Peru: User Satistaction Survey (USS) tool
Source EUIPO.
Showing posts with label survey. Show all posts
Showing posts with label survey. Show all posts
Wednesday, 3 October 2018
Source EUIPO.
Wednesday, 16 March 2016
Measuring the Strength of IP Protection: we need your help
Reading an update on linkedin one notices that “The European Observatory on Infringements of Intellectual Property Rights, on behalf of the EU Commission (DG Trade), is launching a second survey of EU entities with an interest in the protection and enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) in third countries.”
By collecting info from interested parties a “reality of IPR protection and enforcement in various third countries” can be built. The info will then be used to “provide assistance in preparation for negotiation and discussion with these countries.”
If you have an interest and/or knowledge on a non-EU country jurisdiction (it is you Latin and Caribbean (LAC) countries) do please complete the on-line survey (one per country). The survey started to run last Monday and will be available until the 31 May 2016 (accessible here).
Let’s digest this
In a recent presentation that I did at ELAN, Brussels 8th March, after explaining the topic of technology transfer and IPRS and looking the process in 5 selected Latin American jurisdiction, one question remains: will an invention/creation be protected as a matter of fact?
It is indeed a valid question. Legislation in LAC fulfil international standards: adapting national legislation in accordance with TRIPS (WTO) and many other international agreements administered by WIPO. Moreover, many countries have harmonized the law among their own trade bloc (e.g. CAN Decision 486) and others have stricter rules after signing a bilateral agreement. Yet, this does not give you the whole picture: legislation alone cannot measure the strength of IP protection. For this reason, WIPO recently commissioned distinguished international economists to do a study on the economics of IP. They acknowledged that this was a problematic matter since most of the studies in this area are “based on laws as written rather than enforced.”
Then it is suggested to observe the World Bank data which provides a variety of measures for a country. In the presentation, and using this point, I proceeded to build a chart for the 5 countries that I was studying , namely Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Mexico and Peru. I added to these countries the host country of the date, that is Belgium, so that the audience could compare and contrast the statistics and data. The chart reflected the very poor state of the countries’ regimes (exception been Chile which was very similar to that of Belgium). The indicators that I selected were: Control of Corruption; Government Effectiveness; Regulatory Quality; and Rule of Law. The aggregate indicators were ‘estimates’ giving the selected country's score in units of a standard normal distribution, ranging from -2.5 to 2.5. The latest data came from 2014 and I looked at 3 years (from 2012-2014) to see and establish a pattern.
Hopefully, the numbers do speak for themselves. And because of this, we encourage you to participate in the survey.
Why? The reason for you to participate in the survey
The EU Commission aims to tackle the issues noted in the survey and plans to take action by:
“…
• Ensure that IPR chapters in bilateral trade agreements offer adequate and efficient protection for right-holders and address key weaknesses in partner countries' IPR systems while calibrating commitments to third countries’ level of development;
• Ensure the Commission can make recourse to dispute settlement mechanisms or other remedies where the EU's rights under international agreements are infringed;
• Continue and where possible enhance ‘IP Dialogues’ with key third countries; leverage high-level trade and political dialogues to ensure progress on identified IPR issues;
• Provide and promote awareness of appropriate IP-related technical assistance programmes to third countries, including on the possible use of IP flexibilities; leverage the expertise of relevant international organisations in implementing technical assistance programmes;”
Among others [actions points are found at page 19 on this report here).
By collecting info from interested parties a “reality of IPR protection and enforcement in various third countries” can be built. The info will then be used to “provide assistance in preparation for negotiation and discussion with these countries.”
If you have an interest and/or knowledge on a non-EU country jurisdiction (it is you Latin and Caribbean (LAC) countries) do please complete the on-line survey (one per country). The survey started to run last Monday and will be available until the 31 May 2016 (accessible here).
Let’s digest this
In a recent presentation that I did at ELAN, Brussels 8th March, after explaining the topic of technology transfer and IPRS and looking the process in 5 selected Latin American jurisdiction, one question remains: will an invention/creation be protected as a matter of fact?
It is indeed a valid question. Legislation in LAC fulfil international standards: adapting national legislation in accordance with TRIPS (WTO) and many other international agreements administered by WIPO. Moreover, many countries have harmonized the law among their own trade bloc (e.g. CAN Decision 486) and others have stricter rules after signing a bilateral agreement. Yet, this does not give you the whole picture: legislation alone cannot measure the strength of IP protection. For this reason, WIPO recently commissioned distinguished international economists to do a study on the economics of IP. They acknowledged that this was a problematic matter since most of the studies in this area are “based on laws as written rather than enforced.”
Then it is suggested to observe the World Bank data which provides a variety of measures for a country. In the presentation, and using this point, I proceeded to build a chart for the 5 countries that I was studying , namely Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Mexico and Peru. I added to these countries the host country of the date, that is Belgium, so that the audience could compare and contrast the statistics and data. The chart reflected the very poor state of the countries’ regimes (exception been Chile which was very similar to that of Belgium). The indicators that I selected were: Control of Corruption; Government Effectiveness; Regulatory Quality; and Rule of Law. The aggregate indicators were ‘estimates’ giving the selected country's score in units of a standard normal distribution, ranging from -2.5 to 2.5. The latest data came from 2014 and I looked at 3 years (from 2012-2014) to see and establish a pattern.
Hopefully, the numbers do speak for themselves. And because of this, we encourage you to participate in the survey.
Why? The reason for you to participate in the survey
The EU Commission aims to tackle the issues noted in the survey and plans to take action by:
“…
• Ensure that IPR chapters in bilateral trade agreements offer adequate and efficient protection for right-holders and address key weaknesses in partner countries' IPR systems while calibrating commitments to third countries’ level of development;
• Ensure the Commission can make recourse to dispute settlement mechanisms or other remedies where the EU's rights under international agreements are infringed;
• Continue and where possible enhance ‘IP Dialogues’ with key third countries; leverage high-level trade and political dialogues to ensure progress on identified IPR issues;
• Provide and promote awareness of appropriate IP-related technical assistance programmes to third countries, including on the possible use of IP flexibilities; leverage the expertise of relevant international organisations in implementing technical assistance programmes;”
Among others [actions points are found at page 19 on this report here).
Monday, 12 March 2012
Inicio de consulta ciudadana para evaluar nueva Ley de Propiedad Industrial de Chile
El INAPI de Chile ha emitido el siguiente comunicado de prensa, anunciando la apertura de la consulta pública para la reforma de la Ley de Propiedad Industrial, en ciernes:
"Hasta el 29 de marzo estará abierta la consulta ciudadana que realiza la cartera, a través de su sitio web www.economia.gob.cl, respecto a la nueva Ley de Propiedad Industrial, que busca incentivar la innovación, transferir el conocimiento y permitir a los consumidores distinguir de mejor manera los productos y servicios en el mercado.
El proyecto, que será enviado al Congreso durante el primer semestre de este año , se enmarca dentro de las medidas de la Agenda de Impulso Competitivo que ha desarrollado y coordinado este ministerio, con el fin de eliminar las trabas burocráticas y hacer de Chile un país más competitivo.
Al respecto el ministro de Economía, Pablo Longueira, destacó la importancia de la iniciativa. “La propiedad intelectual es un tema muy importante en los procesos de emprendimiento e innovación. Uno de los objetivos de este Gobierno es hacer de Chile un país más competitivo. Conocer la percepción ciudadana mediante esta herramienta participativa, que nunca antes se había aplicado en este ámbito, sin duda fortalecerá este cuerpo legal, que busca perfeccionar y agilizar los procedimientos y protección de los derechos de propiedad industrial, en beneficio de los productores, emprendedores e innovadores del país”, expresó.
En específico, el Director del Instituto Nacional de Propiedad Industrial (INAPI), Maximiliano Santa Cruz, indicó que esta reforma deberá tener positivos efectos en tres grandes áreas. “En materias sustanciales, como puede ser la posibilidad de incorporar nuevas categorías existentes de propiedad industrial; en materias de procedimiento nos permitirá mejorar el proceso de tramitación de éstos derechos y, la tercera, en el ámbito de la observancia, podremos mejoras los actuales mecanismos que existen para asegurar el respeto de las normas de propiedad industrial en Chile”, aseguró.
La regulación de la propiedad industrial requiere estar en constante evolución para hacer frente a los nuevos desafíos que imponen los avances de la técnica y el desarrollo del comercio. La actual ley N° 19.039 fue promulgada en 1991 y posteriormente modificada los años 2005 y 2007, en respuesta a los compromisos internacionales contraídos, particularmente de los ADPIC y tratados de libre comercio. Si bien en su origen fue considerada un ejemplo de modernidad, con el paso de los años y los avances de la técnica y el comercio, muchas de las instituciones y procedimientos que contiene se han vuelto obsoletas.
El borrador del proyecto de ley que es presentado a la ciudadanía, pretende fortalecer la protección de los derechos de propiedad industrial, a través de la regulación de nuevos tipos de protección, como son las nuevas categorías de marcas, y de las materias de exclusión de protección, ya sea de marcas o patentes.
Además permitirá mejorar y agilizar los actuales procedimientos de registro de los derechos, considerando que tramitaciones dilatadas pueden producir que los derechos de las partes no sean oportunamente resguardados. Y, por último, se pretende fortalecer las normas de observancia, debido a que es necesario que existan los mecanismos para asegurar el cumplimiento de las normas de propiedad industrial conforme a nuestra realidad nacional".
Thursday, 9 February 2012
WIPO survey: have you had your say yet?
Whatever you think of WIPO -- love it or loathe it -- your opinion matters, and you can give it confidentially via an online survey. You can find details of the survey and why this blogger thinks it's important here.
The closing date for taking part is this coming Monday, 13 February, but WIPO has not said what time on Monday so it's best to do it by Sunday!
![[Interview] How does Mercado Libre deal with online IP infringements?](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEilexoWfiRujjpmd-Um4qIlawa0S8iWZ5i2EuqzJcCIyJs5srOU5br7y44YJkp0g5t8lBLAo5s5Gte-j0yg5M5cJ_wqLtTxY-ej8kzblVdoFHFsXxyLLHQeT7qtPQcDBqRWt0KfTHOh37sd/s72-c/Banner+BPP.jpg)
