animes03: Launching of ASEAN IP Portal-Background History

animes03: Launching of ASEAN IP Portal-Background History

Launching of ASEAN IP Portal-Background History

The protection of Intellectual Property (IP) rights have become a concern to the Government and the creative people. The IP rights deal with most common issues like public health, education, trade, industrial policy, traditional knowledge, biodiversity, biotechnology, the internet, the cultural industries or climate change. It has become difficult to track the IP infringement due to the rapid expansion of international norms and diversity of IP laws. Therefore, the information about the latest development in the field of IP is vital to the Government and the IP creators. Visual and print media are playing a great role to provide the information about the latest technology, patent law and other related subjects in the field of Intellectual property rights. However, this information is not sufficient to cater the needs of the IP creators. Association of South Asian Nations (ASEAN) is working to create awareness about the protection of IP in the region through ASEAN Working Group on Intellectual Property Cooperation (AWGIPC) for the past several years. The ASEAN was founded in 1967 for promoting the economic growth, cultural development and social progress of the member nations. Currently, the organization has 10 member states. The member states are Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Indonesia, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam. The group observed that there is a widening gap of knowledge and information between the developed and developing nations. The main challenge of the ASEAN Countries is to remove this barrier. Besides it, the task of formulating a common principle for IP protection is very difficult task due to the highly diverse culture of the member countries. ASEAN countries realized that the protection of IP Rights might become an important tool for the alleviation of poverty through social, economical and technological progress. Member nations committed to share, cooperate and work together to promote IP related issues and improve the regional framework and used their resources fully for implementing the recommendations of AWGIPC. In this context, Association of South Asian Nations (ASEAN) has launched ASEAN IP portal on 26th. April, 2013, world IP day. According to the news release "The ASEAN IP Portal was launched today, in conjunction with World IP Day. Comprising information on ASEAN IP systems, comparative IP-related data, and web links to ASEAN IP Offices, stakeholders of ASEAN Member States can now obtain IP information for the entire ASEAN region via a consolidated platform." The functions of ASEAN IP is • Create IP links with the member nations. Share the recent development of IP legal issues among the members . Create a common platform to exchange views regarding protection of intellectual property rights among the members. Raise the awareness about the protection of IP rights among the common people. Create stronger presence ASEAN countries in the world IP scenario. In his inaugural speech, Ms Sim Ann, Senior Parliamentary Secretary, Ministry of Communications and Information & Ministry of Education, said that the introduction of the ASEAN IP would give due recognition and respect to the IP creator and it would encourage and develop the creative talents of ASEAN countries. For more information, you may visit Lex Protector

Overview: The inventors frequently ask the question "Is a patent attorney required for filing a patent application". The inventor thinks that he himself is capable for filing the registration. It is a costly misconception. The registration of the patent is a very complex matter. The registration requires a thorough legal knowledge about the international and national patent act. It is not possible for an inventor to know the tidbits of the law. Therefore, I recommend that the inventor should appoint an attorney for registration.
b> Qualification of a patent attorney:
The patent attorneys possess both the technical and legal knowledge to represent the patentee. According to Indian Patent Act-1970, a lawyer who has a basic degree in science, engineering and medical and passed the patent agent examination is eligible to qualify as a patent lawyer. The lawyer has to take a professional training from a recognized Institute for appearing in the patent agent examination. After passing the examination, the lawyer gets an agent code. The names of all the qualified agents are included in a register. When a patent lawyer submits the application, he has to quote the agent code.
Duties and obligations of patent attorney: The agents whose names have been included in the register, they are entitled to do the following jobs under the "Indian Patent Act-1970".

• The lawyer has to Prepare, draft and process the applications in connections with the case and will proceed before controller.
• Prepare prosecution papers on the related issues.
• Handle issues relating to business units.
• Develop and design strategies for products or projects developed.
• Resolve and troubleshoot litigation issues.
• Maintain and manage accountability to R&D efforts, licensing and other issues.
• Negotiate and communicate on patent issues with clients and business units.
• Maintain a database of clients' issues and update periodically.
• Provide counsel to clients on patent matters.
• Ensure compliance of laws, state and federal laws relating to the issues.

Conclusion: There is a big difference between an invention and describing an invention. A registration is an elaborate description of invention. However, money may be a barrier to the inventor. Mind it, the cost of filing an application through a lawyer is negligible in comparison to the money required for manufacturing and marketing the invention. My suggestion is that you should explore the monetization of your invention. If you can convince the lawyer about the marketability of your invention, the lawyer can help you to overcome the monetary problem. An inventor should not shatter his lifetime dream thinking that he can do a better job than a trained professional.
For more information on copyright, patent and intellectual property rights, please contact: Lex Protector

<!-- Place this tag where you want the widget to render -->
<div id="ezinearticles-widget"></div>

<!-- Place this script before the closing </body> tag -->
<script type="text/javascript" src="http://ezinearticles.com/js/widget.v2.js"></script>
<script type="text/javascript">
EzineArticlesWidget({
    "id": "ezinearticles-widget",
    "author": 1390298,
    "bio": 0,
    "category": 15,
    "articles": 10,
    "width": 250,
    "height": 300,
    "theme": {
        "shell": {
            "background": "#666666",
            "text": "#ffffff"
        },
        "article": {
            "background": "#ffffff",
            "text": "#333333"
        },
        "links": "#555555"
    }
});
</script>

Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons may solve the territorial issue of Patent Exhaustion

Patent Exhaustion is also known as first sale doctrine. Under the doctrine, the rights of the patent holders become exhausted after the sale. Therefore, the patent holder cannot sue anyone for the infringement for the sold patent. The drawback of the doctrine is that it did not clearly define the territorial status of the doctrine. Even the Court delivers the conflicting rulings in the territorial dispute. Therefore, the doctrine should be analyzed to set up a standard of territory status in patent exhaustion case. However, the recent arguments in the case of Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. may find out permanent solutions on the territorial issue of Patent Exhaustion.

Kirtsaeng, a Thai national resold some books in the USA and earned millions of dollars. These books were purchased by his family from the Thailand bookstore.   When these activities of Kirtsaeng were detected by John Wiley & Sons, a reputed textbook publisher of the USA, Wiley filed a suit against Kirtsaeng on the ground of copyright infringement. Kirsten defended him arguing that the books that he sold in America were published under the license of John Wiley & Sons to its Asian subsidiary. Therefore, John Wiley & Sons could not sue anyone for reselling the text books under 106(a), 602(a) and 109(a) of the US copyright acts. The case raised two issues related to provisions of US copyright acts. The first one is whether a copyright owner can file infringement of copyright suit against anyone after the legal sale of his work to another one. The second one is whether the permission is required to import the material in US if anyone legally acquires abroad the copyright of a material from US.

Both the parties seek the justice under the provision of section 109 of copyright act. The section 109 has mentioned the limitations on exclusive rights of copyright owners. According to the section 109, “Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106(3), the owner of a particular copy or phonorecord lawfully made under this title, or any person authorized by such owner, is entitled, without the authority of the copyright owner, to sell or otherwise dispose of the possession of that copy or phonorecord”. Kirtsaeng argued that as the books were published abroad under the license from John Wiley & Sons to its Asian subsidiary, reselling of the books in USA are exempted from punishment. In their counter argument, Wiley & Sons rejected the claim of exemption from punishment mentioning that the US Copyright Act is not applicable in Asia. Therefore, Kirtsaeng will not get impunity under the section 109 (a) of US Copyright Law. The District Court gives its verdict in favor of John Wiley & Sons imposing a damage charge of $600,000. The second circuit also affirmed the verdict.

Now, Supreme Court has heard the oral arguments of the case. The case has attracted the attention of the people related to copyright and patent acts. Both the parties had cited the examples of previous judgments of similar type of cases. The center of the attraction was the financial importance of 109(a) section; the rights of copyright holders to sell the copyrighted work at lower price in the foreign countries in the regime of globalization. A decision explicitly authorizing the importation into this country of low-cost foreign versions of copyrighted works would directly undermine the ability of content providers to maintain high prices for domestic versions of the works.

<p> For more information on copyright, patent and intellectual property rights, please contact:  <a href="http://www.lexprotector.com/blog/2012/09/20/trademark-protection-in-india/">Lex Protector</a></p>

Is “Biological Diversity Act” creating obstacle to the research of Indian Scientists?

Multinational Companies, backed by the powerful nations, are regularly stealing the traditional knowledge of India for their financial gain. India is not getting any legitimate compensation from those Companies. The first world countries are granting patents on traditional medicines of India are causing a great concern to the Indian Government.  According to the WTO regulations, it may be mentioned as bio piracy. Some examples of bio piracy are granting patents of turmeric, neem and basamati rice by European and American states. However, Government of India has revoked the patent of some Indian items through their appeals in the courts of various countries. The revocation of all the patents based on the traditional knowledge is not the feasible solution of the problem. Therefore, India Government felt the need of creating a database of non patent traditional knowledge.

India created its “Traditional Knowledge Digital Library (TKDL)” in 2001. After creation of the “TKDL”, a controversial issue has come into the limelight. The scientists of the Government Organizations such as “Council for Scientific & Industrial Research (CSIR)”, “Defense Research & Development Organization” are complaining that their research papers are either rejected or pending on the grounds of their findings contained in “TKDL”. The main reason of it is the Section 6 of draconian “Biological Diversity Act” and lack of innovative ideas among the “Council for Scientific & Industrial Research (CSIR)” scientists who control “TKDL”.

We hope that the Government of India will relax some of the clauses of “Biological Diversity Act”, so that our scientists can get their patents in a fair way.   

Powered by Backlink Checker © - Dirgio SEO Tools