[Defeated] Foreign Patent Protection Act

[Auralia]

Foreign Patent Protection Act
A resolution to reduce barriers to free trade and commerce.

Category: Free Trade | Strength: Mild | Proposed by: Wallenburg

Recognizing the need for international standards on intellectual property, particularly with regard to patents,

Aware of concerns that previous patent law has failed to properly address this difficult topic,

Believing that this Assembly should not punish member states on the basis of their economic ideologies,

Revering the principles of national sovereignty, and the right of nations to their own economic philosophies and ideologies,

The World Assembly hereby:

1. Defines, for the purpose of this resolution:

"patent" as an official government statement granting an entity the legal right to exclude others from producing or generating profit with a particular invention,

"invention" as a process, good, device, or technology created by an entity,

2. Forbids member nations from granting or recognizing patents for illegal inventions, or for any form of sapient life, as it is not very nice to treat people as property,

3. Prohibits member states and inhabitants of member states from importing from or exporting to other member states goods produced in violation of any rights granted by a WAPS patent,

4. Restores the powers and duties of the World Assembly Patent Service (WAPS), among these being:

To consider claims by entities originating from one or more member states, and to grant patents accordingly,

To archive all patents granted by member states or itself, and to make the WAPS archives public to all member states and their citizens for future reference, or to get lost in aisle after aisle of paperwork,

To evaluate the unique characteristics of member states' economies, demographics, and societies in order to determine and set unbiased and appropriate expiration dates in each member nation on a case-by-case basis for patents granted by the WAPS, and

To hear challenges made by other entities in member states to patents issued by the WAPS, and to investigate and rule on them accordingly,

5. Specifies that the WAPS may only grant patents to entities from member states if:

The entity holds a valid patent granted by the member nation it originates from for the same invention the entity seeks to patent via the WAPS,

The WAPS has not already granted a patent on the invention the entity seeks to claim as its intellectual property,

The entity demonstrates full responsibility for the development of the invention, an inventive step in developing it beyond merely observing or analyzing an already existing invention, and reasonable novelty and uniqueness of the invention in the member nation from which the entity originates, and

The request meets any other basic formatting standards set by the WAPS in order to guarantee the legitimacy of the entity's patent request,

6. Mandates that all patent offices in member nations observe each patent granted by the WAPS as if it were its own, given that:

The patented invention is neither illegal, nor obsolete, nor in the public domain in that member nation at the time the inventive entity receives the patent,

The patented invention is of practical, commercial, or industrial use in that nation,

The patent holder has demonstrated intent to exercise its patent in that nation, and

Previously passed World Assembly resolutions do not permit that member nation not to recognize the patent.

[Auralia]

This resolution is somewhat improved from Wallenburg's just-repealed (by yours truly) Foreign Patent Act, in that it prohibits member states from exporting goods in violation of international patents and contains an appeals mechanism.

However, there are still numerous fundamental problems with the approach taken by this resolution:

• Member states without patent systems are still free to export infringing goods to non-member states. This will make it more difficult for the original inventor to market his or her invention outside the World Assembly. This also allows member states without patent systems to use non-member states as a relay to export infringing goods to member states.
• This proposal essentially declares that, in member states without patent systems, an extraordinarily large class of goods is legal to produce but illegal to export. I find it difficult to believe that border security in these member states will actually be able to stop the flood of attempted illegal exports of lawfully manufactured goods that will ensue, especially given that it would be in their economic interest not to do so. It would be much easier and safer to simply cut off production of infringing goods at the source by simply recognizing the patent.
• To the extent that member states without patent systems do make an effort to prevent the illegal export of patented goods, they will incur a significant burden on border security for little benefit. In essence, they experience the disadvantages associated with patent recognition without any of the advantages. Why would any member state opt for such an approach? Wouldn't it make more sense at this point simply to recognize the patent?
• Finally, and perhaps most importantly, this proposal does not provide for inventors to be compensated for the use of their intellectual labours in member states without patent systems. This can only be properly achieved by recognizing the patent.

In addition, the resolution contains a number of unintended loopholes:

• Clause 6 permits member states to selectively recognize some patents but not others by simply declaring all inventions associated with patents it doesn't want to recognize to be in the public domain. While this must be done before the international patent is issued, this isn't particularly difficult. In most jurisdictions, patent applications are published when they are received before any patent is granted. The organization responsible for issuing international patents may follow similar procedures.
• In the same clause, the qualifier "previously passed World Assembly resolutions do not permit that member nation not to recognize the patent" uses an ugly double negative, but it ultimately translates to "previously passed World Assembly resolutions require that member nation to recognize the patent."
  
  In other words, the clause only requires a member nation to observe WAPS patents if previously passed World Assembly resolutions require that member nation to recognize the patent. There are no previously passed (active) resolutions requiring member states to recognize patents, so the clause requires nothing of member states. This creates a loophole similar to the public domain one described above.

It is also worth noting that the resolution contains several jokes that are inappropriate for international legislation. Examples include the statement that "it is not very nice to treat people as property" and references to "get[ting] lost in aisle after aisle of paperwork".

In summary, the core argument we made in our repeal of the author's previous patent resolution applies equally strongly to this proposal. This proposal still uses an opt-out system for patent recognition, and it still enables large scale patent infringement. Unsurprisingly, we oppose it in favour of our own replacement and therefore recommend a vote AGAINST.

[Adytus]

Nay

[Sygian]

Against, and good luck with your new replacement!

[Neenee]

Nay

[LexerMercs]

Against

[Weast Jurmany]

Nay

[Ravilan]

nay

[Atlantica]

Nay

[Astrantia]

That was an amazing statement Auralia! I've never seen a statement about WA matters that comprehensive on regional forums before