(cache) US-EU Transatlantic Trade Deal Would Skip IPRs

US-EU Transatlantic Trade Deal Would Skip IPRs

Published on 21 June 2012 @ 6:48 pm

Intellectual Property Watch

The Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) yesterday released an interim report with the European Union on ways to expand transatlantic trade and investment. But apparently this would not include trying to bridge differences on intellectual property rights.

The Interim Report to Leaders from the Co-Chairs of the EU-U.S. High Level Working Group on Jobs and Growth states:

“Both the EU and the United States are committed to a high level of intellectual property protection, including enforcement, and cooperate extensively through the Transatlantic IPR Working Group. Both sides agree that it would not be feasible in negotiations to seek to reconcile across the board differences in the IPR obligations that each typically includes in its comprehensive trade agreements. Before the launch of any negotiations, both sides would further consult on possible approaches to deal with IPR matters in a mutually satisfactory manner.”

The report sees most promise in tariff and non-tariff barriers, regulation and standards, and enhanced cooperation.

Ironically, USTR and the EU have pushed hard for the inclusion of intellectual property rights in every recent trade agreement they have pursued up till now.

The National Association of Manufacturers published a blog item today saying the bilateral agreement would create jobs.

Categories: IP Live, Bilateral/Regional Negotiations, Copyright Policy, English, European Policy, Patent Policy, Trademarks/Geographical Indications/Domains, US Policy

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Comments

México y Australia, tan lejos de ACTA…tan cerca del TPPA says:
27 June 2012 at 4:27 pm
[...] ACTA, una creación de la USTR a cargo de Ron Kirk, es un castillo de naipes que poco a poco se derrumba por su propio peso. El precedente que puede sentar el rechazo por parte de la Unión Europea es muy fuerte. La oposición ha logrado avances pero la injusticia sigue, por ejemplo, a diferencia de Colombia; el tratado comercial entre Europa y Estados Unidos, no contendrá medidas de propiedad intelectual. [...]
México y Australia, tan lejos de ACTA…tan cerca del TPPA #iMapas says:
27 June 2012 at 4:54 pm
[...] sigue, por ejemplo, a diferencia de Colombia; el tratado comercial entre Europa y Estados Unidos, no contendrá medidas de propiedad intelectual.En medio del evidente colapso del régimen de propiedad intelectual en todo el mundo, el TPPA es un [...]
México y Australia, tan lejos de ACTA…tan cerca del TPPA | InFORMAT says:
27 June 2012 at 5:56 pm
[...] ACTA, una creación de la USTR a cargo de Ron Kirk, es un castillo de naipes que poco a poco se derrumba por su propio peso. El precedente que puede sentar el rechazo por parte de la Unión Europea es muy fuerte. La oposición ha logrado avances pero la injusticia sigue, por ejemplo, a diferencia de Colombia; el tratado comercial entre Europa y Estados Unidos, no contendrá medidas de propiedad intelectual. [...]
México y Australia, tan lejos de ACTA…tan cerca del TPPA | El Tenanpa says:
27 June 2012 at 6:33 pm
[...] ACTA, una creación de la USTR a cargo de Ron Kirk, es un castillo de naipes que poco a poco se derrumba por su propio peso. El precedente que puede sentar el rechazo por parte de la Unión Europea es muy fuerte. La oposición ha logrado avances pero la injusticia sigue, por ejemplo, a diferencia de Colombia; el tratado comercial entre Europa y Estados Unidos, no contendrá medidas de propiedad intelectual. [...]
México y Australia, tan lejos de ACTA…tan cerca del TPPA « BlackBerry Warez | Blog says:
27 June 2012 at 9:31 pm
[...] ACTA, una creación de la USTR a cargo de Ron Kirk, es un castillo de naipes que poco a poco se derrumba por su propio peso. El precedente que puede sentar el rechazo por parte de la Unión Europea es muy fuerte. La oposición ha logrado avances pero la injusticia sigue, por ejemplo, a diferencia de Colombia; el tratado comercial entre Europa y Estados Unidos, no contendrá medidas de propiedad intelectual. [...]
México y Australia, tan lejos de ACTA…tan cerca del TPPA | Jobbr es says:
28 June 2012 at 5:16 am
[...] ACTA, una creación de la USTR a cargo de Ron Kirk, es un castillo de naipes que poco a poco se derrumba por su propio peso. El precedente que puede sentar el rechazo por parte de la Unión Europea es muy fuerte. La oposición ha logrado avances pero la injusticia sigue, por ejemplo, a diferencia de Colombia; el tratado comercial entre Europa y Estados Unidos, no contendrá medidas de propiedad intelectual. [...]
México y Australia, tan lejos de ACTA…tan cerca del TPPA | Tecnología mulera says:
28 June 2012 at 9:24 am
[...] ACTA, una creación de la USTR a cargo de Ron Kirk, es un castillo de naipes que poco a poco se derrumba por su propio peso. El precedente que puede sentar el rechazo por parte de la Unión Europea es muy fuerte. La oposición ha logrado avances pero la injusticia sigue, por ejemplo, a diferencia de Colombia; el tratado comercial entre Europa y Estados Unidos, no contendrá medidas de propiedad intelectual. [...]
México y Australia, tan lejos de ACTA…tan cerca del TPPA Noticias says:
28 June 2012 at 4:46 pm
[...] ACTA, una creación de la USTR a load de Ron Kirk, es un castillo de naipes que poco a poco se derrumba por su propio peso. El precedente que puede sentar el rechazo por parte de la Unión Europea es muy fuerte. La oposición ha logrado avances pero la injusticia sigue, por ejemplo, a diferencia de Colombia; el tratado comercial entre Europa y Estados Unidos, no contendrá medidas de propiedad intelectual. [...]
México y Australia, tan lejos de ACTA…tan cerca del TPPA | tapanco says:
28 June 2012 at 4:52 pm
[...] ACTA, una creación de la USTR a cargo de Ron Kirk, es un castillo de naipes que poco a poco se derrumba por su propio peso. El precedente que puede sentar el rechazo por parte de la Unión Europea es muy fuerte. La oposición ha logrado avances pero la injusticia sigue, por ejemplo, a diferencia de Colombia; el tratado comercial entre Europa y Estados Unidos, no contendrá medidas de propiedad intelectual. [...]
México y Australia, tan lejos de ACTA…tan cerca del TPPA | CITYGEEK says:
8 July 2012 at 5:26 am
[...] ACTA, una creación de la USTR a cargo de Ron Kirk, es un castillo de naipes que poco a poco se derrumba por su propio peso. El precedente que puede sentar el rechazo por parte de la Unión Europea es muy fuerte. La oposición ha logrado avances pero la injusticia sigue, por ejemplo, a diferencia de Colombia; el tratado comercial entre Europa y Estados Unidos, no contendrá medidas de propiedad intelectual. [...]
ACTA Lives: How the EU & Canada Are Using CETA as Backdoor Mechanism To Revive ACTA says:
9 July 2012 at 4:44 pm
[...] the U.S. and EU recently announced their own plans to negotiate a trade deal but agreed to keep intellectual property issues out of [...]
ACTA Lives: How the EU & Canada Are Using CETA as Backdoor Mechanism To Revive ACTA « exildeutsch says:
10 July 2012 at 8:44 pm
[...] the U.S. and EU recently announced their own plans to negotiate a trade deal but agreed to keep intellectual property issues out of [...]

We welcome your participation in article and blog comment threads, and other discussion forums, where we encourage you to analyse and react to the content available on the Intellectual Property Watch website. By participating in discussions or reader forums, or by submitting opinion pieces or comments to articles, blogs, reviews or multimedia features, you are consenting to these rules.

By participating in discussions or reader forums, or by submitting opinion pieces or comments to articles, blogs, reviews or multimedia features, you are consenting to these rules.

1. You agree that you are fully responsible for the content that you post. You will not knowingly post content that violates the copyright, trademark, patent or other intellectual property right of any third party or which you know is under a confidentiality obligation preventing its publication and that you will request removal of the same should you discover that you have violated this provision. Likewise, you may not post content that is libelous, defamatory, obscene, abusive, that violates a third party's right to privacy, that otherwise violates any applicable local, state, national or international law, that amounts to spamming or that is otherwise inappropriate. You may not post content that degrades others on the basis of gender, race, class, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual preference, disability or other classification. Epithets and other language intended to intimidate or to incite violence are also prohibited. Furthermore, you may not impersonate others.

2. You understand and agree that Intellectual Property Watch is not responsible for any content posted by you or third parties. You further understand that IP Watch does not monitor the content posted. Nevertheless, IP Watch may monitor the any user-generated content as it chooses and reserves the right to remove, edit or otherwise alter content that it deems inappropriate for any reason whatever without consent nor notice. We further reserve the right, in our sole discretion, to remove a user's privilege to post content on our site. IP Watch is not in any manner endorsing the content of the discussion forums and cannot and will not vouch for its reliability or otherwise accept liability for it.

3. By submitting any contribution to IP Watch, you warrant that your contribution is your own original work and that you have the right to make it available to IP Watch for all purposes and you agree to indemnify IP Watch, its directors, employees and agents against all damages, legal fees and others expenses that may be incurred by IP Watch as a result of your breach of warranty or of these terms.

4. You further agree not to publish any personal information about yourself or anyone else (for example telephone number or home address). If you add a comment to a blog, be aware that your email address will be apparent.

5. IP Watch will not be liable for any loss including but not limited to the following (whether such losses are foreseen, known or otherwise): loss of data, loss of revenue or anticipated profit, loss of business, loss of opportunity, loss of goodwill or injury to reputation, losses suffered by third parties, any indirect, consequential or exemplary damages.

6. You understand and agree that the discussion forums are to be used only for non-commercial purposes. You may not solicit funds, promote commercial entities or otherwise engage in commercial activity in our discussion forums.

7. You acknowledge and agree that you use and/or rely on any information obtained through the discussion forums at your own risk.

8. For any content that you post, you hereby grant to IP Watch the royalty-free, irrevocable, perpetual, exclusive and fully sub-licensable license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform and display such content in whole or in part, world-wide and to incorporate it in other works, in any form, media or technology now known or later developed.

9. These terms and your posts and contributions shall be governed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of Switzerland (without giving effect to conflict of laws principles thereof) and any dispute exclusively settled by the Courts of the Canton of Geneva.

US-EU Transatlantic Trade Deal Would Skip IPRs

Related Articles:

Comments

Leave a Reply