WTO: US and Argentina settle dispute over patents and data protection

In May 2000, supplementing an earlier complaint filed in May 1999, the US filed a complaint against Argentina, alleging that its patent laws violate the World Trade Organization's Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property (the TRIPS Agreement). The gist of the US complaint was that Argentina's law failed to provide: (1) adequate protection against "unfair" commercial use of undisclosed test data submitted in order to get market approval of pharmaceutical products; (2) certain safeguards for compulsory licences on an invention granted on the basis of inadequate working by the patent holder; and (3) adequate measures to prevent infringements of patent rights. The US also alleged that Argentina denies certain exclusive rights of patent holders, such as the exclusive right to import the patented product into the country. At the end of May 2002, the US and Argentina notified the WTO that they had reached a "mutually agreed solution," without prejudice to their respective rights and obligations under WTO agreements, and the US has withdrawn its complaint.     

Complaint against Argentina over protection of patents and test data

On 30 May 2000, the same day as the complaint against Brazil, the US (again joined by the EC) filed a complaint against Argentina, alleging that its patent laws violate the TRIPS Agreement in a number of ways.     

论美国"购买美国货"条款与WTO协定的一致性——WTO成员可能的诉讼依据

2009年初,美国国会经济刺激提案中的"购买美国货"条款,遭到了欧共体、加拿大等贸易伙伴的强烈反对,甚至以诉诸WTO相威胁.经过半个多月的纷争,该条款进行了修正,规定其适用须与美国在国际协定下的义务保持一致,并成为美国法律.但对WTO法理与实践的研究表明,本项修正并不能使美国完全免于WTO诉讼风险,包括中国在内的其他WTO成员仍有寻求WTO救济的法律根据.     

Canada ordered to implement WTO ruling against "stockpiling" of generic drugs

In the last issue, we reported on a mixed World Trade Organization (WTO) ruling regarding Canada's patent laws, based on a complaint by the member states of the European Communities (joined by the United States). In March 2000, a WTO Panel accepted the provision in Canada's Patent Act that creates an "early working exception" to patent rights--in other words, that allows a third party to use a patented invention during the term of patent protection, as long as the use is for obtaining regulatory approval of an equivalent product to be sold once the patent expires. This was an important victory from the perspective of allowing earlier access to generic versions of patented drugs.     

Unincorporated software as idea: US Supreme Court limits extraterritorial effect of US patents for software inventions

The US Supreme Court has limited the extraterritorial effectof US patents for software inventions, reversing the previousexpansive interpretation of the Federal Circuit.     

Non-obviousness standard under fire: flexible application of TSM test may result in validity challenges against many US patents

The US Supreme Court has reversed a judgment of the FederalCircuit, holding that a flexible application of the TSM testmay result in validity challenges against many US patents.     

China's new regulatory regime tailored for the sharing economy: The case of Uber under Chinese local government regulation in comparison to the EU,US, and the UK

Although Uber's arrival in China has resulted in disruptive competition for incumbent taxi companies, it offers an attractive alternative in China's supply-demand-imbalanced urban passenger transport system. China's regulatory regime for Uber has evolved in three stages: from the regulatory vacuum prior to 2015 to its official legalization in 2015–2016, and the enactment of numerous local regulations in 2016, with specific and more demanding requirements for Uber. This policy is a part of the Chinese approach to the gradual liberalization of the urban passenger transport market. Policymakers should consider ‘fair competition’ as the guiding principle to balance the interests of sharing firms and incumbent service providers, as well as between different sharing firms. The core value of this principle lies in the benefits it provides for consumers and the way it engenders a pro-competitive market environment. The labor protection arrangements for sharing firms’ laborers should be more flexible and diversified. In order to recognize whether an Uber-Driver is an employee or independent contractor, a new standard taking into account a range of factors should be established through collective negotiations between the participants of the sharing economy, and dialogues between members of the judiciary, academics, and the policymakers. Further, consumer protection law and personal data protection provisions should apply when sharing firms misuse their distinctive algorithmic management model to compete unfairly to the detriment of consumers and other users. Ex ante regulatory measures designed to protect the personal data of users should be introduced for deployment in the context of the sharing economy. When enforcing these rules, a balance should be struck ensuring free data flow that is essential to sharing firms’ innovation and competition, and the need to ensure the level of data security required to underpin a well-functioning sharing society.