Post Tagged with: "patents"

CETA Hits a Snag Over Patent Provisions

The negotiations between Canada and the European Union appear to have hit a snag over patent law changes demanded by large pharmaceutical companies that could add billions of dollars to Canadian health care costs. While the government previously indicated that a deal would be concluded within months, Minister Ed Fast […]

February 29, 2012 — Comments are Disabled — News

The Copyright Costs of Joining the TPP: Extending Bill C-11 With More Digital Locks & Penalties

Coverage of the Canadian government’s decision to seek entry into the Trans Pacific Partnership trade negotiations with the United States, Australia, and many other Asian and South American countries has focused primarily on the potential impact on supply management systems in the dairy and other agricultural sectors. While some believe Canada will ask for an exemption for supply management (and some countries view Canada’s entrance into the talks with skepticism), the potential impact of the TPP on Canadian intellectual property laws should not be overlooked.

Based on leaks of the current drafts of the TPP IP chapter, the agreement would overhaul Canadian copyright law far beyond what is contemplated in Bill C-11. In fact, the TPP would require even stricter digital lock rules, extend the term of copyright, restrict trade in parallel imports, and increase various infringement penalties. If Canada were to ratify the TPP, it would require another copyright bill to undo much of what the government is about to enact with Bill C-11. A recent study on the implications of the copyright provisions point to many concerns including:

November 30, 2011 — 23 comments — News

Will Microsoft vs. i4i Patent Case Influence Canadian Law?

Professor Norman Siebrasse on why it won’t: the statute is different, the precedent is different, and the U.S. Supreme Court expressly did not consider policy arguments.

June 10, 2011 — 2 comments — News

Study Debunks Chamber of Commerce Claims on Canadian Patent Law

Yesterday I posted on how the Canadian IP Council, the Canadian Chamber of Commerce’s IP lobby arm, floated false claims about the scope of counterfeiting in Canada in an attempt to bolster claims for increased border measures. The Chamber placed Canadian countefeiting costs at $30 billion per year, a figure that has no basis in fact and that even RCMP no longer supports.

The Chamber’s false claims on counterfeiting are not the only intellectual property issue where their arguments have been debunked as inaccurate. My weekly technology law column (Toronto Star version, homepage version) focuses on the proposed trade agreement between Canada and the European Union, which could have big implications for the costs of pharmaceutical drugs, on which Canadians spend $22 billion annually.

The E.U. is home to many of the world’s big brand name pharmaceutical companies and one of their chief goals is to extend Canada’s intellectual property rules to delay the availability of lower cost generic alternatives. Earlier this year, the Chamber’s IP Council released a report claiming that Canada lags behind other countries and encouraging the Canadian government to follow the European example by extending the term of pharmaceutical patents and “data exclusivity.”

The CIPC (which counts several brand name pharmaceutical companies as members) claims the reforms would lead to increased pharmaceutical research and development in Canada. But last month University of Toronto law professor Edward Iacobucci released a study that thoroughly debunks the CIPC claims, predicting increased consumer costs and noting that there is little evidence the changes would increase employment or research spending.

Iacobucci’s blunt assessment of the report:

The CIPC Report does not offer objectivity in its assessment of Canada’s patent regime. It rather is a straightforward piece of advocacy on behalf of the branded pharmaceutical sector. The Report makes no effort to place Canada’s patent law in an international context or address international relations, but instead simply asserts without justification that Canada would suffer if it fails to grant the same concessions to the pharmaceutical industry that the EU and US have made. The flaws in this basic approach undermine each of the CIPC Report’s recommendations.

June 9, 2011 — 4 comments — Columns

Why Ed Fast Holds One of The Keys To Health Care Costs

Appeared in the Toronto Star on June 5, 2011 as EU/Big Pharma Deal Would Raise Health Care Costs Ed Fast, Canada’s new Minister of International Trade, may not be household name, yet the B.C. Minister is set to play a key role in one of Canada’s top domestic priorities – […]

June 9, 2011 — Comments are Disabled — Columns Archive