IPTango: Search results for mexico

Showing posts sorted by relevance for query mexico. Sort by date Show all posts

Monday, 24 October 2011

A meaningful pact -- or just a Mexican wave?

Jeremy October 24, 2011 No comments:

Mexico: the UK's latest partner
in reducing the global backlog?

The UK government's News Distribution Service has issued a media release today entitled "A landmark agreement to support the growth of UK businesses operating in Mexico will be signed today by The UK Intellectual Property Office (IPO) and the Mexican Institute of Industrial Property (IMPI)". According to the release:

"The new Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) will improve international cooperation between the two nations on issues involving copyright, patents, trade marks and designs.

Minister for Intellectual Property Baroness Wilcox said:

“This agreement will allow the UK and Mexico to share best practice in areas such as enforcing intellectual property rights and to address the issue of global patent application backlogs. It will also support SMEs looking to protect their rights in Mexico and the UK, giving them the best opportunity to grow their business and boost the economy.

“Mexico is an influential voice on issues of intellectual property in Latin America. The Government is building links with international partners to encourage the growth of innovative business across the globe.”
Director General of IMPI, Dr. Rodrigo Roque said:

“We are excited to start our cooperation links with the UK on intellectual property matters. The execution of this MOU underlines our strong commitment to contribute to intellectual property rights enforcement, not only at a national level but also in the international field, particularly with landmark offices such as UK IPO.

“In the midst of a globalised era, it is imperative for Governments to jointly collaborate on common understandings such as innovation. We are certain that this partnership will enrich our IP systems, and will benefit IP stakeholders in both economies.”
The agreement follows the UK Government’s acceptance of the recommendations made in the Hargreaves Review of Intellectual Property and Growth; a focal point of the Government’s Growth Review set out in the 2011 Budget. The Review highlighted that the UK should continue to pursue international interests in intellectual property. This MoU will provide support for businesses in the UK and help them to achieve their growth potential overseas, benefiting the UK economy.

The UK’s International Strategy for Intellectual Property set out how the UK would do this, including building key bilateral partnerships.

The agreement was signed today (24 October) in Mexico City by the General Director of the Mexican Institute of Industrial Property, Dr. Rodrigo Roque and witnessed by David Frost, Head of Trade Policy at the Department of Business, Innovation and Skills. The IPO’s Chief Executive John Alty had pre-signed the agreement in the UK".

Does anyone in either Mexico or the UK have any idea what the actual content of this MoU is? Will the patent backlog be reduced by mutual recognition of examiners' reports in the two jurisdictions, for example? What is its projected impact on the enforcement of IP rights in Mexico by British SMEs, or vice versa? This blogger does not recall the various calls for evidence in the UK in recent years being met by complaints against infringements in Mexico -- which is hardly the China of Latin America.

ADDENDUM: while I was composing the above text, I received an email from an eminent UK lawyer who was as perplexed at this announcement as I was. The lawyer (who has requested anonymity) has commented in blue on Baroness Wilcox's statement as follows:

Minister for Intellectual Property Baroness Wilcox said:
"This agreement will allow the UK and Mexico to share best practice in areas such as enforcing intellectual property rights [I wasn't aware that Mexico was terribly well-known for efficacious enforcement practices] and to address the issue of global patent application backlogs [So no Mexican stand-offs here, then.]. It will also support SMEs looking to protect their rights in Mexico [that will be a great relief to them - no longer will they have to rely on the famously corrupt local law enforcement agencies or judiciary] and the UK [Should we be told about additional training in Mexican enforcement techniques being given to those who sit in the Patents County Court?], giving them the best opportunity to grow their business and boost the economy [According to Europol, there is more (and safer) profit to be had from a kilo of counterfeit DVDs than from a kilo of cocaine, so maybe the Mexican drug cartels will decide to move across to counterfeit DVDs. I'm just puzzled about how that boosts our economy].

Look who's 1?: Mexico and the Madrid Protocol

Patricia Covarrubia April 01, 2014 No comments:

A year ago, Mexico signed the Madrid Protocol giving trade mark owners a simplified mechanism through which they can protect their mark abroad. Administered by WIPO it is said to be the most efficient means of achieving international protection for a registered trade mark.

Before 2012 no Latin American country (apart from Cuba) had acceded and much was speculated (here, here and here). Colombia and Mexico signed just months apart from each other and time flies….Mexico is already celebrating its first birthday with good reports from WIPO ( Mexico’s process of the applications have been of high quality and efficiency).

The Mexican Institute of Intellectual Property (IMPI) reports that after Mexico’s entry, 54 applications from companies and individuals with business activities in Mexico have submitted their trade mark through the Madrid Protocol. These businesses seek protection mainly in the United States, the European Union and China. In addition, abroad applications notifying Mexico as Designated Office have reached 5,476 of which 1,907 has been granted. Countries that have designated Mexico the most are: the United States, Switzerland, Germany, Spain and China.

IMPI emphasises that the Protocol encourages foreign investment providing legal certainty and giving the opportunity to international companies to enter the domestic market providing an easy accessible mechanism for registration of their marks in our country.

Source IMPI.

Mexico: time to oppose to trade mark registration

Patricia Covarrubia August 16, 2016 No comments:

At the end of this month (August 30, 2016) Mexico will implement an opposition system in trade mark.

In May this year the Latin America IPR SMEs Helpdesk and the UK Intellectual Property Office (UKIPO) collaborated on a roadshow in the UK. Participating in one of this workshops in Reading we cover ‘Intellectual Property Rights in Latin America – sources of help and support’ and one of the issues covered was the (lack of) trade mark opposition in Mexico.

Mexico is one of the few countries which does not provide for trade mark opposition proceedings. The Instituto Mexicano de la Propiedad Industrial (IMPI) is the administrative authority legally authorized to conduct ex officio examinations of trade mark applications on absolute and relative grounds. As noted in the World Trademark Review, Mexico is not bound to introduce opposition proceedings as a result of its accession to the Madrid System, but this amendment would make the trade mark system more efficient. Colombia was the first Latin America emerging country to ratify the Protocol on the Madrid Agreement (2012), then Mexico (2013). Cuba signed in 1995.

On 23 August José Miguel Mena López, Legal Services Manager at Clarke, Modet & Cº Mexico will be holding a Webinar on the implementation of the opposition system in Mexico. Details of the Webinar and how to registry can be found here.

Mexico: it’s all about the cheese!

Patricia Covarrubia March 02, 2018 No comments:

Since May 2016 the EU and Mexico are trying to modernize the trade agreement between them. By January 2018, there has been eight round of talks/negotiations.

On of the key issues that we see in the negotiation is Geographical Indications (GI). There is no possibility of registering foreign GI in Mexico although Appellations of Origins (AO) are feasible. Therefore, if a foreign company would like to protect their GI it can do so by the multilateral international registration i.e. Lisbon Agreement (Mexico is a member). The other route was by the bilateral agreement but this is limited to spirits and yet again only for AO. A foreign company could also register its GI as a ‘collective trade mark’.

The GI table of negotiation
There are in excess of 330 EU products in the list of negotiation, and this includes the sensitive product cheese. This is so because Mexico’s dairy industry produces many cheeses which names, or better say, GI names, originate from EU terroir.

On one hand, the EU claims their exclusive right to use such names, while on the other, Mexico claims that they have the right to keep producing such products. This is based on the fact that the names have become either generic or even acknowledging a different cheese that has become very much a national product and yet using a GI name. An example in mind would be the ‘Queso Manchego’, a cheese product coming from La Mancha region, Spain. According to its Dossier No ES/PDO/0117/0087 and the EU Commission implementing Regulation No 129/2012 of 13 February 2012, ‘Queso Manchego’ is “[p]ressed cheese made from milk of ewes of the ‘Manchega’ breed, aged for a minimum of 30 days for cheeses weighing up to 1, 5 kg and from 60 days up to a maximum of 2 years for larger cheeses.” The Mexican version is made from cow’s milk and so, the Mexican counterparts claim that the Manchego cheese “is ingrained in local culture and does not even resemble the Spanish original.” Moreover, the head of the National Chamber of Dairy Industries claims that “people identify it as a very national product that isn’t even related to the European version”; “people don’t expect a Spanish Manchego when they go to the supermarket and ask for a Manchego.”

Say 'Cheese'.

Next meeting would be in Brussels. The EU sees the latest talks as ‘very good’. Table of negotiations already closed are: competition, SMEs, transparency, sanitary issues, good regulatory practices, and trade and sustainable development. Pending are: market access and rules, including geographical indications and investment protection. The EU is Mexico’s third trading partner. Since 2000, the EU and Mexico trade in goods has increased by 180% which amounted to €53 billion in 2015. (source: here)

The proposed chapter on IP by the EU is available here.

Mexican GIs and the registry of foreign GIs and AOs

Verónica Rodríguez Arguijo June 13, 2018 No comments:

This post was first published on The IPKat blog:

Recently, the Mexican Industrial Property Law was significantly amended and on 27 April 2018, the first batch of amendments to the Law entered into force. These amendments modified provisions regarding patents, designs, utility models, trademarks and appellations of origin (AOs). Moreover, for the first time, geographical indications (GIs) are regulated under the Mexican Industrial Property Law and a registry of foreign GIs and AOs lodged the Mexican Institute of Industrial Property will be created.

In this post, this Kat summarizes the amendments that came into force on 27 April 2018, particularly with respect to GIs and AOs. More details about the amendments to the provisions related to industrial designs, patents, and utility models, as previously discussed by Kat friends, can be seen here.

A post by this Kat regarding the second batch of amendments, which will enter into force on 10 August 2018 and were published on 18 May 2018 in the Federal Official Gazette (DOF), will follow!

Patent Support Program: Arriva Mexico!

Patricia Covarrubia February 27, 2018 No comments:

In developing an IP culture, Mexico is launching a ‘support program’. The idea is to assist inventors whose inventions may be capable of IP protection. To do so, the national IP office, IMPI, has united forces with the Mexico-United States Foundation for Science (FUMEC) and Nacional Financiera (NAFIN).

In general, it is highly noted that IP protection may contribute to the commercial activity in Mexico as well as its competitiveness in the collaboration with other countries. Therefore, the aim is to increase the number of patent applications and utility models and thus, adding value to the knowledge of inventors and entrepreneurs in Mexico.

Diving in (Mexico great sport)...to the project...yas!

With immediate effect the 2018 Call for he Patent Support Program is open (and valid until October this year).

What is this project about?
According to IMPI, the support offered ‘consists in providing specialized and free advice to Mexican developers’. It is directed at ‘entrepreneurs, independent inventors, researchers and entrepreneurs in the country, in order to provide them with tools for the protection of their inventions, their use and exploitation exclusively according to the Mexican legal framework.’

How does it work?
The services offered are:
• patentability analysis: examining the state of the art,
• advice regarding the writing of the application,
• delivery of workshops, among others.

It is open to the vast majority of sectors including IT, health, agriculture, environment, energy, to name a few.

Sources here and here.

It is all about opportunities: opposing to trade marks in Mexico

Patricia Covarrubia January 16, 2017 No comments:

From José Luis Alvarez, Mexican Trademark Agent at Mexican Consulting & Development, SC, the blog received a newsletter about the (no so) recent updates in Mexico.

Back in August 2016, the blog reported that at the end of the said month Mexico was to implement an opposition system in trade mark – the amendment to the law dated April, 2016. At that time, Mexico was one of the few countries which did not provide for trade mark opposition proceedings.

The Instituto Mexicano de la Propiedad Industrial (IMPI) is the administrative authority legally authorized to conduct ex officio examinations of trade mark applications on absolute and relative grounds. In any case, Mexico was not bound to introduce opposition proceedings as a result of its accession to the Madrid System. However, the amendment would make the trade mark system more efficient and harmonizing trade mark system “with global trends and benefiting its users.”

The opposition proceeding while known and practiced in many jurisdictions, it's sometimes not clear what it really entails. Therefore, Jose Luis reports the following ‘good to know’ guidance:

“The amendment included in order to grant the opportunity to anyone who considers that an application violates the IPL´s provisions, to file an opposition within one month of the date of its publication in the Gazette. No extension of the one month opposition period is allowed. After that one month opposition period expires, a list of those applications that were opposed will be published in the Gazette within the following 10 business days.
It is important to mention that the opposition system has no binding effect on the Mexican Trademark Office’s (IMPI) conduct of the registration process and, in particular:
The opposition will not result in any suspension of the registration process;
Opposing an application does not grant the opposing party any status as an interested third party;
The opposition shall not automatically determine the outcome of the in-depth examination carried out by the IMPI; and
The IMPI may consider, in its analysis, the opposition and statements made in response by the applicant.”

And while we are in the topic of trade marks, The Nice Classification - the international classification of goods and services applied for the registration of marks, is now in its eleventh edition - entered into force on January 1, 2017.

TPP: civil disturbance is foreseen in Latin America

Patricia Covarrubia November 02, 2016 No comments:

The 04 of November is set to be the date where several people around Latin America are taken the streets. Organisations in Argentina, Colombia, Chile, Mexico and Peru are planning to take this day to mobilize for ‘democracy and rejection of trade agreements' specifically the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and the Trade in Services Agreement (TISA which is a trade agreement presently being negotiated by 23 members of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) including Latin America countries such as Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Mexico, Panama and Peru). A year ago 12 states ratified the TPP. From Latin America they were: Chile, Mexico and Peru (early post here).

The call follows rejection of restrictive measures contained in these trade agreements. Accordingly the measures threaten the access to generic drugs and biosimilars, impose new trade conditions in the seed market, and restrict freedom of expression, among others. But this appears to be one side of the story -- the reason: the Office of the US Trade Representative asserts that the TPP will allow its members to “draw on the full benefits of scientific, technological, and medical innovation, and take part in development and enjoyment of new media and the arts.” However, one cannot forget the headline of this sentence “Supporting American jobs by promoting America’s innovation advantage.” This is followed by assertions such as “strong and effective protection and enforcement of IP rights is critical to U.S. economic”. These types of expressions seem to be one-sided i.e. the benefit is first for the US. However, in the US Trade Representative report we notice declarations such as that the TPP “Promote innovation and the development of new, lifesaving medicines”; “Promote affordable access to medicines, taking into account levels of development among the TPP countries and their existing laws and international commitments.”; and concluding that all IP “commitments are aligned with the Doha Declaration on TRIPS and Public Health, affirming the rights of countries to take measures to promote public health.” But we all know too well that such commitments when transposed to bilateral agreements are more than what they say…one is familiar with the term TRIP-Plus.

There are indeed two sides of the story and this is tracked by the fact of the claimed ‘secret negotiation’ that went on which was for many years a source of controversy (see news here and here).
Apart from this debate it is also noticeable some other patent related issues that can also be of controversy for some LA countries:

Known product: TPP requires members to confirm that patents are available for either ‘new uses of a known product, new methods of using a known product, or new processes of using a known product’.

Chile IP Law N° 19.039: Art 33 (e) notices that new uses of articles, objects or known elements may constitute a subject matter of invention provided that the said new use solves a problem without prior equivalent technical solution.
Mexico IP Law (last reformed published on DOF 01-06-2016): not stipulated by lawm thus do not recognise second use as a new invention.
Peru: Art 21 Decision 486 CAN notices that already patented products or processes, including the state of the technique, are not subject matter of new patents, for the simple fact that there is a new use which is different from that originally contemplated by the initial patent.
Bear in mind that second use patents are not allowed in any of the Andean Community States (Colombia, Ecuador, Peru and Bolivia). CAN legislation is supranational.

Grace period for disclosure: TPP grants 12 months prior the Patent Application. This is in cases where the ‘disclosure’ is done by the applicant or a third party that obtained the information from the applicant which will not be taken into account when evaluating the novelty of the patent.

Chile: Art 42(a) IP law notes that disclosures made within 12 months prior to the submission of the application will not be considered for purposes of determining the novelty criteria if the public disclosure was made by the applicant of the patent, or if the disclosure was derived from abuse and unfair practices.
Mexico's Law states that: “The disclosure of an invention shall not affect that is still considered new when within twelve months prior to the filing date of the patent application or, where applicable,
the recognized priority date, the inventor or his assignee have disclosed the invention, by any media, for the implementation of the invention or because they have exhibited a
national or international exhibition. When the corresponding application shall include the
substantiating documentation under the conditions established by the regulations of this Act.”
Peru: Art 17 Decision 486 CAN notes that it will not be taken into consideration disclosures occurred within the year preceding the date of the submission of the application if it had been raised by the applicant in cases where such disclosure come from “the inventor or his successor in title; a competent national office which, in violation of the rule governing it, publishes the content of the patent application filed by the inventor or his successor in title; or, a third party who obtained the information directly or indirectly from the inventor or his successor in title.”

Adjusment or Extension?

'Patent Term Adjustment' (PTA) – some literature called this a patent ‘extension’, I do prefer to call it as it is: an adjustment given due to unreasonable administrative delays during the issuance of the Patent. TPP provides for the possibility of requesting a PTA.

Chile: Article 53bis1 IP Law already grants a PTA. A right holder may request within 6 months of the patent granted, a Supplementary Protection due to unjustified administrative delays.
Mexico: silent. The law does not cover this issue.
Peru: Decision 486 CAN does not cover this issue.

Many debates are seeing on regards to public health and we have covered this several times in this blog. This time it was time for a change - to cover a little bit of the procedural issues and some tips for enterprises when registering their patents abroad.

INTA's Latin America programme: support it if you can!

Jeremy January 19, 2011 1 comment:

While there has been much discussion online as to the disappearance from this year's INTA Meeting programme of the Regional Update for Africa, the Latin America Update is safe and sound. According to INTA's website, it takes place on Wednesday 18 May from 11.45am to 1pm and looks like this:

"CW22 Regional Update—Latin America and Mexico

Intermediate Level

Latin America has become an important emerging market after the most recent financial crisis, experiencing a fast recovery and larger growth rates. In IP, the result of such growth is seen in the increase in the number of filings in the region and the transformation of several regional companies into global players. Large Latin American corporations now have their own IP departments, but many still outsource a variety of services. Specialized courts have been created, and new IP laws have been recently enacted.

The main topics this panel will address include:
• Trademarks and social media: infringements, case law and fair use.
• Keywords and domain names.
• How soon will the Madrid Protocol take effect?
• The risk of confusion versus the risk of association.
• Recent case law on trade dress and three-dimensional mark issues.
• The effects of the expansion of broadband Internet access and the booming telecom industry that has increased e-commerce, social media participation and the need to enforce IP rights online.

Moderator:
• Valdir Rocha, Veirano Advogados Associados (Brazil)

Speakers:
• Roberto Arochi, Arochi, Marroquin & Lindner S.C. (Mexico)
• Cristina A. Carvalho, Arent Fox LLP (Brazil)
• Damaso A. Pardo, Perez Alati, Grondona, Benites Arntsen and Martinez De Hoz (h) (Argentina)".

The title "Latin America and Mexico" fascinates this author, who had always thought that, while Mexico was handsomely located in the centre of the Americas, it is still part of Latin America even though (i) no-one there actually speaks Latin and (ii) English is understood by many and spoken by quite a lot of its inhabitants, albeit as a second language. Wikipedia adds:

"The term Latin America was supported by the French Empire of Napoleon III during the French invasion of Mexico, as a way to include France among countries with influence in America and to exclude Anglophone countries".

Readers' comments are welcome.

Now for a warning: during the past couple of years INTA has gone to great efforts to put on very good programmes with well-informed, well-prepared speakers -- but these sessions have been very poorly supported by trade mark and IP practitioners from the region. Please support your region! The better attended it is, and the more greatly it is appreciated, the safer this regular slot will be within an increasingly crowded Meeting programme.

NIC Mexico sets out its stall for .mx domain

Jeremy March 26, 2009 No comments:

Domain name registry Network Information Centre Mexico (NIC Mexico) has reopened the registration of domain names under '.mx'. This reopening takes place in three phases:

During the pre-registration period the owners of '.com.mx', '.net.mx', '.org.mx', '.edu.mx' and '.gob.mx' domain names validly registered before March 1 2009 will be able to apply for the registration of the corresponding domain name under the '.mx' extension. This period ends on 31 July 2009.

August then marks a one-month quiet period, a sort of siesta during which NIC Mexico will stop accepting applications, enabling applications filed during the pre-registration period to be processed.

Then comes the initial registration period, during whichany entity can register a domain name directly under '.mx' on a first-come, first-served basis. This period runs from 1 September to 31 October 2009. Registrations will be valid for a period of one year only.

Source: Roberto Arochi, Arochi Marroquín & Lindner SC, Mexico City, writing for World Trademark Review.

In memory of Armando Manzanero

IPTango December 28, 2020 No comments:

The IPTango team mourns the passing of Armando Manzanero, Mexican songwriter, pianist, singer, producer, and arranger.

Worldwide famous by his romantic songs, Armando Manzanero, passed away on 28 December 2020.

Armando Manzanero Canché born on 7 December 1935 in the city of Mérida, Yucatán.

Considered one of the most renowned composers worldwide, he wrote over 600 songs. Out of these, more than 50 enjoyed global recognition and were performed in more than 30 languages.

“Contigo Aprendí”, “No Sé Tú”, “Esta Tarde Vi Llover”, “Somos novios”, “Te extraño”, “Adoro”, “Voy a apagar la luz”, “Como yo te amé”, “Por debajo de la mesa”, “Nos hizo falta tiempo”, and “Mía” are some of his most famous songs.

Among others, Frank Sinatra, Elvis Presley, Luis Miguel, Juan Gabriel, Elis Regina, Andrea Bocelli, Eugenia León, Tania Libertad, Tony Bennett and Alejandro Sanz performed his songs.

Armando Manzanero was a strong advocate of copyright enforcement. Since 2011, he was the president of the collective management society SACM (Society of Authors and Composers of Mexico).

Proud of his roots, he sang in Maya during a concert held in Chichen-Itzá to celebrate his 83-year career.

Armando Manzanero received several awards, including the Latin Grammy Lifetime Achievement Award (2010), the Grammy Lifetime Achievement Award (2014), and the Cultural Heritage of the Americas Award granted by the Organization of American States (2014).

In October 2020, Armando Manzanero received the Billboard Lifetime Achievement Award “for his exceptional career that spans over six decades and which has taken Latin music to the next level internationally”.

The Secretariat of Culture of Mexico will pay tribute to Armando Manzanero through Canal 22, Radio Educación, and the online platform “Contigo en la Distancia”.

As stated on the SACM website: “His legacy is recorded in the history of music for Mexico’s glory in the world”.

Listen to Armando Manzanero here and here.

Sources:

· Biography of Armando Manzanero published on the SACM website.

· The press release published by the Secretariat of Culture of Mexico.

· The review published on the website Celebrando Armando Manzanero.

· The article “Armando Manzanero to Receive Lifetime Achievement Award at 2020 Billboard Latin Music Awards” published on the Billboard website.

Credit: Image available on the website of the Secretariat of Culture of Mexico, accessed on 28 December 2020.

Mexico: OECD recommends science secretariat

Patricia Covarrubia January 13, 2010 No comments:

As you might have heard, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development(OECD) is an organisation that unites different governments around the world (currently 31 members). The aim is to support and to raise their economic growth. Hence, the OECD is observant of matters such as trade, environment, agriculture, technology, taxation, among others. It collects data and also monitors and analyses the country’s economic development.

The OECD recommended that Mexico should create a new secretariat which will enhance scientific development and innovation in the country. This suggest dividing the Secretariat of Public Education (SEP) and transforming the National Council of Science and Technology (CONACYT) in the Ministry of Higher Education, Science and Technology. The measure is proposed due to a mixture of distorted policies.

Added to this, last September, during his latest visit to Mexico, the secretary general of the world organization, the Mexican Jose Angel Gurría, presented the government of President Calderon, "Studies of the OECD Innovation Policy. Mexico ". He explained that the country’s low productivity and loss of competitiveness is due to low investment in technology and research. It also calls for reforming the National System of Researchers (SNI) due to low productivity which is measured by the number of research publications and patents registered in the country.

With both Chile and Mexico as members, and the ever closer co-operation with Brazil, the OECD has substantially strengthened its links with Latin America.

[Guest Post] COVID-19: The Invisible Enemy Revisited

Verónica Rodríguez Arguijo April 28, 2020 No comments:

This post was first published on The IPKat blog:

The IPKat recently reported, here, on taken measures by the Israeli government to order the equivalent of a compulsory license to enable local companies to make use of the inventions in the search for effective treatment of the COVID-19 virus. Kat friends Alejandro Luna and Portia Guidotti (Olivares) consider how Mexico successfully controlled a pandemic virus in the past, without the need for compulsory licenses.

In 2009, Mexico battled an outbreak of a new strain of influenza, the AH1N1 disease, also known as swine flu. The first symptoms appeared in the country at the beginning of April 2009 and, sometime thereafter, two already marketed medicines indicated for influenza, TAMIFLU® (OSELTAMIVIR) and RELENZA® (ZANAMIVIR), were found to be effective against the disease. The government imposed tight measures across the country. Millions of face masks were handed out to citizens and Mexico City carried out a 10-day quarantine.

Mexico: digital downloads and copyright

Patricia Covarrubia June 07, 2010 4 comments:

Last week, the Coalition for Legal Access to Culture (a body that represents artistic and cultural industries such as the Society of Authors and Composers, the Association of Phonogram Producer and the General Society of Writers and many others) presented, along with Ipsos (one of the world’s largest research companies) a report regarding Digital Downloads.The main line was to try to stabilize the copyright on the Internet.

According to the Coalition, the cultural sector in Mexico accounts for 6% of GDP, and its international level is located at number six of the 20 countries that most exported cultural property - the only Latin American country on the list. Roberto Cantoral, chief executive of the Coalition said that "although the works are intangible products, reform is urgently needed to protect our creativity as we can not compete against the illegal and gratuitous.” He explains that there is an increasing interest in its legislation. He mentioned that the problem is likely to worse when the bandwidth grows in the country – at the moment is 2G while European countries have 10G.

During the press conference, it was reported that during 2009 only in Mexico were downloaded illegally a total of 5100 million songs, a figure 15 times the number of records sold that year; 470 million videos, 24 million movies, 16 million TV shows; 26 million books; and over 1878 million protected images.
Among the Internet sites with the highest number of illegal download are: Ares (71%), YouTube (58%) and limewire (14%) among others. The final results is a loss of 13 billion pesos for the industry.

The Coalition proposes to strengthen cultural heritage and advice to fight piracy in favour of online copyright. To achieve this, Roberto Cantoral explains: “ there is the need to force manufacturers of digital music players such as MP3 to pay a ‘right’”. He adds there should be an adjustment to Internet Service Providers – creating strategies that protect copyright. Roberto Cantoral said that in the end, "we seek the intellectual product to be protected equally as any other commercial product that is purchased in a convenience store". I do agree.

Federico de la Garza, director of the Motion Picture Association (MPA), said that in Mexico there is a legal gap with respect to which authority is responsible for preventing this illegal activity. Roberto Cantoral, president of the Coalition, said the amendment to the Industrial Property Act to prosecute ex officio to piracy, is not enough. "We will conduct an awareness campaign directed at the civil society, industry and government to address this issue," he said.

The initiatives have already been sent to the House of Representatives and the coalition hopes that next year the laws come into force.

For more info click here, here and here.

New Geographical Indications on the Sight

Patricia Covarrubia August 08, 2017 No comments:

From various jurisdictions we received some Geographical Indication news:

Mexico: The Mexican Industrial Property Institute (IMPI) informed that under International Register No. 1062, published in the Bulletin ‘Appellations of Origin’ No. 45, the WIPO has granted international protection for the Mexican ‘Cacao Grijalva.’ This cacao has been protected as denomination of origin in Mexico since August 2016.

For its part, the diary El Economista reported that the National Association of Designations of Origin (ANDO) of Mexico is seeking legal protection for the red octopus ‘Pulpo Maya,’ as well as international recognition for the appellation of origin ‘Arroz Morelos.’

Chile: Lst Friday was inaugurated the ‘First Festival of the Longaniza’ in Chillán, Chile. According to the Regional Diary EDÑUBLE, this is one of many actions developed in the search for an appellation of origin to present this product to the world. Before the festival, local producers of 'longaniza' participated in a talk on geographical indications, featuring speakers from the INAPI. As reported by this news agency, at this stage, 20 local producers of longaniza have received the first general outlines to obtain the geographical indication ‘longaniza de Chillán.’

Post written by Florelia Vallejo Trujillo

Assistant Professor, Universidad del Tolima, Colombia
PhD Candidate University of Nottingham, UK