QUT News, 22 February 2024 22nd February 2024 The role of intellectual property rights in technology transfer to developing countries and least developed countries to achieve the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) is a major theme of a new international…
Australian Centre for Health Law Research QUT Faculty of Business and Law The Gibson Room, Level 10, Z Block, Gardens Point, QUT Friday, the 8th December 2023 Overview The Australian Centre for Health Law Research is hosting a one-day, in-person,…
[QUT] Australia needs a new, independent regulatory body and specific offences, penalties and remedies to curb deceptive ‘greenwashing’ marketing claims after the ACCC found the practice was rife among Australian companies... QUT law Professor Matthew Rimmer made the call in a submission to the Senate Standing Committee on Environment and Communications Inquiry into “greenwashing … and legislative options to protect consumers”. Professor Rimmer said Australia’s current regime for regulating greenwashing was fragmented and fractured. “It is split across consumer law, competition policy, corporations law, advertising standards, and intellectual property,” he said. “Australia needs a regulatory body, with specialist knowledge, to address misleading and deceptive environmental claims. There should be proper enforcement against the scourge of greenwashing in Australia.”
[Cybel Ekpa] In PIJIP’s Right to Research video series, Professor Desmond Oriakhogba discussed the importance of the right to research in empowering citizens to participate in economic development, democratic processes, and personal problem-solving. While most ongoing research in Africa takes shape informally, there is a major challenge of access to information, which is a crucial ingredient for effective research. The problem is caused by copyright regimes in Africa, which are formulated in such a way as to limit access to information.
In this, third video of PIJIP’S video series on the Right to Research in International Copyright Law, Dr. Sanya Samtani of the University of Pretoria discusses how access to knowledge in general and the right to research may be considered human rights in the context of international human rights instruments and the obligations of nation-states. Furthermore, she asserts that the state has a duty to respect research rights by making sure there are no unjustifiable limits on access, protecting research rights from third-party violations.
Interested in learning more about research as a human right? In this informative video, Professor Flynn gives a conceptual overview of research as a human right in international copyright. Further, he sheds light on the human rights aspect of the right to research and how it differs from a type of exception to copyright. He continues to flush out how human rights duties are imposed by the state to act or refrain from acting in certain ways. He uses censorship as an example of a state affirmative action that reduces people's access to their right to research.
[Klaus Beiter] Abstract: This article identifies copyright impediments existing in the sphere of science, to then make (tentative) suggestions as to how these may be overcome. It focuses on scholarly publishing only, and here primarily on digital content, specifically asking whether expensive commercial scholarly publishers continue to “add value” to research in the digital era. The deficits of copyright law and potential solutions thereto are assessed in the light of the right of everyone “to enjoy the benefits of scientific progress and its applications” (REBSPA) as laid down in Article 15(1)(b) of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) of 1966. A substantial part of the discussion examines whether and, if so, in what ways, the REBSPA gives rise to a “right to research,” also in an extraterritorial sense that would require the right to be respected beyond borders, and what the normative implications of such a right would be for copyright and science.
[Sean Flynn] In a huge court victory that may assist human rights and IP advocacy, the SA Constitutional Court released a quite remarkable judgment today that “reads in” the copyright amendment bill’s disability provisions into the current law because of the long delay in passing the bill. The Court finds that the lack of disability exceptions in current law violates the equality right of people with disabilities. It also finds a violation of free expression rights that uses reasoning with broader import.
[Christophe Geiger and Bernd Justin Jütte] Copyright, at international, European and national levels, does not provide a legal framework that prioritizes enabling and incentivizing research using protected works and information to the extent necessary and desirable in a digital, data-driven society in order to build a sustainable ecosystem for innovation and creativity. While small progress has been made, for example with the recent introduction of specific exceptions for research purposes and for text and data mining in certain national legislations as well as in the European Union law, a horizontal approach towards a more research-friendly copyright ecosystem has so far failed to evolve. By revisiting international and European human and fundamental rights instruments as well as the aims and objectives of the European Union, it is possible to distill research as a constitutional and ethical imperative. Conceptualizing a fundamental ‘Right to Research’ and integrating it into a constitutional dialogue provides a convincing argument to rethink copyright towards a research-oriented normative system.
[Jade Kouletakis] Abstract: International intellectual property frameworks conceive of copyright exclusivity as a largely individualistic, westernised and capitalistic benefit which must be balanced against and limited by the non-commercial, competing public interest. This is expressed primarily by way of limitations to and exceptions from the norm of exclusivity recognised within these frameworks. This article argues for an alternative interpretation of copyright exclusivity as being justified by the public interest. However, unlike the works of Geiger et al., this interpretation is not premised upon the constitutional and quasi-constitutional patterns accounting for the public interest foundations of IP. Instead, it is premised upon the conceptualisations of indigenous communities within the Global South relating to exclusivity over intangible property for the communal benefit.
[Section 27] BlindSA, represented by SECTION27, is going to court to fight for the rights of people who are blind or visually impaired by asking the court to amend the apartheid era Copyright Act for greater access to reading materials in accessible formats. The case will be heard in a virtual sitting of the High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division) on 21 September 2021.
From July 26 to September 10, the call for proposals will be open for the collaborative agenda of #IPWeek2021, Intellectual Property Week, the Public Interest, and COVID-19: learnings, discoveries, and challenges. This new version of Intellectual Property, Public Interest and COVID-19 Week will address the lessons and discoveries that the COVID-19 pandemic left to society, and future challenges in the post-pandemic period, in the relationship framework between intellectual property and the public interest.