Opponents of the TPP such as Michael Geist have claimed that extending the term of copyright by 20 years if Canada joins the TPP could cost Canadians hundreds of millions of dollars. These claims, which are inconsistent with a Canadian study conducted for Industry Canada by Prof. Hollander, have been premised on a 2009 New Zealand estimate which suggested that the costs of a term extension to New Zealand could be (NZ) $55 million per year.
Earlier today I appeared before the Senate Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade – Multilateral, Regional and Bilateral Trade Agreements. The Committee’s focus was on CETA and the TPP.
My initial remarks to the Committee are set out below.
I would like to thank the committee for inviting me to appear today to provide input on the Trans-Pacific Partnership.
I am here today in my personal capacity and not representing any clients.
The TPP has been heralded as a 21st century trade agreement. The e-commerce and IP chapters reflect this in my view.
This is a guest blog post by Declan Hamill, Chief of Staff and Vice President, Legal Affairs, Innovative Medicines Canada.
Innovative Medicines Canada is the association of leading innovative pharmaceutical companies dedicated to improving the health of Canadians through the discovery and development of new medicines and vaccines. Our community represents the men and women working for more than 50 member companies which invest more than $1 billion in research and development (R&D) each year to fuel Canada’s knowledge-based economy, contributing over $3 billion to the Canadian economy.
I recently had the privilege of speaking about the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) at the Fordham 24th Annual Intellectual Property Law and Policy Conference, a stellar international IP conference. The other speakers on my panel were Probir Mehta (lead U.S. negotiator of the IP portion of the TPP), Pedro Velasco Martins (lead EU negotiator of the IP portion of the TTIP), and Daren Tang (lead Singapore negotiator of the IP portion of the TPP). The title of the panel was “Examination of TPP & TTIP”. My talk focused on how the IP provisions of the TPP are being inaccurately depicted to the public.
Last week I received several unsolicited emails including the one shown below asking for a donation to support Republican party leader hopeful John Kasich. The e-mail was sent without the remotest chance of there being an express or implied consent and without compliance with the prescribed information requirements of Canada’s much vilified anti-spam law, CASL.
There is no doubt that Canadians have an important interest in who wins the US Presidential party nominations. Given the importance of the stakes, Canadian residents eligible to make a donation might have welcomed receiving the solicitation.
The C.D. Howe Institute released a report earlier today, National Priorities 2016: At the Global Crossroads: Canada’s Trade Priorities for 2016, authored by Daniel Schwanen. One of the key recommendations is to boost market access for Canadian producers by ratifying the CETA and the TPP.
The report also touches briefly on two key intellectual property issues associated with the treaties, pharmaceutical patents and copyright. On these issues, the report stated the following:
Patents seek to encourage innovation by providing firms or individuals a monopoly over new and useful products for a limited period of time before competitors are allowed to offer their own versions.
This is a guest post by Peter Grant. Peter S. Grant is Counsel at McCarthy Tétrault LLP. He is an expert on communications and cultural policy, and the co-author of Blockbusters and Trade Wars: Popular Culture in a Globalized World (Vancouver: Douglas & McIntyre, 2004), a book focused on the interrelationship of trade law with cultural policy.
There is an inherent conflict between free trade agreements and cultural policy. Unless measures that support local culture are exempted from these agreements, there is a risk that the principle of “national treatment” (the free trade rule that foreign products must be given the same treatment as local products) might override those measures.
I was interviewed by Bloomberg TV yesterday on the topic of fears expressed over the intellectual property portions of the Trans-Pacific Partnership. My interview on the TPP can be accessed below. For more detail, you can see my ope-ed in the Financial Post Why Canada has nothing to fear over TPP and Intellectual Property and my more detailed analysis of the IP and e-commerce provisions here.
I had the pleasure of speaking yesterday at the Law Society of Upper Canada 20th Annual IP Law: The Year in Review. I spoke on the topic of Copyright and Technological Neutrality: CBC v SODRAC. My slides are shown below and can be downloaded here.