The blog provides analysis, views, best practice, global and international policy developments and management tips in various areas of the ever growing field of Technology Transfer and University IP Management.
Vietnam became a member of the Convention of Biological Diversity (CBD) in 1994. Vietnam has a rich diversity of species and is counted as one of the mega-diverse countries. However, biodiversity in Vietnam is in danger. The number of endangered species of fauna and flora has been increasing since 2000. The factors causing this situation include population boom, economic policy, farmland expansion, over exploitation, forest fire, infrastructure construction, illegal wildlife trade, environment pollution, and alien invasive species. Gene flow from genetically modified organisms (GMOs) also can pose danger on biodiversity.
In order to fulfill the obligations of a CBD member, the first National Biodiversity Action Plan was approved in 1995. On May 31, 2007, Vietnam's Prime Minister approved the second Action Plan (Decree No. 79/2007/QD-TTg, National Action Plan on Biological Diversity to 2010 and the Strategy for implementation of the Convention on Biological Diversity and the Cartagena Protocol on Biodiversity to 2020). The 2007 Action Plan covers management of GMOs. Vietnam's target set for 2010 include conducting risk assessments, labeling, and monitoring and inspecting of all GMOs marketed in Vietnam.
In order to preserve biodiversity, the Government enacted Biodiversity Law (No. 20/2008/QH12) in November 2008. Chapter 5, Part 3 of the Biodiversity Law has 4 articles (Art. 65-68) on risk management of GMOs. For the implementation of Chapter 5, Part 3, the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment (MoNRE) and other relevant ministries are drafting Biosafety Decree.
By Alex Chan on December 7, 2009 12:54 AM
|Permalink
In FY 2006, the United States Patent & Trademark Office launched a comprehensive strategic planning process. The strategic planning process was launched to help focus the USPTO's energy, to ensure that members of the organization are working toward the same goals, and to assess and adjust the organization's direction in response to a changing environment. This effort involves setting goals, and developing objectives for achieving those goals. As part of the strategic planning process, the USPTO's executive leadership team sought a broad range of perspectives from interested parties, including the Patent Public Advisory Committee, the Trademark Public Advisory Committee, members of the public, stakeholders, and employees. A draft plan was posted on the USPTO Web site, and a notice announcing its availability for review and comment was published in the Federal Register. The draft plan was also reviewed by Congress. The results of the input received from employees and stakeholders were summarized and discussed by the leadership team, which formulated the final version of the 2007-2012 Strategic Plan. The final version of the 2007-2012 Strategic Plan, which was released in March of 2007, then becomes a part of the annual budget request along with an annual performance plan and report.
In support of the Department of Commerce's strategic objective to "protect intellectual property and improve the patent and trademark systems," the USPTO established three strategic goals and a management goal to guide its policies and operations over the next five years. One of the three strategic goals ("Strategic Goal #3") is to improve IP protection and enforcement domestically and abroad. The objectives to achieving Strategic Goal #3 include: (1) supporting efforts and initiatives aimed at strengthening IP protection and curbing theft of IP; (2) continuing efforts to developing unified standards for international IP practice; (3) providing policy guidance on domestic IP issues; and (4) fostering innovation and competitiveness by delivering IP information and education worldwide.
According to the newly released USPTO's Performance and Accountability Report, in 2009, USPTO provided training to more than 2,226 officials from 128 countries on a variety of topics, including IP protection and enforcement, and technology transfer. USPTO also initiated a new pilot program exposing patent officials from other countries to the USPTO Patent Training Academy's patent examiner training program. The six-month long International Examiners in Residence (IEIR) Program included most of the Patent Training Academy's new examiner training curriculum. In addition, the IEIR covered other IP topics, such as copyright, trademark, and enforcement issues. In order to provide a full perspective of the U.S. IP system, the IEIR also included visits to the BPAI, the Federal District Court of the Eastern District of Virginia, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, and the Supreme Court to witness oral hearings at each of these judicial proceedings. Eight patent examiners in various technologies from the patent offices in China, Germany, Korea, and Saudi Arabia participated in the pilot program.
In the area of enforcement, in 2009, USPTO organized and hosted two joint Asian-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) - Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) - Pacific Island Forum (PIF) capacity building events, namely, the Colloquium for Public Prosecutors and the Judiciary on IPR Enforcement in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, and the Workshop on the Border Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights in Honolulu, Hawaii. USPTO also conducted a two-week study tour program on IPR enforcement and the U.S. legal system for twenty-three (23) foreign government judges and prosecutors. These are just a few examples of the wide range of programs the USPTO delivered both in the United States and overseas in 2009.
The full 2009 Performance and Accountability Report can be accessed here:
By Alex Chan on December 2, 2009 3:34 PM
|Permalink
In an effort to provide a more robust system for the provision of IP-related technical assistance to developing and least-developed countries, the USPTO has established the Global Intellectual Property Academy (GIPA) that functions to provide IPR training, capacity building, technical assistance as well as to create multilateral programs and country specific programs in U.S. and abroad. In 2007, the USPTO completed construction of GIPA that includes a 20,000 square-foot training facility at its headquarters in Alexandria, Virginia. Since then, the USPTO has held many global IP training seminars and sessions. Through this dedicated space, the USPTO delivers targeted training to foreign IP officials that include foreign IP office administrators, examiners, judges, prosecutors, customs officers, and other government officials.
One primary focus of GIPA is to offer capacity building and IP training programs in the U.S. and around the world on IP protection, enforcement, and capitalization. In delivering capacity building programs, GIPA works closely with other U.S. government agencies, trading partners and international organizations. For example, GIPA works with several other U.S. government agencies to provide adequate technical cooperation and assistance to developing countries. Such agencies include, for example, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), which focuses technical cooperation activities on providing strong IP enforcement; the U.S. Library of Congress Copyright Office, which provides technical assistance to help developing countries to developing and improve their copyright laws and enforcement mechanisms to address copyright infringements; the Department of Homeland Security Bureau of Customs and Border Protection (CBP), which provides assistance on custom law and border enforcement; the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), which funds and implements IP technical assistance generally as part of broader trade capacity-building programs at country level; and the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR), which enables developing countries to negotiate and implement market-opening and reform-oriented trade agreements as a critical part of trade capacity building.
By David Connaughton on December 1, 2009 5:32 PM
|Permalink
Thailand's largest government research center, the National Science and Technology Development Agency (NSTDA) manages all of its IP through the NSTDA Technology Licensing Office (TLO). The TLO is the largest collection of IP management professionals in Thailand. These professionals work to manage, advise and commercialize the intellectual property coming out of the NSTDA. The goal of the TLO is to increase IP awareness, and encourage commercialization of IP to create jobs and increase the well-being of the populace.
The TLO is broken up into three different sections: The IP Management section, IP Law section and the IP Commercialization Section. Each section is staffed with highly educated professionals who work to harness the innovation of the Thai People.
The IP Management section serves to evaluate, manage and acquire IP protection. This involves evaluating the patentability of new innovations, acquiring patent and other IP protection, and manage this IP through licensing and the like.
The IP Law section serves as an advisory group for workers at the NSTDA and the TLO. The members of the IP law section are highly educated in the IP field and are fully capable of providing sound advise regarding IP law.
The IP Commercialization section serves to assist in the commercialization of newly acquired IP. This involves setting up startup companies, and helping these companies get off the ground, utilizing IP as their main asset.
When these three groups work together, they form a powerful team that utilizes intellectual property to foster Thai innovation, create new jobs, and bring new technologies to the Thai people.
For more information, visit the NSTDA TLO website at: http://tmc.nstda.or.th/tlo/main.php?filename=index_eng
Nigerians like to say that not knowing Nigeria is like not knowing Africa. With a population reaching almost 150 million, Nigeria is the most populated country in the continent. Like many other African nations, disease, poverty and corruption burden its ability to develop and prosper. Although proportionally HIV/AIDS affects only 3.1% of its adult population, the number of people living with HIV/AIDS in Nigeria reaches 2.6 million, the second highest in the continent. Malaria affects 75% of its population, and claims 300,000 of its children each year. Its average yearly per capita income stands currently on $2,400, a fact, which puts most of its citizens below the poverty line. While one could go on and on with this grim picture of Nigeria, in the past decade signs of a different Nigeria emerges.
Simultaneously with the peaceful transfer from military to civilian rule in 1999, Nigeria has set its National Space and Research Agency. In 2003 the agency launched its first satellite and after few more launches, it is preparing to launch the first Nigerian astronaut to space by year 2015. Since the first production of a Nigerian film in 1960, Nollywood, the Nigerian film industry, reached in year 2008 top second worldwide in number of productions, slightly trailing Bollywood and way ahead of Hollywood. Today, Nigeria's education and research system includes 95 universities, 125 polytechnics, and 200 research institutions. Understanding that proactive measures are needed, Nigeria began in 2003 a privatization campaign. After privatizing its national telephone company, which managed in its 30 years of operation to set a total of 4500 telephone lines (in a country of more than 140 million), it reached in 2006, 32 million GSM accounts. Inflation reached by 2006 a single digit and its yearly GDP ranked at 6.5%, while the "recommended" OECD measure stood on 2.5%. Nigeria reduced its foreign debt, and the Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) grew from $6 to $18 billion. The Nigerian stock market reported 40% returns on investments in 2006, and Goldman Sachs forecasted in 2003 that by year 2050, Nigeria would be among the most economically successful nations worldwide.
Nigeria's leaders recognize the value of intellectual property (IP) and its potential in pushing the Nigerian economy forward. Quoted in the Daily Sun, President Yar'Adua said that "commercialization of research products is key to achieving Vision 2020...not commercializing means that we import everything we need." (4/30/09). Addressing issues such as macro-economy, infrastructure, education, health, agriculture and manufacturing, Nigeria's leaders hope that by year 2020 the country will be peaceful, harmonious and a stable democracy. Vision 2020 is their plan for reaching this goal. http://www.nv2020.org/.
Further proof for Nigeria's leaders' understanding of the importance of intellectual property and technology transfer to its economy was manifested in a recent meeting between WIPO's Director General, Mr. Francis Gurry, and Nigeria's President, in early September. President Yar'Adua confirmed that "Nigeria is fully committed to the ideals of WIPO and the protection and enforcement of IPR." The President also urged WIPO's DG to establish a training institute in the country in partnership with the Nigeria government. All Africa.com 9/2/09.
On
November 10, President Obama announced his nomination of Dr. Rajiv Shah for
Administrator of the United States Agency for International Development. Dr.
Shah currently works at the U.S. Department of Agriculture as Chief Scientist
and Under Secretary for Research, Education and Economics. While at USDA, Dr.
Shah has directed the start of the National Institute of Food and Agriculture,
an organization focused on bioenergy, sustainable food production, and
nutrition.
Dr.
Shah previously was the Director of Agricultural Development at the Bill and
Melinda Gates Foundation. In this role, he oversaw the management of a global
vaccination fund. Dr. Shah also was a health care policy advisor for Gore's
presidential campaign in 2000.
Dr.
Shah earned his M.D. from the University of Pennsylvania Medical School and a
Master of Science in health economics at the Wharton School of Business. He is
a graduate of University of Michigan. Several organizations have welcomed
President Obama's selection of Dr. Shah and believe that Dr. Shah has the
experience and necessary skills to be a great leader in global development.
"KITT", which stands for Knowledge and Innovation Technology Transfer is a "machine" designed to do two things:
Instill Technology Transfer knowledge; and
Support the set-up of sustainable institutions in developing countries.
The concept behind this "machine" is:
Find a developing country that is needs to boost its technology transfer capacity.
Identify partners within the country.
With their help, identify candidates to be put in the "machine."
Pursue discussion with partners regarding their needs, while candidates receive IP/TT education.
Address these needs together with the candidates.
Upon the candidates return to the home-country, support them with the set-up of the TTO.
Quality control - follow-up meetings and conferences.
Putting the moral and social validity of such a model aside, we should pursue it because:
It fits with the International Technology Transfer Institute's (ITTI) and Franklin Pierce Law Center's (FPLC) mission.
It seems to answer for the current needs of developing countries.
It has potential in generating a steady body of students.
It promotes a positive U.S. image around the globe and does more to promote our economy and our national security than the use of traditional foreign policy tactics.
Whether KITT manages to satisfy any of the above points or all of them, it promotes ITTI's name and credibility, and therefore FPLC's as well.
Law on
Technology Transfer, No. 80-2006-QH11 (LTT) was enacted on November 29, 2006,
and became effective on July 01, 2007. The purpose of LTT is to regulate "technology
transfer activities in Vietnam, from Vietnam to overseas, and from overseas to
Vietnam" (LTT Article 1).
Before LTT
was enacted, technology transfer in Vietnam was regulated by Decree
No.11/2005/ND-CP (Decree 11), which was enacted on February 2, 2005. Although
Decree 11 listed transferable and non-transferable technologies, the definition
of "technology" was unclear. Under Decree 11, some restrictions were imposed on
technology transfer agreements (TTAs). First, TTAs must be in writing and
documents must be written in Vietnamese. If a party to the agreement is a
foreign individual or organization, it is allowed to use commonly used
language, such as English, in addition to Vietnamese. Second, except for some
special cases, the duration of the agreement must be up to 7 years from the
effective date of the agreement. Third, agreements on technology transfer to
and from abroad must be registered. Such agreements become effective from the
date of the registration.
LTT replaced
Decree 11 and consolidated regulations on technology transfer. Unlike Decree
11, LTT clarifies the definition of terms used in the law. For example, "technology"
is defined as "solutions, processes and technical know-how, whether attached or
unattached to tools and facilities, used to convert resources into products"
(LTT Article 3, Section 2). Compared to Decree 11, LTT gives more flexibility
to TTAs. Under LTT, a form of an agreement may be in writing or "some other
written form with equivalent validity such as a telegram, telex, facsimile or
data message or other form as stipulated by law" (LTT Article 14, Section
1).LTT allows contracting parties
to choose the language of a TTA (LTT Article 14, Section 2). LTT also abolished
the strict restrictions on the duration of TTAs. Moreover, under LTT, parties
can agree on the effective date of the TTA (LTT Article 19, Section 1) and have
no obligation to register the agreement (LTT Article 25, Section 1).
By David Connaughton on November 10, 2009 10:16 AM
|Permalink
Last January, WIPO Director Francis Gurry Presented a Global Leader In Intellectual Property award to the King of Thailand: King Bhumibol Adulyadej. This is a great recognition for Thailand, and provides an opportunity for WIPO to develop ties and assist Thailand in developing their IP and IP management regimes.
King Adulyadej is an accomplished inventor and artist. He holds copyrights in over 1,000 artistic works, and holds 20 patents and 19 trademarks. His copyrighted works include visual, musical and literary works. His patents are generally directed to innovations that help rural Thai citizens such as a water aerator which can conserve and purify water, and artificial rainmaking technology.
By presenting this award, WIPO publicly acknowledges the value of innovation and intellectual property in Thailand. This award showcases The King's leading by example. His works, intellectual property and the corresponding award sends a positive message to other Thai inventors that it is important to patent, utilize and commercialize their innovations to encourage technological development. WIPO Director Gurry stated: "In sharing the fruits of your creativity in the form of invention and musical and artistic works, Your Majesty has not only demonstrated the power of intellectual property to enrich and enhance the quality of daily life and work but has also encouraged people everywhere to create, respect and protect it."
The presentation of this award to the Thai King was also a wonderful opportunity for WIPO to have an audience with the Thai King, Prime Minister and other government officials to discuss intellectual property capacity goals, the role of IP in development, and how these goals can be implemented. Thailand has committed to using IP to further their economic development, and to implement the WIPO Development Agenda.
Thailand is certainly on the right path by committing to developing their IP programs and increasing their IP management capacity. This is an exciting time in their development.
The press release can be seen at: http://www.wipo.int/pressroom/en/articles/2009/article_0001.html
The House of
Representatives Committee on Foreign Affairs met on March 18, 2009 to examine
the appropriate role of the Defense Department in foreign assistance. Committee
Chair Howard L. Berman started the meeting by addressing some issues of
concern: "And what are the implications of putting a military face on
development and humanitarian activities? How does this affect the way we are
viewed in the world, and what is the practical impact on USAID's ability to
carry out development projects?" [2]
Testimony
from witnesses, including Philip L. Christenson, Former Assistant Administrator of USAID, Nancy Lindborg, President of Mercy Corps, General
Michael W. Hagee, Former Commandant of
the Marine Corps, suggests an imbalance of funding and support for the
State Department and USAID, thereby creating a need for the military to
undertake humanitarian programs.
General
Michael W. Hagee recommended there to be "the integrated blend of defense,
diplomacy, and development. But this strategic approach will only be effective
if all three smart power pillars are coherent, coordinated, and adequately
resourced." [3]
While
Dr. Reuben E. Brigety, II, Director of
the Sustainable Security Program, Center for American Progress Action Fund
and Nancy Lindborg conveyed a concern of the Defense Department's impact on
humanitarian assistance. Mr. Brigety wrote, "there are a series of
disadvantages with the military's involvement in assistance missions. First,
the focus on the performance of programs of tactical or strategic value can
mean assistance efforts are directed to places of the greatest potential threat
rather than places of the greatest human need." [4]
Furthermore,
Dr. Reuben E. Brigety, II wrote in his prepared statement, "the military's
growing involvement in this space risks the appearance of 'militarization' of
America's foreign assistance. This is a perception which makes many of our
partners - governments, NGOs, etc. - extremely uncomfortable ... (and) has real
operational consequences in the field when implementing partners refuse to
cooperate with the military, ... for fear of being linked to US foreign policy
and losing their operational neutrality." [5]
Ms.
Lindborg indicated, "When the lines blur between military and civilian actors,
insecurity can increase for civilians." She also noted, "When NGO's are
associated with the military, we are more likely to be perceived as a
legitimate target, and so have a greater vulnerability. Our value and ability
to work in insecure environments is thus further compromised." [6]
The
testimonies and written statements provided a breadth of information, advice,
and recommendations on how to address the issue, but there does not seem to
be a simple solution.
