The IPKat was variously flattered,
humbled, delighted and surprised** to be told that the IPKat blog is the top-ranked
IP “Blawg” (legal blog) of all time in Justia’s Blawgsearch. The rankings
are based on the number of hits and visits to a blog from the Blawgsearch
engine and directories. While it may not be the last word in rankings, the IPKat
is in very good company judging by the renowned names on the list.
However, it’s not all about hits
and number of subscribers in the legal blogging world. Not for the first time, the IPKat reminds readers of the importance of niche IP blogs such as
the SPC blog, or Art & Artifice, which serve an
equally important function in reporting in depth on matters of great interest
in specific sectors. Take a look for the IPKat’s cousins on the sidebar of the
website to see some excellent blogs that may never have the same breadth of
readership but make up for this in terms of quality reporting from experts
in their specific fields.
** Being composed of multiple
authors, the IPKat has no difficulty in maintaining several diverse emotions at
the same time.
SPC Reference C-572/15
Speaking of SPCs,
which we nearly were, the
IPKat has learnt of another SPC reference to the CJEU thanks to a tweet from Carpmaels
Pharma. The issue relates to SPCs in CZ, EE, CY, LV, LT, MT, PO, SI and SK
granted before 1/5/04 & before 1/1/2007 in RO.
The questions are:
1.
Must Article 21(2) of Regulation No
469/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 May 2009 concerning
the supplementary protection certificate for medicinal products (codified
version) be interpreted as shortening the duration of a supplementary
protection certificate issued in a Member State which was issued under national
law before the accession of the State in question to the European Union and
whose duration in relation to an active substance, as stated in the
supplementary protection certificate, would be longer than 15 years from the
time when the first marketing authorisation in the Union was granted for a
medicinal product consisting of the active substance or containing it?
2.
If the answer to the first question
is in the affirmative, is Article 21(2) of Regulation No 469/2009 of the
European Parliament and of the Council of 6 May 2009 concerning the
supplementary protection certificate for medicinal products (codified version)
compatible with European Union law, in particular the general principles of
European Union law on the protection of acquired rights, the principle of the
prohibition of retroactive effect of law, and the Charter of Fundamental Rights
of the European Union?
This Kat’s more pharmaceutically-attuned
colleague Darren tells him that in essence, the question is whether an SPC in
an accession country should be shortened if, after accession to the EU, the
period of protection would be longer than 15 years from first EU marketing
authorization.
Peer-reviewed research on IP &
Innovation
Further to the IPKat's recent
post, "Jeremy
Phillips' words of warning- and some further thoughts", Daphne
Yong-D'Herve, Senior Policy Manager, Intellectual Property, at the
International Chamber of Commerce (ICC), has brought to the IPKat's
attention a recent series of research reports that the ICC has developed on the
role of IP in the innovation process.
Daphne points out that the
reports are peer-reviewed and while they present findings based on the existing
academic literature, they are set out in an easy-to-read (we assume that
means "non-academic") format. The IPKat has taken a look at the
series and finds them worthy of attention for Kat readers interested in this
most timely subject. The reports are available here,
and if you want to be kept updated with future
paper launches you can follow @ICCWBO_ORG #ICCIP or contact Daphne Yong-d'Herve
(dye@iccwbo.org).
Can you get your Netflix fix abroad?
A press
release from the UK’s Department of Business, Innovation and Skills proclaims
that “For the first time, UK consumers will be able to
access digital subscriptions such as Netflix when travelling in other EU
countries, thanks to new European Commission proposals championed by the
Government.” The emailed version of the same release confirms that that this applies
not only to Netflix but also to Amazon’s digital services and Now TV (of
passing-off fame), with services like BBC iPlayer able to opt-in. How exciting!
Reading more closely, the IPKat sees
that this is a Commission proposal, which is supported and perhaps even driven
by the UK government. It still has to go through the legislative process between
the Commission, Council and Parliament -- and the aim is to have it implemented
by 2017.
Prime Minister Cameron used this news
(perhaps prematurely, given that there’s a considerable legislative ground to
cover), to point to this as evidence of “how UK leadership can secure a
flexible single market that works for EU consumers and businesses.”
The IPKat suspects, sadly, that the press
release and the somewhat surprising interest shown by the PM in the nuts and
bolts of copyright law have more to do with the debate on EU membership than a
newfound love of IP. Indeed this raises the question: if UK citizens are to
gain these new digital rights some time in 2017, will they get them before they
decide to remain in or leave the EU?
Only a gentle-cat when put on the highest pedestal would gently direct the attention of his readers to other blogs.
ReplyDeleteYou people are amazing. Thank you for all your work.