Rio+ 20: The future we want or greenwash?

The Rio+20 United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development featured a fractious debate over intellectual property and the environment. Not only was there heated debate about patent law, technology transfer, and sustainable development, there was also a debate about sustainable public procurement, eco-labelling, accountable advertising, and greenwashing.

A Submission to the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties on the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 (# ACTA)

“If Hollywood could order intellectual property laws for Christmas, what would they look like? This is pretty close.” David Fewer “While European and American IP maximalists have pushed for TRIPS-Plus provisions in FTAs and bilateral agreements, they are now pushing for TRIPS-Plus-Plus protections in these various forums.” Susan Sell “ACTA is a threat to the future of a free and open Internet.” Alexander Furnas “Implementing the agreement could open a Pandora's box of potential human rights violations.” Amnesty International. “I will not take part in this masquerade.” Kader Arif, Rapporteur for the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 in the European Parliament Executive Summary As an independent scholar and expert in intellectual property, I am of the view that the Australian Parliament should reject the adoption of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. I would take issue with the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade’s rather partisan account of the negotiations, the consultations, and the outcomes associated with the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. In my view, the negotiations were secretive and biased; the local consultations were sometimes farcical because of the lack of information about the draft texts of the agreement; and the final text of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 is not in the best interests of Australia, particularly given that it is a net importer of copyright works and trade mark goods and services. I would also express grave reservations about the quality of the rather pitiful National Interest Analysis – and the lack of any regulatory impact statement – associated with the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. The assertion that the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 does not require legislative measures is questionable – especially given the United States Trade Representative has called the agreement ‘the highest-standard plurilateral agreement ever achieved concerning the enforcement of intellectual property rights.’ It is worthwhile reiterating that there has been much criticism of the secretive and partisan nature of the negotiations surrounding the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. Sean Flynn summarizes these concerns: "The negotiation process for ACTA has been a case study in establishing the conditions for effective industry capture of a lawmaking process. Instead of using the relatively transparent and inclusive multilateral processes, ACTA was launched through a closed and secretive “‘club approach’ in which like-minded jurisdictions define enforcement ‘membership’ rules and then invite other countries to join, presumably via other trade agreements.” The most influential developing countries, including Brazil, India, China and Russia, were excluded. Likewise, a series of manoeuvres ensured that public knowledge about the specifics of the agreement and opportunities for input into the process were severely limited. Negotiations were held with mere hours notice to the public as to when and where they would be convened, often in countries half away around the world from where public interest groups are housed. Once there, all negotiation processes were closed to the public. Draft texts were not released before or after most negotiating rounds, and meetings with stakeholders took place only behind closed doors and off the record. A public release of draft text, in April 2010, was followed by no public or on-the-record meetings with negotiators." Moreover, it is disturbing that the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 has been driven by ideology and faith, rather than by any evidence-based policy making Professor Duncan Matthews has raised significant questions about the quality of empirical evidence used to support the proposal of Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011: ‘There are concerns that statements about levels of counterfeiting and piracy are based either on customs seizures, with the actual quantities of infringing goods in free circulation in any particular market largely unknown, or on estimated losses derived from industry surveys.’ It is particularly disturbing that, in spite of past criticism, the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade has supported the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011, without engaging the Productivity Commission or the Treasury to do a proper economic analysis of the proposed treaty. Kader Arif, Rapporteur for the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 in the European Parliament, quit his position, and said of the process: "I want to denounce in the strongest possible manner the entire process that led to the signature of this agreement: no inclusion of civil society organisations, a lack of transparency from the start of the negotiations, repeated postponing of the signature of the text without an explanation being ever given, exclusion of the EU Parliament's demands that were expressed on several occasions in our assembly. As rapporteur of this text, I have faced never-before-seen manoeuvres from the right wing of this Parliament to impose a rushed calendar before public opinion could be alerted, thus depriving the Parliament of its right to expression and of the tools at its disposal to convey citizens' legitimate demands.” Everyone knows the ACTA agreement is problematic, whether it is its impact on civil liberties, the way it makes Internet access providers liable, its consequences on generic drugs manufacturing, or how little protection it gives to our geographical indications. This agreement might have major consequences on citizens' lives, and still, everything is being done to prevent the European Parliament from having its say in this matter. That is why today, as I release this report for which I was in charge, I want to send a strong signal and alert the public opinion about this unacceptable situation. I will not take part in this masquerade." There have been parallel concerns about the process and substance of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 in the context of Australia. I have a number of concerns about the substance of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. First, I am concerned that the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 fails to provide appropriate safeguards in respect of human rights, consumer protection, competition, and privacy laws. It is recommended that the new Joint Parliamentary Committee on Human Rights investigate this treaty. Second, I argue that there is a lack of balance to the copyright measures in the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 – the definition of piracy is overbroad; the suite of civil remedies, criminal offences, and border measures is excessive; and there is a lack of suitable protection for copyright exceptions, limitations, and remedies. Third, I discuss trade mark law, intermediary liability, and counterfeiting. I express my concerns, in this context, that the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 could have an adverse impact upon consumer interests, competition policy, and innovation in the digital economy. I also note, with concern, the lobbying by tobacco industries for the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 – and the lack of any recognition in the treaty for the capacity of countries to take measures of tobacco control under the World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. Fourth, I note that the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 provides no positive obligations to promote access to essential medicines. It is particularly lamentable that Australia and the United States of America have failed to implement the Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health 2001 and the WTO General Council Decision 2003. Fifth, I express concerns about the border measures in the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. Such measures lack balance – and unduly favour the interests of intellectual property owners over consumers, importers, and exporters. Moreover, such measures will be costly, as they involve shifting the burden of intellectual property enforcement to customs and border authorities. Interdicting, seizing, and destroying goods may also raise significant trade issues. Finally, I express concern that the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 undermines the role of existing international organisations, such as the United Nations, the World Intellectual Property Organization and the World Trade Organization, and subverts international initiatives such as the WIPO Development Agenda 2007. I also question the raison d'être, independence, transparency, and accountability of the proposed new ‘ACTA Committee’. In this context, I am concerned by the shift in the position of the Labor Party in its approach to international treaty-making in relation to intellectual property. The Australian Parliament adopted the Australia-United States Free Trade Agreement 2004, which included a large Chapter on intellectual property. The treaty was a ‘TRIPs-Plus’ agreement, because the obligations were much more extensive and prescriptive than those required under the multilateral framework established by the TRIPS Agreement 1994. During the debate over the Australia-United States Free Trade Agreement 2004, the Labor Party expressed the view that it would seek to mitigate the effects of the TRIPS-Plus Agreement, when at such time it gained power. Far from seeking to ameliorate the effects of the Australia-United States Free Trade Agreement 2004, the Labor Government would seek to lock Australia into a TRIPS-Double Plus Agreement – the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. There has not been a clear political explanation for this change in approach to international intellectual property. For both reasons of process and substance, I conclude that the Australian Parliament and the Australian Government should reject the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. The Australian Government would do better to endorse the Washington Declaration on Intellectual Property and the Public Interest 2011, and implement its outstanding obligations in respect of access to knowledge, access to essential medicines, and the WIPO Development Agenda 2007. The case study of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 highlights the need for further reforms to the process by which Australia engages in international treaty-making.

No logo: Brand bullies, trade mark law, and the Trans-Pacific Partnership

The Trans-Pacific Partnership is a sweeping trade agreement, spanning the Pacific Rim, and covering an array of topics, including intellectual property. There has been much analysis of the recently leaked intellectual property chapter of the Trans-Pacific Partnership by WikiLeaks. Julian Assange, WikiLeaks’ Editor-in-Chief, observed “The selective secrecy surrounding the TPP negotiations, which has let in a few cashed-up megacorps but excluded everyone else, reveals a telling fear of public scrutiny. By publishing this text we allow the public to engage in issues that will have such a fundamental impact on their lives.” Critical attention has focused upon the lack of transparency surrounding the agreement, copyright law and the digital economy; patent law, pharmaceutical drugs, and data protection; and the criminal procedures and penalties for trade secrets. The topic of trade mark law and related rights, such as internet domain names and geographical indications, deserves greater analysis.

Vertically stacked photovoltaic and thermal solar cell

According to some embodiments, the present invention provides a novel photovoltaic solar cell system from photovoltaic modules that are vertically arrayed in a stack format using thin film semiconductors selected from among org. and inorg. thin film semiconductors. The stack cells may be cells that are produced in a planar manner, then vertically oriented in an angular form, also termed herein tilted, to maximize the light capturing aspects. The use of a stack configuration system as described herein allows for the use of a variety of electrode materials, such as transparent materials or semitransparent metals. Light concn. can be achieved by using fresnel lens, parabolic mirrors or derivs. of such structures. The light capturing can be controlled by being reflected back and forth in the photovoltaic system until significant quantities of the resonant light is absorbed. Light that passes to the end and can be reflected back through the device by beveling or capping the end of the device with a different refractive index material, or alternatively using a reflective surface. The contacting between stacked cells can be done in series or parallel. According to some embodiments, the present invention uses a concentrator architecture where the light is channeled into the cells that contain thermal fluid channels (using a transparent fluid such as water) to absorb and hence reduce the thermal energy generation.

Wrapped optoelectronic devices and methods for making same

In various embodiments, optoelectronic devices are described herein. The optoelectronic device may include an optoelectronic cell arranged so as to wrap around a central axis wherein the cell includes a first conductive layer, a semi-conductive layer disposed over and in electrical communication with the first conductive layer, and a second conductive layer disposed over and in electrical communication with the semi-conductive layer. In various embodiments, methods for making optoelectronic devices are described herein. The methods may include forming an optoelectronic cell while flat and wrapping the optoelectronic cell around a central axis. The optoelectronic devices may be photovoltaic devices. Alternatively, the optoelectronic devices may be organic light emitting diodes.

Kits and methods for diagnosis, screening, treatment and disease monitoring [WO 2015048852 A1]

Disclosed are methods for detecting the presence of a carcinoma or an increased likelihood that a carcinoma is present in a subject. More particularly, the present invention discloses methods for diagnosis, screening, treatment and monitoring of carcinomas associated with aberrant DNA methylation of the MED15 promoter region

Are we waiting too long for the cardiovascular outcome trials with the glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists?

Several new medicines are in development for the treatment of type 2 diabetes, and cardiovascular outcome trials are the gold standard for these medicines. This editorial demonstrates that despite being available for over 10 years, there are no cardiovascular outcome studies for any of the glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists, which demonstrate cardiovascular safety or benefit in subjects with high cardiovascular risk. The author argues that the FDA should be ensuring that clinical outcome studies for subjects with type 2 diabetes and high cardiovascular risk be undertaken in a timelier manner.

After 10 years of clinical trials with liraglutide, do we know whether it is beneficial in diabetes?

Type 2 diabetes remains an escalating world-wide problem, despite a range of treatments. The revelation that insulin secretion is under the control of a gut hormone, glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1), led to a new paradigm in the management of type 2 diabetes. Liraglutide is a long acting GLP-1 receptor agonist used in the treatment of type 2 diabetes. The review considers the clinical trials with liraglutide. There are many comparator trials between liraglutide and other medicines for the treatment of type 2 diabetes, and these trials have shown that liraglutide lowers HbA1c and body weight, and is well tolerated. A large cardiovascular safety trial with liraglutide is presently being undertaken. After 10 years of clinical trials with liraglutide, we do not know whether liraglutide has cardiovascular safety in subjects with type 2 diabetes and high cardiovascular risk. Although this is not a requirement for registration by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), in my opinion, they should reconsider this. We also do not presently know whether liraglutide has any beneficial effects on clinical cardiovascular outcomes.

Adherence to insulin treatment in diabetes: Can it be improved?

Insulin is used in all subjects with Type 1 diabetes, and when Type 2 diabetes is not controlled by oral anti-diabetic medicines, insulin is also used in Type 2 diabetes. However, despite this use, there is still increased mortality and morbidity in subjects with diabetes, compared to subjects without diabetes. One of the factors, which may be involved in this increased mortality and morbidity in subjects with diabetes, is nonadherence to insulin. Nonadherence rates to insulin are in the range20-38%, and many factors contribute to the nonadherence. The major aim of the review was to determine whether interventions to improve adherence to insulin do actually improve adherence to insulin. Most studies have shown that adherence to insulin was improved by changing from the vial-and-syringe approach to prefilled insulin pens, but not all studies have shown that this translated into better glycemic control and clinical outcomes. The results of studies using automatic telephone messages to improve adherence to insulin to date are inconclusive. There is limited and variable evidence that an intervention by a nurse/educator, which discusses adherence to medicines, does improve adherence to insulin. In contrast, there is little or no evidence that an extra intervention by a doctor or an intervention by a pharmacist, which discusses adherence to insulin, does actually improve the measured adherence to insulin. In conclusion, rather than assuming that an intervention by a health professional discussing adherence to insulin actually improves adherence to insulin, long-term studies investigating this are required.

Comparative studies of how living circumstances influence medication adherence in ≥ 65 year olds

Background Resources to help the older aged (≥65 year olds) manage their medicines should probably target those in greatest need. The older-aged have many different types of living circumstances. There are different locations (urban, rural), different types of housing (in the community or in retirement villages), different living arrangements (living alone or with others), and different socioeconomic status (SES) circumstances. However, there has been limited attention to whether these living circumstances affect adherence to medicines in the ≥65 year olds. Aim of the review The aim was to determine whether comparative studies, including logistic regression studies, show that living circumstances affect adherence to medicines by the ≥65 year olds. Methods A literature search of Medline, CINAHL and the Internet (Google) was undertaken. Results Four comparative studies have not shown differences in adherence to medicines between the ≥65 year olds living in rural and urban locations, but one study shows lower adherence to medicines for osteoporosis in rural areas compared to metropolitan, and another study shows greater adherence to antihypertensive medicines in rural than urban areas. There are no comparative studies of adherence to medicines in the older-aged living in indigenous communities compared to other communities. There is conflicting evidence as to whether living alone, being unmarried, or having a low income/worth is associated with nonadherence. Preliminary studies have suggested that the older-aged living in rental, low SES retirement villages or leasehold, middle SES retirement villages have a lower adherence to medicines than those living in freehold, high SES retirement villages. Conclusions The ≥65 year olds living in rural communities may need extra help with adherence to medicines for osteoporosis. The ≥65 year olds living in rental or leasehold retirement villages may require extra assistance/resources to adhere to their medicines. Further research is needed to clarify whether living under certain living circumstances (e.g. living alone, being unmarried, low income) has an effect on adherence, and to determine whether the ≥65 year olds living in indigenous communities need assistance to be adherent to prescribed medicines.

Diabetes in South Asians

Economic, dietary and other lifestyle transitions have been occurring rapidly in most South Asian countries, making their populations more vulnerable to developing Type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular diseases. Recent data show an increasing prevalence of Type 2 diabetes in urban areas as well as in semi-urban and rural areas, inclusive of people belonging to middle and low socio-economic strata. Prime determinants for Type 2 diabetes in South Asians include physical inactivity, imbalanced diets, abdominal obesity, excess hepatic fat and, possibly, adverse perinatal and early life nutrition and intra-country migration. It is reported that Type 2 diabetes affects South Asians a decade earlier and some complications, for example nephropathy, are more prevalent and progressive than in other races. Further, prevalence of pre-diabetes is high, and so is conversion to diabetes, while more than 50% of those who are affected remain undiagnosed. Attitudes, cultural differences and religious and social beliefs pose barriers in effective prevention and management of Type 2 diabetes in South Asians. Inadequate resources, insufficient healthcare budgets, lack of medical reimbursement and socio-economic factors contribute to the cost of diabetes management. The challenge is to develop new translational strategies, which are pragmatic, cost-effective and scalable and can be adopted by the South Asian countries with limited resources. The key areas that need focus are: generation of awareness, prioritizing health care for vulnerable subgroups (children, women, pregnant women and the underprivileged), screening of high-risk groups, maximum coverage of the population with essential medicines, and strengthening primary care. An effective national diabetes control programme in each South Asian country should be formulated, with these issues in mind.

Evolution of the concept of compulsory licensing: A critical analysis of key developments before and after TRIPS

Patents provide monopoly rights to patent holders. There are safeguards in patent regime to ensure that exclusive right of the patent holder is not misused. Compulsory licensing is one of the safeguards provided under TRIPS using which patent granting state may allow a third party to exploit the invention without patent holder’s consent upon terms and conditions decided by the government. This concept existed since 1623 and was not introduced by TRIPS for the first time. But this mechanism has undergone significant changes especially in post-TRIPS era. History of evolution of compulsory licensing is one of the least explored areas of intellectual property law. This paper undertakes an analysis of different phases in the evolution of the compulsory licensing mechanism and sheds light on reasons behind developments especially after TRIPS.

The ownership question of plant gene and genome intellectual properties

The restructuring of the crop agriculture industry over the past two decades has enabled patent holders to exclude, prevent and deter others from using certain research tools and delay or block further follow-on inventions

Active Adaptive Gyrostabiliser Control System

A gyrostabiliser control system and method for stabilising marine vessel motion based on precession information only. The control system employs an Automatic Gain Control (AGC) precession controller (60). This system operates with a gain factor that is always being gradually minimized so as to let the gyro flywheel (12) develop as much precession as possible - the higher the precession, the higher the roll stabilising moment. This continuous gain change provides adaptation to changes in sea state and sailing conditions. The system effectively predicts the likelihood of maximum precession being reached. Should this event be detected, then the gain is rapidly increased so as to provide a breaking precession torque. Once the event has passed, the system again attempts to gradually decrease the gain.

Fault tolerant vessel stabiliser control system

A vessel stabilizer control system includes a sensor fault detection means which senses the availability of sensing signals from a gyrostabilizer precession motion sensor and a vessel roll motion sensor. The control system controls the action of a gyro-actuator which is mechanically coupled to a gyrostabilizer. The benefit of employing fault sensing of the sensors providing the process control variables is that the sensed number of available process control variables (or sensors) can be used to activate a tiered system of control modes. Each tiered control mode is designed to utilize the available process control variables to ensure safe and effective operation of the gyrostabilizer that is tolerant of sensor faults and loss of power supply. A control mode selector is provided for selecting the appropriate control mode based on the number of available process control variables.