Proposed Government IP Strategy Promises Fight Against Piracy
A national strategy promising tougher enforcement of IP laws and protections hit the desks of President Barack Obama and Congress on Tuesday, receiving mixed reaction from private industry groups. U.S. Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator (IPEC) Victoria Espinel said in the report: “In order to continue to lead, succeed and prosper in the global economy, we must ensure the strong enforcement of American intellectual property rights.”
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
The nation’s first comprehensive plan against intellectual piracy, the 2010 Joint Strategic Plan on Intellectual Property Enforcement was mandated by the PRO-IP Act. In devising the plan, Espinel’s office collected more than 1,600 public comments on battling piracy (WID March 26 p3). The plan directs the federal government to redouble its efforts against using products that infringe intellectual property rights. It establishes a government-wide working group to study how to reduce the risk of procuring counterfeit products and bans the use of illegal software by federal contractors.
The plan also seeks to boost enforcement by sharing information between law enforcement agencies and stakeholders. For example it directs the U.S. Trade Representative’s office to identify foreign pirate websites as part of its annual Special 301 report and enhance communication between law enforcement agencies and rightsholders, who are better positioned to identify pirated goods. The plan promises to increase efficiency and coordination among federal, state and local agencies through information sharing and improved training for state and local law enforcement personnel and prosecutors.
To fight overseas piracy, the plan directs federal agencies to develop a new plan to fight foreign-based or controlled websites that infringe American intellectual property. It also directs them to enforce intellectual property rights through better cooperation with foreign law enforcement agencies and though the use of trade policy. Importers of infringing goods who voluntarily disclosed violations would receive lighter penalties, while exporters would face tougher penalties.
The plan also directs the federal government to improve how it assesses the impact of intellectual property on domestic firms and how it tracks the resources spent fighting piracy. As part of that strategy the IPEC will launch a comprehensive review of existing IP laws and help federal agencies revise penalties to deter IP piracy.
Private industry groups had mixed reactions, suggesting Congress will have a tough time acting on it before the end of its session. It was a “very meaningful step towards fighting intellectual property theft,” said David Hirschmann, president of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s Global Intellectual Property Center. “If fully implemented by the administration and Congress, the first-ever National IP Enforcement Strategy could dramatically improve our nation’s ability to combat counterfeiting and piracy.”
"As the industry moves to provide new and innovative ways to deliver creative content to consumers, particularly over the Internet, it is especially critical that the United States has an effective framework for protecting creative content online and enforcing intellectual property rights in the digital environment,” said MPAA President Bob Pisano.
But the plan could be a “drag on innovation,” said the Computer and Communications Industry Association. “We certainly understand the need to reduce the risks of counterfeit products, and it would be short sighted to not prioritize enforcement efforts to address activities that put the public at risk,” said CCIA President Ed Black. “We are surprised that no one appears to be recognizing the broader economic debate on this issue. A proper enforcement strategy would ensure that legitimate innovation is not being squashed by an overly broad, overly zealous crackdown.”