|
||||
| IP Institute | IP Conference | ||||
| |
Fordham Intellectual Property Law Institute
Seventeenth Annual Conference Intellectual Property Law & Policy Cambridge University Wednesday and Thursday, April 15th and 16th, 2009
Hugh C. Hansen Director
Learn. Debate. Have Fun.
CONFERENCE PROGRAM Subject to Change Updated April 10, 2009 Please check back for further updates. www.fordhamipconference.com Tuesday, April 14th 3:00 PM to 5:00 PM Registration Location: Faculty of Law Tea and Coffee
Shuttle bus available on April 14th, 3:00 PM to 7:00 PM. Route: Cambridge train station (main entrance) -- Cambridge bus station (outside Parkside Pool, on Gonville Place & Mill Road) -- Faculty of Law -- Robinson College. Look for Fordham IP Conference signage!
6:00 PM to 10:00 PM
Gala Reception & Dinner for Faculty and Sponsors Kings College Sponsored by ICC BASCAP (all conference faculty and sponsors are invited) There will be a shuttle bus from the Faculty of Law and Robinson College to King's College from 5:30 PM to 7:00 PM, and from King's College to Robinson College from 9:00 PM to 10:30 PM.
Wednesday, April 15th Faculty of Law
7:15AM – 8:00 AM Registration and Continental Breakfast
Please note: Doors will close at 8:00. Registrants not yet seated will be escorted to overflow room with closed-circuit TV.
8:00 AM – 8:15 AM Welcoming Remarks: Prof. Hugh C. Hansen In Memoriam: Sir Hugh Laddie
Speaker: Rt. Hon. Lord Justice Jacob
SESSION 1: Plenary Session What Does the Future Hold? Wednesday: 8:15 AM – 1:00 PM
Plenary Session Moderator: Prof. Hugh C. Hansen Fordham University School of Law
A. Multilateral and Bilateral Relations 8:15 AM – 9:15 AM Speakers: Luc Devigne Head of Intellectual Property and Public Procurement, DG Trade, European Commission, Brussels Michael Keplinger Deputy Director General, World Intellectual Property Organization, Geneva Stanford McCoy Assistant U.S. Trade Representative for Intellectual Property and Innovation, U.S.T.R., Wash. D.C. Hannu Wager Counsellor, Intellectual Property Division, World Trade Organization, Geneva
Panelists: Prof. Robert Burrell Visiting, Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law; TC Beirne School of Law at the University of Queensland, Australia James Love Director, Knowledge Ecology International,Wash. D.C. Michael Shapiro Senior Counsel, Office of Intellectual Property and Enforcement, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, Alexandria Hon. Weerawit Weeraworawit Deputy Secretary General, National Human Rights Commission, Thailand, Bangkok
B. IP Policy and the European Union 9:15 AM – 10:15 AM Speaker: Margot Fröhlinger Director, DG Internal Market and Services Commission, Brussels
Panelists: Prof. Dr. Reto Hilty Director, Max Planck Institute for Intellectual Property, Competition and Tax Law, Munich Tilman Lüder Head of Unit, Copyright and Knowledge-based Economy, DG Internal Market and Services, European Commission, Brussels Hon. Paul Maier President of the Boards of Appeal, OHIM Prof. Dr. Peter Meier-Beck Patents Chamber, German Federal Supreme Court, Karlsruhe Ted Shapiro Senior Vice President, General Counsel and Deputy Managing Director, EMEA, Motion Picture Association, Brussels
BREAK 10:15 AM – 10:45 AM
C. The Judiciary and IP Policy: What Has Been Its Role, What Will Be Its Role? 10:45 AM – 12:00 PM Speaker: Lord Hoffmann Law Lord, House of Lords, Parliament, London
Panelists: Dr. Klaus Grabinski Presiding Judge, District Court, Düsseldorf Rt. Hon. Lord Justice Jacob Court of Appeal, Royal Courts of Justice, London Hon. Robert van Peursem Vice President, District Court, The Hague, The Netherlands Hon. Alice Pezard Chief Justice, Cour de Cassation, French Commercial Court, Paris William Robinson Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer, London Speaker: Hon. Randall R, Rader U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, Wash. D.C. Panelists: Andrew Bridges Winston & Strawn, San Francisco Hon. William E. Kovacic Commissioner, Federal Trade Commission, Washington, D.C. Hon. Jed. S. Rakoff U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York James Toupin General Counsel, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, Alexandria
D. General Counsel Roundtable: IP in a Challenging World 12:00 AM – 1:10 PM
Paul T. Cappuccio Executive Vice President & General Counsel, Time Warner, New York Richard Cotton Executive Vice President & General Counsel, NBC Universal, New York Michael Fricklas Executive Vice President, General Counsel & Secretary, Viacom, New York Lawrence A. Jacobs Senior Executive Vice President & Group General Counsel, News Corporation, New York Louise Pentland Senior Vice President & Chief Legal Officer, Nokia Corporation, Helsinski
LUNCH Robinson College 1:10 PM – 2:30 PM
Wednesday Afternoon, April 15th
THREE CONCURRENT SESSIONS: Copyright, Patent and Trademark Law
SESSION 2: COPYRIGHT LAW Concurrent Session (Wednesday 2:30 PM – 6:15 PM)
A. Infringement & Remedies (ISP participation, temporary reproduction [Cablevision case], making available right, data privacy) 2:30 PM – 4:15 PM
Moderator: Michael Shapiro Senior Counsel, Office of Intellectual Property and Enforcement, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, Alexandria Speakers: Allen Dixon International Intellectual Property and Technology Consultant, London Data privacy: a personal right/an infringement facilitator -- what to do? Data protection issues in enforcing IP rights against internet wrongs. Dr. Nils Bortloff Vice President Legal & Business Affairs (Germany, Austria, Switzerland), Universal Music Entertainment GmbH, Berlin ISP Cooperation: Practical and Political Considerations inEurope David Carson General Counsel, U.S. Copyright Office, Washington, D.C. The Cartoon Network (Cablevision) Decision: CopyrightCataclysm or Tempest in a Teapot? ruled that an operator of a cable television system incurs no liability for copyright infringement when it offers a time- shifting service that permits its subscribers to direct it to make copies of television programs on servers maintained at its facilities and to direct it to transmit performances of those programs to the subscribers at a time subsequent to the original transmission. Did the court correctly rule? Prof. Justin Hughes Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, New York Copyright Liability and Internet Intermediaries – in Three Acts Since 1966 national legislatures have limited the liability of mainstream ISPs, but beginning with the Napster decision in 2001 courts have taken a dim view of ISPs that are infringement-based business models. Now, technological developments are bringing new pressure to bear on ISPs to take greater responsibility to stop infringements. Dr. Stanley Lai Allen & Gledhill, Singapore ISP participation in Enforcement efforts (the experience from Singapore and Asia) Shira Perlmutter Executive Vice-President Global Legal Policy, IFPI, London ISP Participation: The Wave of the Future? Carey R. Ramos Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP, New York The Devil in the Details: Investor Liability (Bertelsmann, Veoh), the "Making Available" Controversy and Defining the Scope of Injunctive Relief (the Morpheus/Streamcast Experience) in the Wake of the U.S. Supreme Court's Decision in Grokster
Panelists: Prof. Jerome H. Reichman Duke University School of Law, Durham, N.C. Andrew Bridges Winston & Strawn, San Francisco
BREAK 4:15 PM – 4:45 PM
B. Web 2.0 and Exceptions & Limitations (including three-step test, fair use), Google Book Settlement,Gower’s, Green Paper 4:45 PM – 6:30 PM
Moderator: Prof. Mary Wong Franklin Pierce Law Center, Concord, N.H. Speakers: Antoine Aubert European Copyright Policy Manager, Google, Brussels Prof. Gerald Dworkin Kings College London (Emeritus) Dr. Mihály Ficsor Director, CITP, Budapest Prof. Dr. Reto Hilty Director, Max Planck Institute for Intellectual Property, Competition and Tax Law, Munich Emily Hudson Doctoral candidate, University of Melbourne Cultural Institutions and Copyright Exceptions: Some Empirical and Policy Observations Maria Pallante Associate Register for Policy and International Affairs, U.S. Copyright Office, Wash. D.C. Prof. Jerome H. Reichman Duke University School of Law, Durham Reforming Limitations and Exceptions to International Copyright Law: A Response to the EC Green Paper
Panelists: Tilman Lüder Head of Unit, Copyright and Knowledge-based Economy, DG Internal Market and Services, European Commission, Brussels
RECEPTION Fitzwilliam Museum Sponsored by Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer
SESSION 3: PATENT LAW Concurrent Session (Wednesday, 2:30 PM – 6:15 PM)
A. Overview of U.S. Patent Law Developments 2:30 PM – 3:40 PM
Moderator: Prof. Martin Adelman George Washington University Law School, Washington, D.C.
Speaker: Dimitrios Drivas White & Case, New York
Panelists: Eric Kirsch Cooper & Dunham, New York William J. McCabe Ropes & Gray, New York Brian P. Murphy Morgan Lewis, New York Hon. Randall R. Rader U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, Wash. D.C.
BREAK 3:40 PM – 4:10 PM
B. Comparative Damages; Acquisition of Evidence, Expert Witnesses 4:10 PM – 5:15 PM
Moderator: David Perkins Milbank, London Speakers: Hon. Mr. Justice Floyd Patents Court, Royal Courts of Justice, London Dr. Klaus Grabinski Presiding Judge, District Court, Düsseldorf Eiji Katayama Abe, Ikubo & Katayama, Tokyo Hon. Robert van Peursem Vice President, District Court, The Hague, The Netherlands
Panelist: Prof. John M. Golden University of Texas School of Law, Austin
C. Injunctive Relief; Proposed Fair Use 5:15 PM – 6:30 PM
1. Injunctive Relief: A Comparative Analysis Moderator: Gonzalo Ulloa y Suelves Gómez-Acebo & Pombo, Madrid
Speakers: Prof. John M. Golden University of Texas School of Law, Austin Edward Nodder Bristows, London Felix Rodiger Bird & Bird, Dusseldorf Injunctive Relief: The German Perspective
Panelists: George Badenoch Kenyon & Kenyon, New York Hon. Mr. Justice Floyd Patents Court, Royal Courts of Justice, London Marleen van den Horst BarentsKrans, The Hague
2. A New “Fair Use” Doctrine for Patents? Speaker: Dan Ravicher Executive Director, Public Patent Foundation; Lecturer in Law, Intellectual Property Law Program, Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, New York
Panelists: Trevor Cook Bird & Bird, London Prof. F. Scott Kieff Washington University School of Law David Perkins Milbank, London RECEPTION Fitzwilliam Museum Sponsored by Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer
SESSION 4: TRADEMARK LAW Concurrent Session (Wednesday, 2:30 PM – 6:00 PM)
A. EU Trademark Law Developments 2:30 PM – 3:50 PM
Moderator: Phillip Johnson Barrister, 7 New Square, London
Speakers: William Robinson Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer, London An Overview of EU Trademark Case Law Developments Dr. Dev Gangjee Department of Law, London School of Economics Non-conventional Trademarks: What’s Afoot in the EU? Hon. Paul Maier President of the Boards of Appeal, OHIM Hon. Mr. Justice Arnold Patents Court, Royal Courts of Justice, London
Panelists: Dr. G. E. Evans Queen Mary, University of London, Centre for Commercial Law Studies David Llewelyn White & Case, Kings College London, External Director IP Academy Singapore
BREAK 3:50 PM – 4:20PM
B. Right of Publicity/Privacy: Comparative Developments 4:20 PM – 5:20 PM
Moderator: Prof. Coenrad Visser University of South Africa, Pretoria
Speakers: Prof. Marshall Leaffer Indiana University, Bloomington David Saenz Greenberg Traurig, New York Prof. Charlotte Waelde Edinburgh University
Panelists: Fabienne Brison (Prof. Dr.) Howrey, Brussels Noelle Colfer Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom (UK) LLP
C. Industrial Designs, Fashion, Ornamental Patents 5:20 PM – 6:30 PM
Moderator: Prof. Gerald Dworkin Kings College London (Emeritus)
Speakers: Harri Salmi Member, Boards of Appeal, OHIM, Alicante Community Designs: Update on OHIM Procedural Matters and Case Law in Boards of Appeal and Court of First Instance Prof. Susan Scafidi Visiting, Fordham University School of Law Unfashionably Late: Current U.S. Efforts to Establish IP Protection for Fashion Design A review of U.S. law's relative lack of protection compared to EU; description of proposed Design Piracy Prohibition Act; and current state of fashion industry negotiations and congressional progress with regard to it. Edward E. Vassallo Fitzpatrick, Cella, Harper & Scinto, New York
Panelists: Neil Coulson Jones Day, London Daniel Ilan Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP, New York Richard Wilder Associate General Counsel, Intellectual Property Policy, Washington, D.C.
RECEPTION Fitzwilliam Museum Sponsored by Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer
Thursday Morning, April 16th Faculty of Law
7:30 AM Continental Breakfast Three Breakfast Roundtable Seminars 7:30 AM – 8:30 AM These sessions stress the “seminar” part of the name, with interchanges among speaker, panelists and those attending the seminar after a short introductory talk.
A. Monetization of Patent and Other IP Rights
In the historical model, companies "practice" their own intellectual property and use it primarily against competitors. Today, however, IP owners while commercially exploiting their IP do not necessarily use it in the traditional sense. Concurrently, new mechanisms to monetize IP outside the traditional model are developing. A leader in this has been Ocean Tomo who held the first patent auction in April 2006.
This Breakfast Roundtable will explore and discuss the evolution of these interesting and important monetization developments including: the patent auction, the rise of non-practicing entity litigation, venture-backed patent holding companies such as Intellectual Ventures, and the novel IP Exchange. The latter will start trading patent license units for sale as early as this year. It will also explore the effect on patent prosecution including the use of continuations and needed coverage in relation to target companies; drafting when anticipating future charges of inequitable conduct; and proper language with regard to capturing standards.
Moderator: David S. Bloch Winston & Strawn LLP, San Francisco
Speakers: David S. Bloch Winston & Strawn LLP, San Francisco Joel Lutzker Ocean Tomo LLC, Greenwich, CT James G. McEwen Stein McEwen LLP, Wash. D.C.
Panelist: Dr. Roya Ghafele Oxford University Of War and peace: analyzing international policy discourse on Intellectual Property B. Policy Interplay between IP Rights and Antitrust/Competition Law: How Do We Get It Right? Moderator: Prof. Hugh C. Hansen Fordham University School of Law
Speaker: Josh Holmes Barrister, Monckton Chambers, London
Panelists: Hon. William E. Kovacic Commissioner, Federal Trade Commission, Wash. D.C. Prof. Valentine Korah University College London (Emeritus) Harald Mische Case Handler, DG Competition, Directorate D, European Commission, Brussels Patricia A. Martone Ropes & Gray, New York Hon. Alice Pezard Chief Justice, Cour de Cassation, French Commercial Court, Paris Thomas Vinje Clifford Chance, Brussels
C. Creativity and the Internet: Are We Building a Sustainable Ecosystem? Moderator: Prof. Justin Hughes Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, New York
Panelists: Sandra Aistars Assistant General Counsel, Intellectual Property, Time Warner Inc., New York Prof. Lionel Bentley Cambridge University Andrew Bridges Winston & Strawn, San Francisco Prof. Dr. Reto Hilty Director, Max Planck Institute for Intellectual Property, Competition and Tax Law, Munich Prof F. Scott Kieff Washington University School of Law Tilman Lüder Head of Unit, Copyright and Knowledge-based Economy, DG Internal Market and Services, European Commission, Brussels Maria Pallante Associate Register for Policy and International Affairs, Shira Perlmutter Executive Vice President, Global Legal Policy, IFPI Prof. Jerome Reichman Duke University School of Law, Durham, N.C. Three Concurrent Sessions Patent, Trademark and Copyright Law
SESSION 5: PATENT LAW Concurrent Session (Thursday, 8:30 AM – 1:00 PM)
A. Subject Matter: “Intangible” Patents -- Business Methods, Software,”Soft” Patents, Second Medical Uses 8:30 AM – 10:10 AM
Moderator: Prof. Martin Adelman George Washington University Law School, Washington, D.C.
Speakers: Dr. Myles Jelf Bristows, London Ian Karet Linklaters, London Kaz Kazenske Senior Director, Patent Prosecution, Microsoft Corporation, Virginia Lord Neuberger Law Lord, House of Lords, Parliament, London
Panelists: Alison Brimelow President, European Patent Office, Munich Prof. Johanna Gibson Director, Queen Mary Intellectual Property Research Institute (QMIPRI) Prof. John M. Golden University of Texas School of Law, Austin Shimako Kato Abe, Ikubo & Katayama, Tokyo Prof. Dr. Peter Meier-Beck Patents Chamber, German Federal Supreme Court, Karlsruhe
BREAK 10:10 AM – 10:40 AM
B. Patent Law Developments in Japan 10:40 AM – 11:40 AM
Moderator: John Michael Richardson Attorney, AAA Arbitrator, Appointed Mediator for New York state and federal courts, New York Speakers: Shimako Kato Abe, Ikubo & Katayama, Tokyo Recent decisions regarding pharmaceutical patents in Japan What should patentees pay attention to in order to win infringement lawsuits regarding pharmaceutical patents? What are some effective counter-attacks that can be mounted against patentees? Prof. Kazuo Makino Omiya Law School, Tokyo Recent issues and possible countermeasures in patent infringement litigation Issues arising from the decision conflicts caused by the so-called "double track" system - JPO Track and the Court Track available to invalidate the patent after the amendments of the Patent Act. Possible solutions. Hon. Sumiko Sekine Judge, Tokyo District Court, Intellectual Property Division
Panelists: Lord Hoffmann Law Lord, House of Lords, Parliament, London Prof. Dr. Peter Meier-Beck Patents Chamber, German Federal Supreme Court, Karlsruhe John Richards Ladas & Parry, New York
C. Patent Offices: IP5 group (consisting of USPTO, JPO, SIPO, KIPO and EPO), strategy for work sharing and related Foundation Projects. 11:40 AM – 1:10 PM
Moderator: John Richards Ladas & Parry, New York Speakers: Alison Brimelow President, European Patent Office, Munich Patent offices: IP5 group, strategy for sharing, and related Foundation Projects. In view of the increasing workload in patent offices, there is a need to establish efficient cooperation between offices in order to avoid unnecessary duplication of work. Charles R. Eloshway Deputy Director, Office of International Policy and Enforcement, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, Alexandria USPTO efforts to deal with the growing application backlog The USPTO is making efforts, internally and internationally, to deal with the growing global backlog of patent applications and examination workload through office-to-office cooperation on work-sharing and on streamlining the international patent system. Work-sharing initiatives will help in new and existing bilateral, plurilateral, and multilateral frameworks will help improve efficiency and quality of examination, and reduce duplication or work among offices. Kaz Kazenske Senior Director, Patent Prosecution, Microsoft Corporation, Virginia Shintaro Takahara Director, Multilateral Policy Office, International Affairs Division, Japan Patent Office Development of Global Work-sharing
Commentator: Heinz Bardehle Puschmann & Borchert. Oberhaching, Germany Panelist: Dan Ravicher Executive Director, Public Patent Foundation; Lecturer in Law, Intellectual Property Law Program, Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, New York
LUNCH Robinson College 1:10 PM – 2:30 PM
SESSION 6: STANDARDS Concurrent Session (Thursday, 8:30 AM – 10:00 AM)
Moderator: Thomas Vinje Clifford Chance, Brussels
Speakers: Christian Harmsen Bird & Bird, Dusseldorf The antitrust defense and standards Michael D. Hartogs Senior Vice President and Division Counsel, Technology Licensing Division, Qualcomm, San Diego Daniel Ilan Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP, New York Enforceability of FRAND commitments against patent transferees. IP, contractual, and antitrust issues associated with enforceability of FRAND commitments against patent transferees, where the commitments were made by former patent owners and the transferees are not themselves members of the standard-setting organization concerned. Carey R. Ramos Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP, New York Are SSOs Breeding Grounds for Anticompetitive Conduct?" Has the regulatory agencies' focus on "patent ambush" claims in the Rambuss and Qualcomm cases taken attention away from other issues at SSOs? Will the focus shift in Washington and Brussels? What role will private enforcement proceedings play? Prof. Anselm Kamperman Sanders Maastricht University, The Netherlands Standards Setting and ICT: The Roles of IP Law and Competition Law -- A Comparative Perspective Cecilio Madero Villarejo Director, Directorate C, Markets and Cases II: Information, Communication and Media, Directorate general for Competition, European Commission, Brussels IPR policies for ICT standards under article 82 of the EC treaty Dr. Justin Watts Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer, London Fun and games with "essentiality" A great deal of the growing body of law on SSOs and IPR turns on essentiality. Tensions naturally arise between patentees, SSOs, and users in the differing aspects of essentiality including practical vs. technical, whole patent vs. claim, and coverage vs. validity. Is there a correct approach to resolving these tensions?
Panelist: Patricia A. Martone Ropes & Gray, New York
BREAK 10:00 AM – 10:30 AM
SESSION 7: COMPETITION LAW Concurrent Session (Thursday, 10:30 AM – 1:10 PM)
A. United States and Antitrust; FTC Agenda; Patent Misuse & Antitrust 10:30 AM – 11:30 PM
Moderator: Prof. Hugh C. Hansen Fordham University School of Law
Speakers: Hon. William E. Kovacic Commissioner, Federal Trade Commission, Wash. D.C. The FTC's actions balancing competition and patent policies. The FTC has acted during this decade to promote harmonious competition law and patent policies that achieve a sensible balance between the aims of the two systems. The FTC has relied heavily on non-litigation policy tools to do so. The FTC recently conducted a self-study having implications in this area. Daryl Lim Fellow, Stanford Law School Program in International Legal Studies Patent Misuse and Antitrust: An Empirical Study
Panelists: Prof. F. Scott Kieff Washington University School of Law Patricia A. Martone Ropes & Gray, New York Carey R. Ramos Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP, New York Pat Treacy Bristows, London Thomas Vinje Clifford Chance, Brussels
B. DG Comp PHARMA Inquiry: The Implications for Innovation 11:30 AM – 1:10 PM On January 15, 2008, the European Commission launched a competition (antitrust) inquiry into the pharmaceutical sector. The Commission was concerned in particular that "fewer new pharmaceuticals are being brought to market and the entry of generic pharmaceuticals sometimes seems to be delayed." The Commission published its Preliminary Report on November 28, 2008 and invited comments from stakeholders by January 31, 2009. Over 70 submissions were received and the majority were published on the Commission's website in mid-March. The Final Report is expected in summer 2009.
Moderator: Dr. John Temple Lang Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP, Brussels
Speakers: Sir Christopher Bellamy Senior Consultant, Linklaters, London Rt. Hon. Lord Justice Jacob Court of Appeal, Royal Courts of Justice, London Harald Mische Case Handler, DG Competition, Directorate D, European Commission, Brussels David Rosenberg GlaxoSmithKline, London A View of the Research-based Industry The Sector Inquiry Interim Report displays an incomplete and flawed understanding of the patent system, its relationship to pharmaceutical innovation, and legal and economic factors influencing market entry. The way that the Report was presented was unfortunate, and it is questionable whether the Inquiry will achieve its objectives. Unless the approach is changed significantly, the Final Report could create legal/commercial uncertainty and have a chilling effect on innovation in Europe. Christopher Stothers Milbank, London Is Competition Law the Wrong Prescription for the PharmaSector? extent can competition law address them? To what extent should it? How do 436 pages of Preliminary Report and 802 pages of submissions help? Panelists: Hon. Mr. Justice Arnold Patents Court, Royal Courts of Justice, London Prof. Valentine Korah University College London (Emeritus)
LUNCH Robinson College 1:10 PM – 2:30 PM
SESSION 8: ENFORCEMENT; TRADE LAW Concurrent Session (Thursday, 8:30 AM – 1:00 PM)
A. Enforcement & Counterfeiting: IP’s Drug War: Can it Be Won? What is the Enforcement Role for WIPO? ACTA: What Is and What Should be its Role? 8:30 AM – 10:00AM
Moderator: Giulia Di-Tommaso Director, Legal Policy and International Relations, Unilever, Brussels Speakers: Giovanni Casucci Casucci Studio Legale, Milan IP Enforcement during Trade Fairs and Exhibition: Toward an International ADR Urgent Enforcement Policy Luc Devigne Head of Intellectual Property and Public Procurement, DG Trade, European Commission, Brussels Peter Fowler Senior Counsel, Office of Intellectual Policy and Enforcement, U.S. Patent & Trademark Office, Alexandria Capacity-Building as an Integral Tool in IPR Enforcement Efforts: the USPTO Experience The protection and enforcement of IPR is a national priority because copyright piracy and trademark counterfeiting harms the U.S. economy, threatens consumer safety, and contributes to the loss of American jobs. U.S. government efforts include policy initiatives, training and technical assistance, and law enforcement action both domestic and abroad. The challenge facing the USPTO is how to sustain its efforts and adapt them to a changing fiscal and political environment. Dr. Roya Ghafele Oxford University IP as a Tainted Brand: What Can Be Done? Hon. Jed S. Rakoff U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York Purposes, Policies, Draftsmanship and Effect of Anti-Counterfeiting legislation in the U.S. What did the sponsors hope to achieve with the federal legislation? What were the drafting challenges? What were the difficulties encountered after enactment? is there hope for the future? Eric H. Smith Greenberg Traurig, Wash. D.C. What Role for ACTA and WIPO? Panelists: Michael Keplinger Deputy Director General, World Intellectual Property Organization, Geneva Howard Knopf Macera & Jarzyna LLP, Ottawa
BREAK 10:00AM – 10:30 AM
B. Trade Policy and IP Rights: The Road Ahead; Development Agenda 10:30 AM – 12:00 PM Moderator: Prof. Justin Hughes Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, New York Panelists: Jason Albert Director, International Intellectual Property Policy, Microsoft Corporation, Redmond Luc Devigne Head of Intellectual Property and Public Procurement, DG Trade, European Commission, Brussels (invited) Michael Keplinger Deputy Director General, World Intellectual Property Organization, Geneva James Love Director, Knowledge Ecology International, Wash. D.C. Stanford McCoy Assistant U.S. Trade Representative for Intellectual Property and Innovation, Wash. D.C. Hon. Alice Pezard Chief Justice, Cour de Cassation, French Commercial Court, Paris Hannu Wager Counsellor, Intellectual Property Division, World Trade Organization, Geneva Hon. Weerawit Weeraworawit Deputy Secretary General, National Human Rights Commission, Thailand, Bangkok
C. United States v. China in the WTO 12:00 PM – 1:10 PM Moderator: Daryl Lim Fellow, Stanford Law School Program in International Legal Studies Speakers: Prof. Daniel Gervais Vanderbilt University Law School, Nashville Eric H. Smith Greenberg Traurig, Wash. D.C. What have governments learned about criminal enforcement from the WTO panel's "Thresholds Decision"? Prof. Wang Qian IPR School, East China University of Political Science and Law, Shanghai Correct interpretation of scope of "prohibited works" in PRC Copyright Law; the remedy available to copyright owners of "prohibited works" if Article 4 is abolished; the impact of the WTO's decision on Article 4. Prof. Peter K. Yu Drake University Law School, Des Moines
Panelists: Prof. Justin Hughes Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, New York Stanford McCoy Assistant U.S. Trade Representative for Intellectual Property and Innovation, Wash. D.C.
LUNCH Robinson College 1:10 PM – 2:30 PM
Thursday Afternoon, April 16th
Three Concurrent Sessions: Patent Law; Copyright/Competition Law; Trademark Law
SESSION 9: PATENT LAW Concurrent Session (Thursday, 2:30 PM – 6:30 PM)
A. How Much for How Little? The Interface Between Biotech & IP: When Does Discovery Become an Invention? 2:30 PM – 3:40 PM
Moderator: Nicholas Groombridge Weil, Gotshal & Manges, New York
Speakers: Hon. Mr. Justice Kitchin Patents Court, High Court of Justice, London How much for how little? A U.K. perspective on the balance between scope of protection and advances made by inventors. Dr. Donald W. Pfaff Professor, Head of Laboratory of Neurobiology and Behavior, Rockefeller University, New York A Scientist's View of the Timing of Patent Applications. his/her institution? How does such a researcher mediate between an allegiance to "pure science" and the commercial interests of the institution that supports him? What are the trade-offs between a purely legal/commercial approach to patentability, and the long-term interests of the public in allowing a discovery to be as comprehensive as possible before it is the subject of a patent application? John Richards Ladas & Parry, New York
Panelists: Robert DeBerardine Chief Patent Counsel, Sanofi-Aventis, Paris Lord Neuberger Law Lord, House of Lords, Parliament, London Hon. Randall R. Rader U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, Wash. D.C. Tony Rollins Managing Counsel, European Patents, Merck Sharp & Dohme,United Kingdom
BREAK 3:40 PM – 4:10 PM
B. Cross Border Patent Infringement: A comparative analysis 4:10 PM – 5:10 PM
Moderator: David Perkins Milbank, London Speakers: Brian Cordery Bristows, London Gabriel Cuonzo Trevisan & Cuonzo, Milan Dr. Frank-Erich Hufnagel Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer, Düsseldorf Panelists: Dr. Klaus Grabinski Presiding Judge, District Court, Düsseldorf John Lane Frommer Lawrence & Haug Marleen van den Horst BarentsKrans, The Hague C. Obviousness/Inventive Step: A comparative study of approaches in the EPO, Germany, Japan, United Kingdom and United States, including “obvious to try” and selection patents. 5:10 PM – 6:30 PM Moderator: John White Cooper & Dunham, New York Speakers: Prof. Martin Adelman George Washington University Law School, Washington, D.C. Obviousness/Inventive Step: A comparative study of the EPO, Germany, Japan, United States and United Kingdom, including "obvious to try" and selection patents. William Chandler Member, Board of Appeal, European Patent Office, Munich The Problem and Solution Approach -- Fixed Dogma or Focused Debate? The problem and solution approach is the preferred tool for judging inventive step at the EPO, especially by the Boards of Appeal. It provides a structured framework for the discussion of inventive step. Sometimes it is viewed as a rather rigid, artificial device, but, used properly, it allows a practical, objective assessment of whether the skilled person would have arrived at the invention knowing only the prior art and common knowledge. What are the key steps of this approach, aspects of choosing "closest" prior art, and of formulating the objective technical problem? Alastair McCulloch Jones Day, London Prof. Dr. Peter Meier-Beck Patents Chamber, German Federal Supreme Court, Karlsruhe John Richards Ladas & Parry, New York
Panelists: Eiji Katayama Abe, Ikubo & Katayama, Tokyo Hon. Robert van Peursem Vice President, District Court, The Hague, The Netherlands James Toupin General Counsel, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, Alexandria
RECEPTION Sponsored by Bristows
SESSION 10: COPYRIGHT/COMPETITION LAW Concurrent Session (Thursday, 2:30 PM – 4:15 PM)
Music Distribution, Collecting Societies; DG Comp CISAC Inquiry 2:30 PM – 4:15 PM
Moderator: Pat Treacy Bristows, London
Speakers: Sebastien J. Evrard Jones Day, Brussels Dr. Mihály Ficsor Director, CITP, Budapest Dr. John Temple Lang Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP, Brussels Frances Lowe Director of Regulatory and Corporate Affairs, PRS for Music, London Cecilio Madero Villarejo Director, Directorate C, Markets and Cases II: Information, Communication and Media, Directorate General for Competition, European Commission, Brussels Prof. Silke von Lewinski Max Planck Institute for Intellectual Property, Competition and Tax Law, Munich; Franklin Pierce Law Center, Concord, N.H.
Panelist: Thomas Heide Berwin Leighton Paisner LLP, London
BREAK 4:15 PM – 4:45 PM
SESSION 11: COPYRIGHT LAW Concurrent Session (Thursday, 4:45 PM – 6:30 PM)
Information Society Directive, DRM, Private Copy Levies, Secondary Liability, and Copyright Territoriality 4:45 PM – 6:30 PM Moderator: Tilman Lüder Head of Unit, Copyright and Knowledge-based Economy, DG Internal Market and Services, European Commission, Brussel Speakers: Trevor Callaghan European Senior Product Counsel, Google, London Sarah Faulder Public Affairs Director, PRS for Music, London Prof. F. Willem Grosheide Molengraaff Institute/Center for Intellectual Property Law, University Utrecht Secondary Liability of ISPs Under EU Regulation Further harmonization of ISP liability under EU Regulation is required. The best way to do this may be the introduction of a notice and take-down procedure to be instigated by a claimant against intermediaries such as ISPs together with a warranty on behalf of ISPs by that claimant for removing from its networks allegedly infringing content. Scott M. Martin Executive Vice President, Intellectual Property, Paramount Pictures, Viacom, Los Angeles Timo Ruikka Strategy Adviser, IPR Intellectual Property, Nokia Corporation., Helsinki Private Copy Levies: One Beast or Many? "fair compensation" mean and what doesn't it mean? Is there a "right" answer under the InfoSoc Directive? If there is, then many national systems must be materially "wrong." Or did the Directive harmonize a mandatory linking between excepted private copies and compensation without defining either? If so, where does that leave the stakeholders? Ted Shapiro Senior Vice President, General Counsel and Deputy Managing Director, EMEA, Motion Picture Association, Brussels The English Premier League Case (ECJ Case C-403/08): Is There More to it than Where Fans Can Watch Football? Panelists: David Carson General Counsel, U.S. Copyright Office. Washington, DC Sebastien J. Evrard Jones Day, Brussels
RECEPTION Sponsored by Bristows
SESSION 12: TRADEMARK LAW Concurrent Session (Thursday, 2:30 PM – 6:30 PM)
A. Dilution Actions: Dying or Growth Industry? 2:30 PM – 3:30 PM
Moderator: Dr. G. E. Evans Queen Mary, University of London, Centre for Commercial Law Studies
Speakers: Prof. Marshall Leaffer Indiana University, Bloomington David Llewelyn White & Case, Kings College London, External Director Ip Academy Singapore Dilution Law in the EU: A Review and Analysis Sven Klos Klos Morel Vos & Schaap, Amsterdam Impact of Intel and TDK and Other Recent Developments on Benelux Countries
Panelists: Dr. Dev Gangjee Department of Law, London School of Economics Gordon D. T. Humphreys Member of the Second Board of Appeal, OHIM, Alicante Prof. Spyros Maniatis Director, Centre for Commercial Law Studies, Queen Mary, University of London
BREAK 3:30 PM – 4:00 PM
B. Trademarks and the Internet: “Use,” E-Commerce, Ad Words, eBay, UDRP, ICANN and new Registrars 4:00 PM – 5:30 PM Moderator: John Michael Richardson Attorney, AAA Arbitrator, Appointed Mediator for New York state and federal courts, New York
Speakers: Sandra Aistars Assistant General Counsel, Intellectual Property, Time Warner Inc., New York ICANN's proposal to expand gTLDs: can risks to consumers and brand owners be limited? Premature launch of new gTLDs presents unacceptable risks to consumers and brand owners alike. Prof. Robert Burrell Visiting, Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, New York; TC Beirne School of Law at the University of Queensland, Australia Use, Initial Interest Confusion and the Internet: An Australian Analysis Prof. Souichirou Kozuka Sophia University, Tokyo Economic Analysis of Trademarks: A Comparative Analysis Dr. Peter Ruess Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer, Dusseldorf Recent EU law on Online Trade Mark Infringement: a Clearer Picture? Ron Zink Microsoft, Chief IP Counsel, Europe Middle, East and Africa. Panelists: Trevor Cook Bird & Bird, London Alain Strowel Covington & Burling, LLP, Brussels
C. Trademarks and Free Speech 5:30 PM – 6:30 PM Moderator: Prof. Coenrad Visser University of South Africa, Pretoria Speakers: Prof. Robert Burrell Visiting, Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, New York; TC Beirne School of Law at the University of Queensland, Australia Gordon D. T. Humphreys Member of the Second Board of Appeal, OHIM, Alicante Free Speech and Trademark Registration Trademarks convey messages, using words and images, to promote the goods or services they seek to cover. When those messages relate to religion or terrorism, or use vulgar or offensive words, individual rights have to be balanced against the common good. How does a registration authority such as OHIM assess whether a sign can be protected in these circumstances? How do the shifting paradigms of society reflect on that assessment? How are different categories of consumer and disparate goods and services to be dealt with in a European context? Jonathan Griffiths Senior Lecturer, School of Law, Queen Mary, University of London
RECEPTION Sponsored by Bristows Shuttle bus available 7:00 PM and 10:00 PM, April 16th. Route: Cambridge train station (main entrance) -- Cambridge bus station (outside Parkside Pool, on Gonville Place & Mill Road) -- Faculty of Law -- Robinson College. Please look for Fordham IP Conference signage! |
|||
Home - Registration - Program - Faculty - Papers - Publications - Tell a Friend - Help ©2008 Fordham IP Institute |
||||