In a blog post yesterday, How IP Enforcement Can Be Used To Suppress Dissent, Prof. Geist argues that “tougher enforcement measures” of IP laws are connected with civil rights abuses by governments to quell political dissent. He further claims that the USTR Special 301 report was connected to the recent Russian raids against advocacy groups and news organizations in Russia. He also postulates that enforcement of IP rights under ACTA would increase such abuses and accordingly would be “a dangerous and misguided approach that is apt to cause more problems than it solves”.
Archive for the ‘IIPA’ category
Geist: tough IP laws suppress political dissent
September 15th, 2010Misinterpreting the IPR 2010 Report
February 25th, 2010The Intellectual Property Rights Alliance just published its 2010 report reviewing countries’ rankings on various indexes measuring their respect for property rights. The aim of the report was to show the clear link between a country’s respect for property rights and economic prosperity.
According to the report, the link can be seen in all forms of property including intellectual property. Dealing with the latter, the report states:
Canada again in the penalty box over poor IP laws and enforcement according to 2010 IIPA 301 report
February 19th, 2010Yesterday, the International Intellectual Property Alliance released its 2010 SPECIAL 301 REPORT ON COPYRIGHT ENFORCEMENT AND PROTECTION. The report notes that “its statement in the 2007 Special 301 report – submitted three years ago – remains, disappointingly, true today: “Canada remains far behind virtually all its peers in the industrialized world with respect to its efforts to bring its copyright laws up to date with the realities of the global digital networked environment. Indeed, even most of the major developing countries have progressed further and faster than Canada in meeting this challenge.”
This site is published by Barry Sookman personally. It is not affiliated with McCarthy Tétrault or any of its clients. Full bio 