[Ip-health] USTR 301 Report: A question
Michael H Davis
m.davis at csuohio.edu
Thu May 3 14:09:13 PDT 2018
I remember seeing this when going through the filings.I believe at least one way of finding it is to go to Chile's filing where they state what they have done and either state or imply what their commitment had been last time around.
Prof. Mickey Davis
Cleveland State University
2121 Euclid Avenue, LB 234
Cleveland, OH 44115-2214
Cleveland-Marshall College of Law
1801 Euclid Avenue
Law Building, LB 234
Admitted to practice before the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Reg. No. 45,863
-------- Original message --------
From: "Kaplan, Warren" <wak at bu.edu>
Date: 5/3/18 4:59 PM (GMT-05:00)
To: Burcu Kilic <bkilic at citizen.org>, Ip-health at lists.keionline.org
Subject: [Ip-health] USTR 301 Report: A question
There was a recent, interesting summary of the latest USTR 301 report and we have a question.
The summary for Chile (one of the "usual suspects") stated that "... Chile did not deliver any tangible progress on outstanding IP commitments in recent years."
I've not read the Report yet so apologies but can anyone provide some insight or does someone actually know what these "outstanding IP commitments" are?
Thanks in advance for any help in this.
Warren Kaplan, PhD, JD, MPH
WHO Collaborating Center for Pharmaceutical Policy
Boston University School of Public Health
801 Massachusetts Avenue
Boston, MA 02118
617 414 1152 (office)
617 414 1261 (fax)
....( )/ ( )
" An imbalance between rich and poor is the oldest and most fatal ailment of all republics....“
THINK. TEACH. DO.
FOR THE HEALTH OF ALL.
Ip-health mailing list
Ip-health at lists.keionline.org
More information about the Ip-health