Supplementary protection certificates: Advocate General's opinion on formulations

The opinion of Advocate General Léger, published on 24November 2005 in C-431/04, opens the way for extending the durationof certain pharmaceutical formulation patents by means of asupplementary protection certificate (SPC).     

Proof of use, continuity of functions in inter partes proceedings, and three-dimensional marks: Europe in review

Legal context: This article reviews the recent CFI and ECJ case law on proofof use and continuity of functions in the context of oppositionproceedings as well as the strict approach to three-dimensionalmarks. Key points: Unlike the situation in many common law jurisdictions, the Communitytrade mark regime is not a use-based system. Nevertheless, oncea mark has been registered for more than five years, the rightsthat it seeks to protect may only be enforceable to the extentthat the sign has been used for the goods and services it covers.In the context of opposition proceedings, applicants may callfor evidence that the opponent has actually used the mark onwhich the opposition is based. The concept of ‘genuineuse’ - which must be demonstrated in order to show thata mark has actually been used - has come before the Court ofJustice for further clarification. Where proof of use is adducedfor the first time before the Board of Appeal, the Court ofFirst Instance believes that, because of the principle of thecontinuity of functions, it is not out of time. That analysishas not been supported by the recent opinion of Advocate GeneralSharpston in the Arcol case and there is now considerable uncertaintypending a final pronouncement on the issue by the Court of Justice.In the meantime, the case law from Luxembourg continues to insiston three dimensional marks being like any other type of mark,whilst taking a very strict approach to the registrability ofsuch signs. Practical significance: The evidence of use to be adduced need not be quantatively significantand the ‘hurdle to be jumped’ is somewhat ‘lower’than was previously the case. Whether negligent representativesmay continue to use the continuity of functions principle tojustify recouping missed deadlines on appeal (particularly,when presenting proof of use), remains to be seen. However,what is certain is that three-dimensional marks will continueto be difficult to register.     

Whales, Sustainability and International Environmental Governance

The international governance structures in place with respect to whales are dominated by the International Whaling Commission (IWC). However, the IWC's constitutive document, the 1946 International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling (ICRW), lacks many critical elements of good governance which have evolved since the conclusion of the convention. Since the signing of the ICRW, there have been significant and far-reaching developments in the ways and means by which sustainable development and environmental policy is formulated and implemented.
Sustainability principles have expanded well beyond limited conservation objectives to include, in particular, the precautionary and ecosystem approaches. International governance has also evolved to require efficient and participation-based decision-making processes, including integrated management and sustainability, efficient and participation-based decision-making processes, international cooperation between States and coordination between international agencies, transparency, and dispute-resolution and compliance mechanisms. These are all elemental aspects of modern environmental governance.
Necessary reforms to the ICRW are substantial, and in light of the unanimity required, it is likely that only a new convention will achieve the necessary changes. A governance framework for whales must enable and encourage participants and stakeholders to cooperate in a spirit of global partnership. The goal should be to conserve, protect and restore the health and integrity of the global whale populations as part of the overall goal of the sustainability of the oceans and seas implementing the ecosystem and precautionary approaches. It must integrate with other elements of international governance to that wider goal.     

To arrest insecurity: time for a revised security sector reform agenda

Despite the exponential growth in the attention and resources devoted to security sector reform (SSR), positive tangible outcomes remain hard to find. A ‘conceptual-contextual’ divide exists between SSR's stated goals and its actual implementation, a fissure that suggests the need to re-evaluate its tenets as currently conceived and practiced. This paper contributes to such a reappraisal and argues for a new round of SSR debate and policy formulation that will be simultaneously more pragmatic and less ambitious, while listening carefully to the wishes of those who are to benefit from SSR. Our core argument is that the current understanding of SSR policy provides practitioners with neither the requisite intellectual foundation nor practical guidance to craft institutions that arrest insecurity. Consequently, a number of the central concepts of the current SSR agenda—local ownership, civil society, governance, multi-sectoral approach, etc.—need to be recast to make them operationally effective, managerially coherent, and susceptible to measurable evaluation.     

Cooperative Hegemony and Summitry in the Americas

As an instrument for governance, summitry is a novel structure for the management of contemporary hemispheric regionalism in the Americas. Such regionalism is a clear case of the "structuralist paradox" of international cooperation. This article attempts to explain the particular asymmetric regionalism in the Americas by using the concept of cooperative hegemony. The underlying hypothesis is that the U.S. government, since 1994, has pursued a strategy of cooperative behavior, at least in regard to power sharing, in two specific phases of hemispheric regionalism: agenda setting and institutionalization. This study tests the hypothesis through a content analysis of the main documents produced at the Miami, Santiago, and Quebec summits, then relates these findings to the progress of institutionalization from 1994 to 2003.     

R&D value mapping: A new approach to case study-based evaluation

This study presents an approach to harnessing the power of case studies for research evaluation calledR&D value mapping (RVM). While this method uses case studies in the traditional manner to provide in-depth insights, it also structures case studies through an analytical framework that yields quantitative data and less subjective “lessons learned”. When properly applied, RVM can yield an inventory of outcomes and empirical generalizations regarding the determining variables. A particular advantage of the approach is that it not only provides an indication of the type and amount (though not a single numerical index) of outcome, but also gives insight into the reasons outcomes are achieved. Thus, RVM is useful for policy management strategies seeking to replicate success. The specific steps associated with the RVM method are illustrated through studies that have applied the technique. The authors gratefully acknowledge support from of the Department of Energy, Basic Energy Sciences and previous contracts from Sandia National Laboratories and the New York State Energy Research & Development Authority. A number of persons have made useful comments on the RVM method. We are particularly grateful to David Roessner, Juan Rogers, Gretchen Jordan and Iran Thomas.