IPTango

Tuesday, 23 June 2009

Chile: Primer microorganismo patentado.

Gilberto Macias (@gmaciasb) June 23, 2009 No comments:

El Instituto Nacional de Propiedad Intelectual de Chile (INAPI) concedió a BioSigma la patente de invención del microorganismo Wenelén, logrando así la propiedad industrial del primer microorganismo chileno que acelera el proceso para recuperar cobre en los minerales de baja ley.

Pedro Morales, gerente corporativo de Innovación de Codelco, resalta que el valor de Wenelén radica en que “es un microorganismo que tiene propiedades claves para la biolixiviación de la calcopirita, que es la gran tarea que tiene la industria del cobre de alcanzar la biolixiviación de este mineral en forma en eficiencia y en tiempos comparables al de otros minerales sulfurados constituye una tremenda oportunidad de transformar recursos de baja ley en reservas comercialmente explotables. Por ello es tremendamente importante la concesión de la patente, ya que nos da la tranquilidad y la opción de comercializar los servicios de Wenelén para el beneficio de toda la industria del cobre.”

BioSigma es una asociación de Codelco con la compañía japonesa Nippon, Mining & Metals.

Codelco encabeza el ranking de empresas chilenas que encabezan el patentamiento industrial en Chile, con 111 solicitudes de patentes industriales realizadas entre enero de 2000 a marzo de 2009.

Más información aquí.

"I complain about Intellectual Property day": a cry from Venezuela

Jeremy June 21, 2009 1 comment:

Richard N. Brown (De Sola Pate & Brown, Abogados-Consultores, Caracas, Venezuela) writes to tell IP Tango that Margarita Vilatimó Rivero, Venezuela´s Registrar of Patents and Trade Marks has posted on the website used by the supporters of the Venezuelan President her comments on Intellectual Property Day. ASIPI had organized a seminar in Caracas and the Registrar was moved to post her vision of Intellectual Property. You will note, Richard adds, that she attacks multinational companies and supports pirates! The text goes as follows:

"I complain about April 26: I complain about Intellectual Property day

Intellectual Property finds its roots in the perfection of legal texts that without doubt follow a model of capitalist society. Perhaps, no doubt, this condition has allowed us to state that intellectual property is a mechanism used by large capital to dominate the most deprived sectors of the worlds people.

It so happens when we observe the struggle of large multinational firms against the wrongly denominated “piracy”? This is, no other than the reproduction of musical, audio and video, or literary works. As a result of this absurd struggle against “piracy”? initiated by the large capitalists, our people have been deemed to be pirates or delinquents. It has been attempted to accuse the natural action of the human being to accede freely to culture and education, but incredibly, we all were shocked to view such a capitalist phenomenom that makes us slaves by impeding us from access to knowledge, technology, art, education, and culture.

The need of large capital to appropriate property which solely belongs to humanity because property is the result of cultural and technological values and the advance of history. It is an example of the existing savage neo-liberalism. It is for this reason that the Venezuelan Revolutionary, Bolivarian, socialist people ought to be aware of this fraud and ought to rebel against the laws that are not their own and that defenitively bind our conscience.

From the compact disc containing your favorite music to the medication that cures your cold, all are impregnated by intellectual property. The most famous top models sell their talent on the footbridge or pose in front of a photographer who in turn also sells his/her talent to the large emporiums distinguished by a trademark? Going over famous trademarks as “Victoria’s Secret? Even “Zara”?, these artists or performers depend on the millionaire contracts of large worldwide trademarks and consequently, they accumulate enormous wealth.

There begins a dependence that causes stupidity because while these large capitals, owners of those renowned trademarks, are concerned by using in the best manner both the model’s and the photographer’s talent, these in turn get rich in a kind of interdependency on the one hand to sell a lifestyle and on the other to condition the minds of that people that find inaccessible those products or services which they may desire to enjoy.

These are the bases of the alienation produced in the minds and souls of our citizens, who desire to posess an untrue life style transmitted by the media into those homes and places wherein this life style is impossible.

The need of our children, young people, and adults to possess products or enjoy services of a determined trademark which in turn are used by sportmen or sportwomen, the favorite actress or singer of that same youth, because it is mentioned in a TV spot or advertisement in television, press, billboard, or Internet, is what leads them to commit a crime or very serious mistakes, from robery to obtain money to acquire that life style even inducing them to kill to make himself feel he is the owner of the life style of others.

On the Intellectual Property day, on April 26, we saw a group of jurists and specialists preparing an event for April 27 on which it is intended to sell in a dangerous manner Intellectual Property to the Venezuelan people as a mean of achieving sustainable development? I ask myself sustainable? How?

Anyone who knows that monster called Intellectual Property knows that it is a mechanism of perverse domination exercised by large capitals over the peoples of the world. We must remember that thanks to intellectual property many persons in the world who are ill do not have access to medications because patents are no other than exclusive fees of exploitation that the States are obliged by Intellectual Property legislation to grant large multi-national pharmaceutical companies over technology translated into a medication. It impedes its access unless you pay high final costs.

And God pardon those incautious companies who may try to manufacture the same medication using similar technology, because there may fall upon them those important law firms represented by many of those highly paid jurists until having those incautious companies disappear from the market and erase that idea from their heads.

Now we are seeing the advances in intellectual property that the European Union has proposed on this fateful matter, each time more and more neoliberal. For example, they are proposing more time for protection and the exclusive monopoly of copyrights 70 years after the death of the author. They are also proposing to extend the term of patents 20 more years plus those additional years that pass from the filing of the application of patents up to the authorization of the commercialization of the product, a fact that is a deception due to the fact that the patent does not grant the product its commercialization, the commercialization of pharmaceutical products is granted in Venezuela by the National Institute of Hygiene Rafael Rangel abscribed to the Ministry of the Popular Power for Health. They propose to restrict even more the limitations and exceptions to copyright, with the possibility that these become absolute and not even for educational reasons, a text may be used and reproduced, because shall this be authorized, we would be in the obligation to pay copyright fees over every copy or public communication that we make of the work. They propose to restrict even more the use of data in those tests necessary for research to put into practice a medication, limiting the various States in their support of the manufacturing and production of generic medications by the National Pharmaceutical Industry, in order to lower prices and to facilitate its access.

Likewise it occurs with the copyright, where the authors, artists, and performrs are managed and manipulated in their need to subsist or to make their living from art, having to assign their rights to entertainment industry, large disc producers and publishers through the Intellectual Property legislation.

Consequently, these mechanisms, through which inventors and authors have works or inventions expropriated by legal entities that generally are the large aforementioned multinational companies, and are enhanced by a special law called Intellectual Property, and not satisfied with it, once these are expropriated, through meausures of intellectual property rights to be observed, the large capital impedes that the peoples of the world and even the creators itself of the works or the inventions accede to technological and cultural advances that imply these works or inventions, unless you pay a high price for its access.

If you do not do so, they call you a Pirate? or a Counterfeiter? of authentic? works. You may expect years of prison... then, please!!!, Intellectual property never can be considered a mean of sustainable development. It will be sustainable solely out of wealth and the accumulation of capital that only very few can make over the misfortune and oppression of the peoples of the world".

Venezuela: La información de las patentes será pública para que cualquiera "haga uso de ellas”.

Gilberto Macias (@gmaciasb) June 19, 2009 No comments:

La incertidumbre en materia de propiedad industrial sigue creciendo en Venezuela, lo cual no extraña dada la vuelta a la Ley de Propiedad Industrial de 1955.

Ahora resulta que la "información técnica" de las patentes autorizadas en el país estará en la página web del Servicio Autónomo de la Propiedad Intelectual (SAPI) y cualquier persona podrá "hacer uso de ellas".

Según lo según lo dicho por la directora general del SAPI, Arlene Piñate, "Todas las personas pueden acceder a la página web, ir al área de consultas y realizar la búsqueda que necesiten. Esto es de gran importancia porque así los venezolanos pueden modificar y mejorar las nuevas tecnologías que se van desarrollando"

De acuerdo con el texto, la decisión se tomó para "eliminar la exclusión que implica el sistema de patentes". El pasado domingo en el programa Aló Presidente, Hugo Chávez aseveró que había que debatir sobre la propiedad intelectual y las patentes. "Las patentes para nosotros no pueden ser un encadenamiento ni una trampa".

Parece que la gota que derramó el vaso ha sido la patente del Tetra-Pak. Sin lugar a dudas el terma dará mucho de que hablar.

Más información aquí y aquí.

Puma pounces on pipe mark infringer

Jeremy June 15, 2009 No comments:

In Puma AG Rudolf Dassler Sport v Cueros del Norte SRL (Case 14414/2003, March 27 2009), a decision of the Federal Civil and Commercial Court of Appeals of Buenos Aires, Cueros del Norte SRL was orded to stop using the plaintiff's 'inverted pipe' design for sports shoes.

Puma, the proprietor in Argentina of a figurative trade mark consisting of an inverted pipe for goods in Class 25 (sports shoes), sued Cueros for trade mark and design infringement, seeking both damages and injunctive relief: Cueros's design had an additional stripe that ran from the broader portion of the pipe to the back of the shoe. The trial court dismissed the action on the basis that the designs at issue were different. Puma appealed.

The Court of Appeals considered that Cueros had copied the inverted pipe design, since the similarity of its design to that of Puma could not have occurred by chance. The trade mark had been infringed too. The court observed that sports shoe manufacturers invest large amounts of money in promoting their brands and that some device marks have become well known worldwide: these included Puma's inverted pipe. The court added that well-known marks should enjoy broad protection.

Taking all the circumstances into account, the court awarded Puma damages of Ps30,000 (approximately US$8,000). While Puma wanted the shoes destroyed, the court decided that the parties should consider the possibility of donating the shoes to a charitable organisation: the goods should be destroyed only if the parties failed to reach agreement.

Source: note for World Trademark Review by Fernando Noetinger, Noetinger & Armando, Buenos Aires.

Nuevo requerimiento de búsqueda para presentación de solicitudes de marcas en Venezuela.

Gilberto Macias (@gmaciasb) June 11, 2009 No comments:

Según nos informan nuestros apreciados amigos del Estudio Antequera Parilli y Rodríguez, la Oficina Venezolana de Propiedad Industrial (SAPI) ha emitido un Aviso Oficial notificando que a partir del pasado 5 de mayo de 2009, toda nueva solicitud de registro de marca debe ser acompañada de los resultados oficiales de búsqueda.

En consecuencia, a partir de dicha fecha, todas las nuevas solicitudes de marcas sufrirán un retraso en su presentación, pues es necesario esperar la entrega de los resultados oficiales de búsqueda a los efectos de cumplir con el nuevo requisito impuesto.

El incumplimiento de este requisito trae como consecuencia que la nueva solicitud de registro no sea admitida a trámite y no le sea asignado el número correspondiente.

Más información aquí. Gracias por la noticia Natalia, Ricardo y Dani.

MEXICO: Consultas gratuitas en el IMPI

Gilberto Macias (@gmaciasb) June 08, 2009 No comments:

Gracias a nuestra compañera Paulina Rius (Langlet, Carpio y Asociados, S.C.) nos hemos enterado que por disposición oficial se han eliminado algunas tarifas del IMPI.

Concretamente, quedó aprobada la eliminación de las tarifas correspondientes a las “búsqueda de anterioridades fonéticas” y “consulta de marca particular”.

Por lo tanto, desde el pasado 2 de Junio de 2009, los servicios de Búsqueda Fonética y Consulta a Expedientes son libres de aprovechamiento sin cargo alguno.

Sin lugar a dudas una gran noticia para los tiempos que corren. Gracias Pau.

PCT entra en vigor en Chile / PCT enters into force in Chile

Aurelio Lopez-Tarruella Martinez June 08, 2009 No comments:

Según nos informa Rodrigo Ramirez, tal y como indica una reciente circular administrativa, el 2 de junio comenzó a regir oficialmente el PCT en Chile (país número 140), siendo el INAPI (Instituto Nacional de Propiedad Industrial) dependiente del Ministerio de Economía, la oficina receptora de solicitudes internacionales para nacionales y residentes en Chile.

La vigencia ocurre después de 3 meses del depósito del instrumento de ratificación en Ginebra el 2 de marzo de 2009. Serán ISA e IPEA para las solicitudes internacionales ingresadas por Chile la OEPM, EPO y USPTO.

La patente del TAMIFLU vigente hasta el 2015 en México.

Gilberto Macias (@gmaciasb) June 05, 2009 No comments:

Mucho se ha dicho sobre la denominada gripe porcina, gripe mexicana o influenza H1N1, por lo que en éste blog no expresaremos nuestro punto de vista al respecto. No obstante, nos hemos encontrado con ésta interesante noticia que relaciona dicha enfermedad con el mundo de la propiedad industrial e intelectual.

La farmacéutica suiza Roche tiene el producto patentado (Oseltamivir, comercializado bajo la marca Tamiflu) y en el caso específico de México, la protección va hasta el año 2015. Por lo que, la eventual circunstancia de declarar la patente de utilidad pública ni se la plantean. De hecho, las autoridades de Salud declararon que no había sido necesario.

Según el artículo 77 de la Ley de la Propiedad Industrial, existen dos supuestos por los cuales se puede declarar la utilidad pública de una patente y ésos son:

1) Que se produzca un encarecimiento del producto y,

2) Que no haya el abasto suficiente.

Al no darse ninguno de esos dos supuestos en el caso de Tamiflu , no existe la necesidad por la cual romper la patente. Sin lugar a dudas Roche estará más que contento considerando sus anteriores registros.

Brazilian Patent and Trademark Office new fee schedule

Jeremy June 04, 2009 No comments:

Published on 14 May in the Federal Gazette (in Portuguese, Diário Oficial da União) was Resolution nº 211 establishing the new official fees for the services performed by the Brazilian Patent and Trademark Office (BPTO). The new schedule represents an average increase of 24% in the overall fees, when compared with the last one, dating back to 2003.

Although the BPTO’s fees have not suffered any amendments since 2003, it appears that this move goes against the current trend of reducing the current costs and fees associated with IP rights prosecution, as has happened with OHIM.

This measure has been subject to vigorous complaints by the IP community in Brazil due to its inappropriate timing. The existing worldwide crisis and the cutbacks made by companies on IP matters have been the strongest arguments against such increase.
The BPTO has argued that the local economy is growing in a steady pace despite the world crisis, and that it has granted discount rates for trademark and patent applications filed by Brazilian small/medium size companies. Thus the timing of the increase is not as bad as it has been argued and the increase has been maintained.

The BPTO has nevertheless ignored the fact that most of the IP applications filed locally are on behalf of foreign companies, most specifically in the US and Europe. The envisaged result of the increase will be the reduction in the number of filings with the consequent decrease of the BPTO’s revenue.

Written by José Carlos Vaz e Dias. Posted by his friend and colleague Jeremy

Parody as unfair competition? No, says Brazilian court

Jeremy May 27, 2009 No comments:

Can a parody involving TV shows and actors of a broadcasting company be considered a form of unfair competition? According to GLOBO, the biggest broadcasting company in Brazil, the answer is yes, especially when it is promoted by a rival broadcasting company, named RECORD.

The rivalry between these two companies has reached our local courts. At issue are Tom Cavalcante’s parodies, broadcast by RECORD, regarding GLOBO TV programmes and its main actors. Tom Cavalcante is one of the biggest comedians in Brazil and public recognition may be compared to that of Benny Hill and Mr Bean.

To restrrain such acts, GLOBO brought a legal action against RECORD claiming that such parodies go well beyond what is lawful, representing a parasitic activity, entering thus in the domain of unfair competition. For RECORD, the broadcast parodies are in accordance with the constitutional right of freedom of speech. The plaintiff also sought an interlocutory injunction enjoining RECORD for parodying its TV shows, as well as its actors and actresses. This request was denied in a decision recently affirmed by the Appellate Court.

This decision is only the first act of a legal battle that promises to be fierce and to have several acts. In this play, the story is not yet fully written and there are two playwrights working on each side and in opposite ways. Let us see how our local courts, as Deus ex Machina, will decide this dispute.

Written by Jorge Miguel Arruda da Veiga (Di Blasi, Parente, Vaz e Dias & Asociados)