ENFORCEMENT

Recommendations

Info

Joint Strategic Plan on Intellectual Property Enforcement SECTION 4 Spotlight: International Cooperation and Information Sharing in Action There are many examples of effective international cooperation in IPR protection and enforcement, including bilateral and multi-lateral dialogues and frameworks, including by way of the Department of Homeland Security’s National Intellectual Property Rights Coordination Center (“IPR Center”) and Europol’s Intellectual Property Crime Coordinated Coalition (IPC3). From worldwide scans of international mail for illicit pharmaceuticals sold over the Internet 18 to seizures of counterfeit contaminated food and drink products in the retail supply chain, 19 coordinated international enforcement efforts make significant headway against illicit trade, build relationships amongst enforcement officers that support productive sharing of data and trend analysis, and offer government agencies the opportunity to observe their counterparts’ novel approaches to difficult enforcement challenges. Due to the transnational nature of illicit IPRbased threats, international engagement focused on Cooperation and Information Sharing is also important. This tier of engagement does not focus on the type of assistance described above. Rather, it focuses on ensuring that government IPR enforcement agencies and personnel have the necessary data and relationships to effectively spot trends, address challenges with international dimensions, and maximize the impact of domestic resources and operations by offering opportunities to form regional and global partnerships under existing laws and legal structures. Cooperation and information sharing between countries is critical for effective IPR protection and enforcement. Greater effort is needed to promote cooperation and joint operations, as well as enhanced structured dialogue between stakeholders and governmental entities. Opportunities exist to strengthen capacity-building, cooperation, and information-sharing between countries on IP enforcement. These opportunities must continue to be pursued in a deliberate and strategic manner. ACTION NO. 4.3: Develop a comprehensive assessment for capacity-building and/or cooperation on IP enforcement in appropriate countries or regions. Guided by the list of countries identified by USTR under 19 U.S.C. § 2242(a), the relevant members of the U.S. Interagency Strategic Planning Committees on IP Enforcement will assess some of the challenges to effective IPR protection and enforcement, as appropriate. The assessment will include a discussion of whether the identified challenges would be best addressed through enhanced capacity-building, cooperation and information sharing, or by other means. ACTION NO. 4.4: Coordinate IP enforcement capacity-building programs that are responsive to the findings of the capacity-building assessments. In following up on these assessments, the government programming will include: • attention to those countries that have been identified as appropriate for capacity building and assistance; • focus on those countries for which the provision of capacity-building support is likely to result in a meaningful improvement in their level of IPR enforcement; • consideration of the challenges faced in a particular country with respect to improving its level of IPR enforcement; • consideration to avoid duplication of other IP enforcement-related capacity-building support that the agency, or another agency, has already provided to that country. In addition to coordination through the U.S. Interagency Strategic Planning Committees on IP Enforcement, all agencies delivering IP enforcement-related training and capacity-building programs may consider cost-effective collaborative efforts in planning such programs to prevent undue duplication. Such measures could include, for example, that the agency continues to co-sponsor and support other IP enforcement capacitybuilding programs, and that the agency provides forward-looking or summary quarterly submissions of accurate and up-to-date information through the Global Intellectual Property Education Database, at http://usipr.uspto.gov. 20 ACTION NO. 4.5: Continue ongoing implementation of capacity-building assessments. Relevant Federal departments and agencies will endeavor to include and implement appropriate actions in their strategic plans on IPR 130
Office of the Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator protection and enforcement for the designated country or region, including making resource allocations as appropriate, for carrying out their international engagements through capacitybuilding, cooperation and information sharing, and other means. exports support U.S. business and higher-paying jobs. In order to support exports, our trade policy promotes open markets and a fair, level playing field for trade. Our trade policy must also promote high standards that ACTION NO. 4.6: Enhance opportunities for information sharing with foreign governments. The U.S. Interagency Strategic Planning Committees on IP Enforcement, in consultation with such other agencies and offices as may be appropriate, will coordinate as appropriate to identify areas in which prospective sharing of information between the United States and a foreign government that is not currently underway may materially enhance the Federal Government’s ability to enforce U.S. IPR domestically and abroad. One prominent study found that if IPR protection in China were improved to a level comparable to the United States, U.S. net employment may increase by 2.1 million jobs and American companies would benefit from an estimated $107 billion in additional annual sales. Source: U.S. INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION, Report on China and the Effects of Intellectual Property and Indigenous Innovation Policies on the U.S. Economy (Investigation No. 332-519) C. PROMOTE <strong>ENFORCEMENT</strong> OF U.S. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS THROUGH TRADE POLICY TOOLS. America’s trade policy has a significant impact on the strength and growth of the U.S. economy and the livelihood of millions of Americans. Ninety-five percent of the world’s consumers live outside U.S. borders. Our Made-in-America products and services are in demand, making American exports a vital pillar of our 21st century economy. Exports play an indispensable role as a driver of the U.S. economy. In 2015, the U.S. realized a record in volume of American exports for the fifth year in a row, selling $2.34 trillion in goods and services abroad. 21 When taking a closer look at the nature of U.S. exports, we see that intellectual property (IP) intensive industries account for approximately $842 billion (in 2014), or more than 50 percent of total U.S. merchandise exports. 22 Our exports, as well as our domestic economy, are fueled by the technological innovation and output from our creative sectors. From household brands to the music and movies that inspire us, and the technologies and innovation we rely on each day, American ingenuity serves as a foundation upon which we grow our economy and contribute to the world around us. Protection of the intellectual property rights behind these exports remain an important U.S. Government priority. As discussed in greater detail in Section I, these support the rule of law and our country’s values. Illicit IP-related activity—in addition to undermining opportunities in the marketplace—imposes significant negative social costs. As noted throughout this Strategic Plan, trade in counterfeit goods, for example, introduces significant risks into global supply chains, subverts human rights (by reliance on forced labor, child labor, or sweatshop-like working conditions), threatens individual health by causing or failing to treat serious illnesses, and can generate environmental disasters by way of unregulated manufacturing conditions or use of unregulated products, all the while proceeds of illicit trade flow to criminal syndicates who undermine rule of law in a variety of ways. 23 These threats and abuses of the rule of law are not limited to, or self-contained within, developed economies. It must not be overlooked that the attendant harms associated with illicit trade are often felt by FIG. 61: A Worldwide Issue, With Disproportionate Geographic Impact Percentage of counterfeit drugs: between 20% and 30% between 10% and 20% between 1% and 10% less than 1% Source: European Commission, at http://ec.europa.eu/ internal_market/indprop/docs/conf2008/wilfried_roge_en.pdf. SECTION 4 131
Page 1:
U.S. JOINT STRATEGIC PLAN ON INTELL
Page 6 and 7:
B. In Furtherance of a Healthy Doma
Page 9:
PREAMBLE A Reflection on Creativity
Page 12 and 13:
Senior Advisory Committee Establish
Page 14 and 15:
INTRODUCTION IP-intensive industrie
Page 16 and 17:
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Services, the Dep
Page 18 and 19:
While seeking to be thorough, the S
Page 20 and 21:
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY • Advertising B
Page 23 and 24:
1 THE GLOBAL SCALE OF INTELLECTUAL
Page 25 and 26:
INTRODUCTION The story of intellect
Page 27 and 28:
Office of the Intellectual Property
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
« Office of the Intellectual Prope
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65:
Page 68 and 69:
SECTION 2 CONTENTS HELPING TO PROMO
Page 70 and 71:
Joint Strategic Plan on Intellectua
Page 72 and 73:
Page 74 and 75:
Page 76 and 77:
Page 78 and 79:
Page 80 and 81:
Page 82 and 83:
Page 84 and 85:
Page 86 and 87:
Page 88 and 89: Joint Strategic Plan on Intellectua
Page 99 and 100: 3 SECURE AND FACILITATE LEGITIMATE
Page 101 and 102: INTRODUCTION U.S. and international
Page 103 and 104: Office of the Intellectual Property
Page 121 and 122: ENDNOTES Office of the Intellectual
Page 125: Office of the Intellectual Property
Page 128 and 129: SECTION 4 CONTENTS PROMOTE FRAMEWOR
Page 162 and 163: ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS With thanks to, an
show all

ENFORCEMENT

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?