2020 · COVID-19 · Intellectual Property · TRIPS Agreement · WTO

Suspending TRIPS to Fight COVID-19?

India and South Africa have now submitted a proposal (dated 2 October 2020) to the WTO’s TRIPS Council requesting for the waiver of Sections 1 (Copyright), 4 (Industrial Designs), 5 (patents), and 7 (undisclosed information) of Part II of the TRIPS Agreement in relation to the prevention, containment, and treatment of COVID-19. The waiver would… Continue reading Suspending TRIPS to Fight COVID-19?

2020 · Australia · Intellectual Property · International Trademark Law · IP Policy · Tobacco Plain Packaging · TRIPS Agreement

Is it Necessary to Consider Alternative Measures under Article 20 of the TRIPS Agreement?

This week, I continue with my analysis of the Appellate Body’s decision on the trademark issues in the Australia – Plain Packaging case. (For previous posts in this regard, see here and here). In this post, the focus will be on whether it is necessary to consider alternative measures when deciding whether an encumbrance is justifiable pursuant… Continue reading Is it Necessary to Consider Alternative Measures under Article 20 of the TRIPS Agreement?

2020 · Intellectual Property · International Trademark Law · IP Policy · Tobacco Plain Packaging · Trademark · Uncategorized

Does Article 20 of TRIPS require a Rigid & Exact Set of Factors to Determine Whether an Encumbrance is Unjustifiable?

Last week, I blogged about the recent decision of the WTO’s Appellate Body that upheld Australia’s  tobacco plain packaging measures. While the Appellate Body largely agreed with the earlier interpretation of both Articles 16(1) and 20 of the TRIPS Agreement by a dispute settlement panel (hereinafter, panel), there are some notable differences in the way… Continue reading Does Article 20 of TRIPS require a Rigid & Exact Set of Factors to Determine Whether an Encumbrance is Unjustifiable?

2020 · International Trademark Law · IP Policy · Tobacco Plain Packaging · Trademark · Uncategorized

NEWSFLASH: WTO’S Appellate Body Upholds Australia’s Tobacco Plain Packaging Measures

This is a quick update regarding the Australia – Plain Packaging case. I have commented on the earlier decision of the WTO’s dispute settlement panel in a short piece available here. In its report, the panel upheld Australia’s tobacco plain packaging measures (TPP measures) as compatible with the TRIPS Agreement. However, two of the complainants… Continue reading NEWSFLASH: WTO’S Appellate Body Upholds Australia’s Tobacco Plain Packaging Measures

2020 · Human Rights · Intellectual Property · IP Policy

Territoriality, Tobacco, Trademarks, and the TRIPS Agreement

Towards the end of last year, I was invited by the editorial board of the National Law School of India Review (NLSIR) to make a contribution to NLSIR Online. I chose to write a short piece on the 2018 decision of the WTO Panel in the Australian Plain Packaging case and its implications for the principle… Continue reading Territoriality, Tobacco, Trademarks, and the TRIPS Agreement

Intellectual Property

Article 10 of the Berne Convention and the Three Step Test (Part 3)

In my last post, I examined the interface between Articles 9(2) and 10 of the Berne Convention. In that post, I concluded with the view that Article 10 is distinct from and not subject to the requirements of Article 9(2) of the Berne Convention. I also raised a question about the impact of Article 13… Continue reading Article 10 of the Berne Convention and the Three Step Test (Part 3)

Intellectual Property

Article 10 of the Berne Convention and the Three Step Test (Part 2)

In my previous post, I introduced Article 10 of the Berne Convention. In this post, I want to focus on Article 9(2) of the Berne Convention which contains what has become known as the three step test. Article 9(2) of the Berne Convention provides that: “It shall be a matter for legislation in the countries… Continue reading Article 10 of the Berne Convention and the Three Step Test (Part 2)