[A2k] Infojustice Roundup - November 11, 2013

Michael Palmedo mpalmedo at wcl.american.edu
Mon Nov 11 12:22:53 PST 2013

Infojustice Roundup 


Korean Legislation Would Require Mandatory Human Rights Impact
Assessments for Trade Agreements


[Heesob Nam] Trade agreements have been evaluated in economic terms, but
the impact of trade agreements is not limited to economic life. They
have human rights dimensions in many aspects. For instance, trade
agreements containing the TRIPS-plus provisos may affect the right to
access to essential medicine, the right to food and more broadly the
right to science and culture, which is protected by the Article 27(1) of
the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Accordingly, the UN human
rights bodies have tried to develop and propose human rights impact
assessments (HRIA) of trade agreements. Click here for more.


Open Educational Resources in Poland: Challenges and Opportunities


[UNESCO Institute for Information Technologies in Education]  A new
country report on Open Educational Resources in Poland has been
published by IITE. The authors Kamil Sliwowski and Karolina Grodecka
describe the national educational policy and the structure of the
recently reformed educational system of Poland, national programmes and
projects aimed at digitization of schools, top-down and bottom-up
activities in the development of Open Educational Resources (OER).
Click here for more. <http://infojustice.org/archives/31163> 


European Parliament Members Explore Decriminalizing File-Sharing


[Ernesto] Frustrated by the lack of copyright reform in Europe, several
Members of European Parliament have started a coordinated platform to
urge the European Commission to update its outdated policy. The MEPs are
looking for a more flexible copyright system which benefits European
citizens and businesses, including the decriminalization of file-sharing
for personal use. The first steps towards these goals are to be made
during an event in Brussels on Tuesday. Click here for the full piece on


Letter from AARP and 14 Other Civil Society Groups to Obama on Trans
Pacific Partnership and Medicine Prices


[Original letter by 15 civil society groups] Dear Mr. President: The
organizations below are, like you, dedicated to ensuring the
sustainability of public programs that provide access to affordable
health care. But we write today to express our deep concern that
provisions being advanced by the United States Trade Representative
(USTR) for the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) Agreement will undermine
this goal by limiting the ability of states and the federal government
to moderate escalating prescription drug, biologic drug and medical
device costs in public programs. We are also concerned that the final
trade agreement will bind the U.S. to a 12-year market exclusivity
period for brand-name biologic drugs, contrary to the Administration's
proposal in its most recent and previous budgets to reduce the
exclusivity period.  Click here for more.


Also on TPP:

*         Matthew Rimmer. Will the Pacific Rim Become a Gasland? Dirty
Fracking and the TPP. (Link <http://infojustice.org/archives/31188> )

*         Jane Kelsey. Crunch Time for TPPA at Salt Lake City Meeting
19-24 November. (Link <http://infojustice.org/archives/31181> )


Briefing Paper: Current Proposals to Amend U.S. Patent Law


[Jorge Contreras] This Briefing Paper was produced in conjunction with
the American University Washington College of Law Patent Policy Forum
being held on Nov. 8, 2013.  The Forum will explore current proposals to
amend U.S. patent law to address issues surrounding non-practicing
entity (PAE) litigation, software and business methods patents and
standards-essential and FRAND-encumbered patents. The Briefing Paper
summarizes the legislative and administrative proposals that are
currently on the table in each of these areas, and is intended to be a
springboard for informed policy discussion. Click here for more.


Racial slurs and football team names: What does trademark law say?


[Christine Haight Farley] ... Since 1905 federal trademark law has
banned the registration of scandalous or immoral marks.  In 1947, marks
that may disparage, bring into contempt or disrepute persons,
institutions, beliefs, or national symbols were also banned.  U.S.
trademark law is not unique in prohibiting the registration of offensive
trademarks. Many other countries' trademark laws contain similar
provisions. Click here for more.



More information about the A2k mailing list