[Ip-health] EU Strategy for the protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights in third countries

Jamie Love james.love at keionline.org
Wed Jul 2 07:35:01 PDT 2014

This is the new EU document on enforcement of IPR in third countries


Strasbourg, 1.7.2014
COM(2014) 389 final


Trade, growth and intellectual property - Strategy for the protection and
enforcement of intellectual property rights in third countries

{SWD(2014) 204 final}

Here are a few paragraphs from the document:

Page: 17 Way forward

Although they are more resource-intensive than multilateral or plurilateral
avenues, such bilateral ways of action have been intensively resorted to in
the past, with positive results, and should still be pursued under the
revised Strategy. It is important to aim at better coherence between IPR
and other policies.

One example is in relation to the Union's strategy for engaging in
international cooperation on research and innovation, where ensuring fair
and equitable treatment of IPR by the Union's partner countries is of the
utmost importance. The Union's funding programmes for research and
innovation, currently Horizon 2020, are fully open to participation from
international partner countries, offering access to a European internal
market with predictable and fair rules as regards IP protection. A long
term goal should be to strive for this openness to be reciprocated by all
of the Union's partner countries, including by ensuring equivalent
protection of IPR.

In the context of trade defence instruments, granting market economy status
depends, amongst other criteria, on IP protection in the country concerned.

For countries that persistently break international commitments on IP rules
in ways that have a major impact on the EU, and where the authorities are
unwilling to cooperate or where cooperation shows limited results, the
Commission may consider restricting their participation or funding in
specific EU-funded programmes in sufficiently serious and clearly targeted
cases. This would not affect programmes financed by the European
Development Fund or Development Cooperation Instrument. Commission policy
dialogues with partner countries might also be utilised to engage on
serious IPR infringement issues. To ensure coherence, efforts should be
made to encourage Member States to apply such or other approaches in

As regards Free Trade Agreements it must however be recognised that the
negotiation of IPR  chapters will remain challenging. Many of the countries
that the EU is in negotiations with  (or about to start negotiations) have
the perception that they stand little to gain from a strong  IPR regime. To
achieve meaningful outcome for the EU will therefore require continuous
awareness-raising and outreach for all stakeholders at both technical and
at times at political level.

Pages 18-19

3.8. Action points

Ensure regular interaction with all stakeholders to raise awareness and
guide policy;

* Enhance data collection and reporting, so as to improve the understanding
of the role of IPR and the impact of infringement; conduct regular surveys
in order to maintain a list of ‘priority countries’ for focused EU efforts;

* Ensure a strong and coherent role for the EU in international IPR fora in
line with the Lisbon Treaty;

* Continue multilateral efforts to improve the international IPR framework,
including by encouraging further ratification of existing treaties; promote
ratification of relevant IPR treaties by all EU Member States;

* Ensure that IPR chapters in bilateral trade agreements offer adequate and
efficient protection for right-holders and address key weaknesses in
partner countries' IPR systems while calibrating commitments to third
countries’ level of development;

* Ensure the Commission can make recourse to dispute settlement mechanisms
or other remedies where the EU's rights under international agreements are

* Continue and where possible enhance ‘IP Dialogues’ with key third
countries; leverage high-level trade and political dialogues to ensure
progress on identified IPR issues;

*  Provide and promote awareness of appropriate IP-related technical
assistance programmes to third countries, including on the possible use of
IP flexibilities; leverage the expertise of relevant international
organisations in implementing technical assistance programmes;

* Establish a stronger relationship between the Commission, Member States
and EU business to directly support economic operators in overcoming
concrete difficulties on IP issues; enhance networking and coordination of
actions between EU and Member States representations in third countries;

* Aim at better coherence between IPR and other policies, e.g. consider
restricting participation or funding in specific EU-funded programmes in
sufficiently serious and clearly targeted cases, and to improve coherence
between the Commission and Member States in third countries in this goal;

* Continue assistance to right-holders (through projects such as IPR
Helpdesks) and consider their possible expansion; consider further posting
of IPR experts to key EU delegations.

James Love.  Knowledge Ecology International
http://www.keionline.org, KEI DC tel: +1.202.332.2670, US Mobile:
+1.202.361.3040, Geneva Mobile: +41.76.413.6584,   twitter.com/jamie_love

More information about the Ip-health mailing list