra-action, film viewers may start to realize how important is to protect copyright. Hopefully it will give them a sense of deference for their own product and valuate their creators and artist. At the end, charity should begin at home.


Source INDECOPI.

Innocent until proven guilty...or the other way around?

‘Presumed guilty’ is a Mexican movie that has been in the middle of some legal battles regarding the image of people appearing in movies. Back in 2011 the iptango posted the news here believing that it was THE END of the history. However, we received the latest info regarding such a case this week – the sequence...

Thanks to Phil Cox, Director at Global Law Marketing, we have a good summary of this affair (written by Abraham Diaz at Olivares):

“Luis Schmidt and Abraham Diaz (at Olivares) have recently won a civil court decision on behalf of the producers of the EMMY winning documentary, “Presumed Guilty”. 3 years ago Luis Schmidt and Abraham Diaz worked pro bono to lift an injunction on the distribution of the film into Mexican cinema’s. The injunction created much publicity and the lifting of it even more and then film went on to win an Emmy for best documentary. This recent decision now had precendent setting decisions that will govern what producers of documentaries can or cannot do regarding the image of people appearing in their documentaries. This is a landmark case.

At Olivares we assessed the producers of the documentary “Presumed Guilty”, which is controversial because it denounces vices of the Mexican Criminal Law system, which leads any individual to be in jeopardy of suddenly becoming a PRESUMED GUILTY.

Olivares defended the producers and director of the film by removing an injunction rendered by a District Court. This film was awarded an EMMY for best documentary in 2011 and was only shown in Mexican cinemas, and thus able to be seen by the world, because Olivares, on a pro bono basis, managed the legal process of removing the injunction, which at the time was fought at the political level because of the ramifications of the substance of the film coming to market, i.e. the world would see the injustice in the Mexican penal system and the corruption inherent within the Mexican justice system.

The scenario for making this denounce is one single and ordinary penal case, wherein an individual named JOSE ANTONIO ZUÑIGA (TOÑO) was accused or murdering another individual named JUAN CARLOS REYES PACHECO, and because of a criminal proceeding full of legal vices, TOÑO was convicted to 20 years of prison.

The investigation conducted by Roberto Hernandez and Layda Negrete, who are attorneys but were as well the producers of the documentary, brought to light all the vices of TOÑO’s proceeding. Likewise, in a landmark case Roberto and Layda obtained the permission to record all the hearings of TOÑO’s criminal proceeding, being the case that all this footage helped TOÑO to obtain his liberation after 2 years of imprisonment.

The footage of the hearings evolved into a one and a half hour documentary, and it was then that Roberto and Layda requested the legal assistance of OLIVARES to evaluate the risks involved in releasing it.

From the very beginning we knew that it was a very controversial documentary, which could trigger many law suits as the image of many individuals was appearing in the documentary without any authorization. However, the result of our analysis was that we could rely in the exceptions set forth in the Mexican Copyright Law, which allows the recording of the image of persons who are in public places and for informative or investigative purposes. Hence we gave green light to PRESUMED GUILTY.

Nevertheless, as a consequence of the exhibition of the documentary the producers and the distributors of the documentary were sued by 3 individuals appearing in the documentary; namely: i) the relatives of JUAN CARLOS REYES PACHECO (the murdered person); ii) VICTOR DANIEL REYES BRAVO, the cousin of the murdered person and who by the way was the only witness of charge against TOÑO; and iii) JOSÉ MANUEL ORTEGA SAAVEDRA, an ex police officer who was involved in the apprehension of TOÑO.

These 3 persons were claiming an indemnification derived from damages and moral damages. JUAN CARLOS’s relatives and VICTOR were represented by the same lawyer, and the sum of all what they were requesting amounted to 3,000 milllion Mexican Pesos (approximately 300 million USD), while ORTEGA was demanding 60 million pesos.

Last week we obtain 2 favorable ruling in the trials started by JUAN CARLOS’ relatives and VICTOR, being the case that as we had advised, the rules set forth in the Mexican Copyright Law are not applicable to VICTOR and JUAN CARLOS, and on the civil law side, they proved no damages at all. Hence, the producers and distributors that we represented have been totally absolved.

Today we have just received another favorable ruling from the 8th civil court, in the case started by ORTEGA, exactly in the same sense, namely, the rules set forth in the Mexican Copyright Law are not applicable to ORTEGA, and on the civil law side, he proved no damages at all. Hence, the producers and distributors that we represented have been absolved in that case too.”

Indeed, filming a documentary abouth the criminal judicial system in Mexico was a risky task per se. The documentary has disclosed a crude reality and the case is a milestone case regarding image/private rights of people.

The news can be found here, here and here.

PROSUR reúne en Chile a jefes de algunas oficinas de propiedad industrial de Suramérica

Los jefes de las oficinas de Argentina, Brasil, Colombia, Ecuador, Paraguay, Perú, Uruguay y Chile estarán desde el 3 al 6 de febrero en INAPI analizando los avances en materia de cooperación e integración regional.

PROSUR surgió hace un par de años con un objetivo: fomentar el uso del sistema de propiedad industrial como herramienta estratégica para promover la innovación, la competitividad y el emprendimiento, favoreciendo a innovadores, comunidad científica, empresas, pymes y universidades de la región. Esta instancia de cooperación regional establecida entre las oficinas de marcas y patentes de Brasil, Argentina, Colombia, Ecuador, Paraguay, Perú, Uruguay y Chile, este último representado por el Instituto Nacional de Propiedad Industrial (INAPI), se están reuniendo en Chile, en el edificio de INAPI, desde el 3 al 6 de febrero para analizar los avances que han tenido en materia de cooperación. Sólo Surinam no estará presente en esta oportunidad.

Por su vinculación en el comercio, la propiedad intelectual tiene un fuerte componente internacional. Muchos de los estándares de protección así como también las características de los procedimientos de registro se negocian a nivel multilateral. En este contexto, tener lazos regionales fuertes como los que se tienen con PROSUR, fortalece el trabajo que realiza cada oficina.

PROSUR trabaja para integrar sistemas para el intercambio de documentación y en materia de institucionalización del grupo, y como línea de trabajo, los países acordaron generar una plataforma informática que permita a cada oficina compartir los exámenes de patentes que cada una de ellas realiza. Esta plataforma colectiva se realizará con las herramientas que permiten las tecnologías de la información. Esto logrará, en el caso de las oficinas que administran estos derechos, aumentar la eficiencia y calidad en el proceso de búsqueda, examen y decisiones que diariamente deben realizar evitando la duplicación innecesaria que se produce cuando los distintos analizan una misma solicitud de patentes sin beneficiarse del trabajo que realizan sus pares.

Fuente: Constanza Zülch Barrios (Encargada Comunicaciones Institucionales INAPI)

LNIDA SUIZA off the menu in Argentina

In Gloria SA v Embajada de Suiza en la República Argentina (Case 825/2006, August 23 2013), the Argentine Court of Appeals reversed the decision of the trial court which dismissed the Swiss Embassy's opposition to the registration of LINDA SUIZA  (meaning 'pretty Switzerland').

Gloria SA's application was for milk, yoghurt, cheese and dairy products in Class 29, as well as mineral waters, sodas, non-alcoholic beverages, fruit beverages, syrups and other preparations for beverages in Class 32. The Swiss Embassy  opposed, arguing that the mark would mislead consumers as to the origin of the products and that it included the name of a foreign nation, contrary to Articles 3(d) and (g) of the Trade Mark Law). A further ground was based on Article 10bis of the Paris Convention and Article 953 of the Civil Code (which prohibit acts which are contra bonos mores).

According to the Court of Appeals, the word 'Suiza' is officially recognised by the Argentine government as designating the Swiss Confederation. While the mark did not consist of the word 'Suiza' alone, it was the most important element of the mark since 'linda' was of little consequence. The Court of Appeals did not address the other grounds of opposition.

Source: "Swiss embassy prevents registration of mark containing 'Switzerland'" by Jorge Otamendi, G Breuer, Buenos Aires, posted on World Trademark Review, 27 January 2014

Obligatoriedad de uso de marcas en Uruguay

A partir del pasado 1° de enero de 2014, los dueños de marcas registradas en Uruguay deberán usarlas “pública y efectivamente”, de forma directa o a través de un tercero licenciatario. Si la marca no es objeto de uso puede ser cancelada. 

La reciente aprobada Ley de Rendición de Cuentas No. 19.149, de 24 de octubre de 2013, (artículo 187) ha establecido la obligatoriedad del uso de las marcas registradas, como condición para su vigencia e instaura la posibilidad de presentar una acción de cancelación por falta de uso.

Dicha acción podrá ser solicitada por los titulares de un interés directo, personal y legítimo y solo en las siguientes circunstancias:

a) cuando no hubiera sido usada por su titular, por un licenciatario o por persona autorizada para ello, dentro de los cinco años consecutivos y siguientes a la fecha de su concesión o a la fecha de autorización de sus respectivas renovaciones.

b) cuando dicho uso se hubiera interrumpido por más de cinco años consecutivos.

No obstante, el registro no podrá ser cancelado cuando el titular pruebe que la falta de uso obedece a razones de fuerza mayor.

Tampoco se prevén posibles cancelaciones de oficio por la propia Dirección Nacional de la Propiedad Industrial (DNPI) y se aclara que no se requerirá prueba del uso para renovar una marca.

 

Peru: Doing more than a ‘bit’ for their heritage

Since 2010, the Inventions and New Technologies Directorate at INDECOPI has been working together with the Institute for Research on the Peruvian Amazon ( IIAP ) in recovering the collective knowledge of the native peoples.

By December 2013 INDECOPI has received 2,057 applications for registration of collective knowledge from 33 native communities and 5 rural communities and in total, 1,895 certificates for registration of collective knowledge have been awarded. In these cases, INDECOPI works as a guardian, a custodian of the information which can only be used under the principles established in the law that protects the collective knowledge (Law No. 27811 ). This law establishes a sui generis regime that protects the collective knowledge of indigenous peoples which are linked to biological resources i.e. biodiversity. More importantly, the Peruvian State recognizes the right of indigenous peoples to decide over their collective knowledge.

For example, last December INDECOPI presented 982 titles collective knowledge to thirteen indigenous communities of San Martin and Amazonas regions –an illustration of what is protected could be:

• Knowledge related to annatto, used to cure conjunctivitis and have been handed down from father to son, for the native community of Kachipampa Kechwa .
• Knowledge related to guava, used to cure upset stomach and used through generations of the native community Mishkiyakillu Kechwa.

Finally, INDECOPI reports that the aim is to “consolidate the rights that these communities have over their collective knowledge that have been preserved and passed down from generation to generation”. INDECOPI’s president added that INDECOPI is committed “to indigenous and rural communities” and “offers these tools to protect intellectual property of such priceless heritage”.



Source INDECOPI.