Article
Source: The Hindu
Article
04.20.16
On February 24, 2016, U.S. President Barack Obama signed the Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act of 2015, which introduces important measures relating to intellectual property rights (IPR) issues. The focus of the law is to enhance enforcement of IPR over the U.S.’s trading partners. The U.S. already scrutinises developments of IP law in its trading partners; this Act will only heighten it. Consequently, the Trade Facilitation Act is bound to impact India’s ability to develop an IP policy suited to its own developmental needs.
Traditionally, the United States Trade Representative (USTR), which is an agency that is part of the executive office of the President, has the twin task of negotiating trade agreements and overseeing enforcement of U.S. trade policy, including IP policy. As part of its duties, the USTR creates an annual list of countries, known as the Special 301 list. Countries featured on this list are those that the USTR believes have either national laws or regulations that detrimentally affect U.S. trade or the rights of IP holders. Essentially, if a trading partner is on this list, the USTR report indicates to it that the U.S. believes that the country is providing inadequate “IPR protection, enforcement, or market access for persons relying on intellectual property.”
The USTR also groups these countries in three categories. The most egregious violators are designated as Priority Foreign Countries (PFC), serious offenders are listed on the Priority Watch List (PWL), and less serious offenders in the Watch List (WL). Any country falling within the PFC or PWL is subject to USTR scrutiny in the form of investigations and possible sanctions under the procedures set out under the Trade Act, 1974. Over the years, the USTR has increased the number of countries that are put on the PWL, but reduced countries designated as PFCs. The Special 301 list has consistently featured India, most often as a PWL country, since its institution in 1989. This has caused some consternation within India, which has been disappointed that its proactive steps to improve domestic IP protection and engage with the U.S. have been unsuccessful in placating the U.S.
Read more: Trading Charges