Intellectual Property in Computing: (How) Should Software Be Protected? An Industry Perspective

The future of the software industry is today being shaped in the courtroom. Most discussions of intellectual property to date, however, have been frames as debates about how the existing law --- promulgated long before the computer revolution --- should be applied to software. This memo is a transcript of a panel discussion on what forms of legal protection should apply to software to best serve both the industry and society in general. After addressing that question we can consider what laws would bring this about.

Generic Architecture and Semiconductor Intellectual Property Cores for Avanced Encryption Standard Cryptography

A generic architecture for implementing the advanced encryption standard (AES) encryption algorithm in silicon is proposed. This allows the instantiation of a wide range of chip specifications, with these taking the form of semiconductor intellectual property (IP) cores. Cores implemented from this architecture can perform both encryption and decryption and support four modes of operation: (i) electronic codebook mode; (ii) output feedback mode; (iii) cipher block chaining mode; and (iv) ciphertext feedback mode. Chip designs can also be generated to cover all three AES key lengths, namely 128 bits, 192 bits and 256 bits. On-the-fly generation of the round keys required during decryption is also possible. The general, flexible and multi-functional nature of the approach described contrasts with previous designs which, to date, have been focused on specific implementations. The presented ideas are demonstrated by implementation in FPGA technology. However, the architecture and IP cores derived from this are easily migratable to other silicon technologies including ASIC and PLD and are capable of covering a wide range of modem communication systems cryptographic requirements. Moreover, the designs produced have a gate count and throughput comparable with or better than the previous one-off solutions.

Intellectual Property management in publicly funded R&D centres—A comparison of university-based and company-based research centres

Recent thinking on open innovation and the knowledge-based economy have stressed the importance of external knowledge sources in stimulating innovation. Policy-makers have recognised this, establishing publicly funded Centres of R&D Excellence with the objective of stimulating industry–science links and localised innovation spillovers. Here, we examine the contrasting IP management practices of a group of 18 university- and company-based R&D centres supported by the same regional programme. Our analysis covers all but one of the Centres supported by the programme and suggests marked contrasts between the IP strategies of the university-based and company-based centres. This suggests the potential for very different types of knowledge spillovers from publicly funded R&D centres based in different types of organisations, and a range of alternative policy approaches to the future funding of R&D centres depending on policy-makers’ objectives.

Intellectual Property and the EU’s Deep Trade Agenda

The EU is considered to be one of the main proponents of what has been called the deep trade agenda—that is, the push for further trade liberalization with an emphasis on the removal of domestic non-tariff regulatory measures affecting trade, as opposed to the traditional focus on the removal of trade barriers at borders. As negotiations on the Doha Development Round have stalled, the EU has attempted to achieve these aims by entering into comprehensive free trade agreements (FTAs) that are not only limited exclusively to tariffs but also extend to non-tariff barriers, including services, intellectual property rights (IPRs), competition, and investment. These FTAs place great emphasis on regulatory convergence as a means to secure greater market openings. The paper examines the EU's current external trade policy in the area of IP, particularly its attempts to promote its own regulatory model for the protection of IP rights through trade agreements. By looking at the IP enforcement provisions of such agreements, the article also examines how the divisive issues that are currently hindering the progress of negotiations at WTO level, including the demands from developing countries to maintain a degree of autonomy in the area of IP regulation as well as the need to balance IP protection with human rights protection, are being dealt with in recent EU FTAs.

Multinational drug corporations, intellectual property rights and the Canadian state : a historical and critical analysis

This study critically analyzes the historical role and influence of multinational drug cotpOrations and multinational corporations in general; the u.s. government and the Canadian state in negotiating the global recognition ofIntellectual Property Rights (IPR) under GATT/NAFTA. This process began in 1969 when the Liberal government, in response to high prices for brand-name drugs amended the Patent Act to introduce compulsory licensing by reducing monopoly protection from 20 to seven years. Although the financial position ofthe multinational drug industry was not affected, it campaigned vigorously to change the 1969 legislation. In 1987, the Patent Act was amended to extend protection to 10 years as a condition for free trade talks with the u.s. Nonetheless, the drug industry was not satisfied and accused Canada of providing a bad example to other nations. Therefore, it continued to campaign for global recognition ofIPR laws under GATT. Following the conclusion of the GATTI Trade-Related aspects of Intellectual Property Rights agreement (TRIPS) in 1991, the multinational drug industry and the American government, to the surprise of many, were still not satisfied and sought to implement harsher conditions under NAFTA. The Progressive Conservative government readily agreed without any objections or consideration for the social consequences. As a result, Bill C-91 was introduced. It abandoned compulsory licenses and was made retroactive from December 21, 1991. It is the contention of this thesis that the economic survival of multinational corporations on a global scale depends on the role and functions of the modem state. Similarly, the existence of the state depends on the ideological-political and socioeconomic assistance it gives to multinational corporations on a national and international scale. This dialectical relation of the state and multinational corporations is explored in our theoretical and historical analysis of their role in public policy.

Intellectual property rights and the campaign for access to essential medicines : the advocacy role assumed by Médecins Sans Frontières

Non-governmental organizations and transnational networks have been increasingly successful a t gaining influence within issue areas traditionally controlled by the state. In many instances, non-state actors have been instrumental in forcing issues onto the global agenda, have aided in the development or transformation of global regimes, and have participated in securing state compliance for the adoption of new international norms. This paper argues that, consistent with social constructivist theory, ideas are important in influencing state preferences and change may be possible when certain factors are present. I f non-state actors can influence states, it is meaningful to understand how this happens. This paper focuses on a campaign led by Medecins Sans Frontieres that began in the late 1990s to acquire affordable medicines for patients in developing states that could not afford patented drugs. The campaign reached a measure of success in that member states of the World Trade Organization re-negotiated contested terms and meanings within the trade agreement for intellectual property rights and allowed concessions that would benefit lower income states. What factors contributed to the success of the campaign? And what were the most important factors - the issue, the actors or the mechanisms used?

Paradigm Shift in European Intellectual Property Law? From Microsoft to Linux

"L’auteure Lucie Guibault aborde la question des ""logiciels libres"" dans le cadre des droits d’auteurs et des brevets. Ces logiciels sont des programmes informatiques qui sont gratuitement distribués au public, dont la modification et la redistribution sont fortement encouragées, mais dont la vente ou la commercialisation est découragée ou même carrément prohibée. Ces caractéristiques particulières distinguent les logiciels libres des ""programmes propriétés"" traditionnels, qui se basent sur le principe que le créateur d’un programme en possède les droits de propriété et qu’il est le seul autorisé à le modifier ou le vendre, sous réserve de sa capacité à faire cession de ces droits. Les logiciels libres sont fondés sur une idéologie de coopération, qui promeut la propagation des idées et des connaissances et qui favorise ainsi la création de meilleurs logiciels. L’auteure présente les grandes caractéristiques des trois principales licences de logiciels libres, soit la ""General Public License"", la licence ""Berkeley Software Distribution"" et la ""Mozilla Public License"". Elle soutient que ces logiciels libres et les régimes normatifs qui les encadrent sont à l’origine d’un changement de paradigme au sein des régimes européens et hollandais de protection des droits d’auteurs et des brevets. La première partie de l’article analyse les régimes des droits d’auteur des trois licences de logiciels libres. L’auteure souligne que ces régimes ont été établis en se basant sur la prémisse qu’il n’y a pas de distinction significative entre les créateurs et les utilisateurs de logiciels libres. Les régimes normatifs reflètent cette situation en prévoyant un ensemble de droits et d’obligations pour les utilisateurs dans le cadre de l’utilisation, de la reproduction, de la modification et de la redistribution gratuite des logiciels libres. L’auteur explique comment ces régimes normatifs s’intègrent au sein de la législation européenne et hollandaise, entre autre au niveau du droit de propriété, du droit commercial, du droit des communications et du droit des obligations. L’auteur démontre que, de façon générale, ces régimes normatifs législatifs semblent s’être adéquatement adaptés aux nouvelles réalités posées par les règles de droits d’auteurs des logiciels libres. La seconde partie aborde la problématique du droit des brevets, tel que défini par la législation européenne et hollandaise. La plupart des utilisateurs et créateurs de logiciels libres s’opposent aux régimes de brevets traditionnels, qui limitent l’innovation et les possibilités de développement techniques. L’auteur décrit les différents régimes alternatifs de brevets offerts par les trois licences de logiciels libres. De plus, l’auteur présente l’encadrement légal pour ces nouveaux brevets, tel que défini par les législations européennes et hollandaises. Elle soutient que cet encadrement légal est inadéquat et qu’il n’est pas adapté aux besoins des utilisateurs de logiciels libres."