Brazil to Break Patents on U.S. Films, Books, Drugs

Source: Bloomberg

Brazil to Break Patents on U.S. Films, Books, Drugs
By Iuri Dantas

March 15 (Bloomberg) -- Brazil will seek to break intellectual property rights on U.S.-made prescription drugs, music, books, software and movies in a bid to force the U.S. government to end cotton subsidies that violate global trade rules.

Brazil’s government submitted a list of products that may have royalties, copyrights and patents suspended as part of $829 million in retaliatory sanctions authorized by the World Trade Organization, according to a statement published today in the country’s official gazette.

The Geneva-based WTO in August ruled that Brazil may impose annual sanctions on U.S. imports because the cotton subsidies violate trade regulations. Of the amount awarded, Brazil will adopt penalties on intellectual property rights totaling $239 million this year.

Brazil and U.S. still have room to negotiate an agreement to avoid the application of the sanctions, Foreign Minister Celso Amorim said last week. President Lula Inacio Lula da Silva blamed the “fighting” over the agricultural subsidies on the U.S.’s refusal to sign an accord during the Doha round of global trade talks.


Read more: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=a.VF70UEOmVM

It is very clear "intellectual property rights" are what they are dealing with. Only the title/blurb is in error...

It might just take that.

Good point about the copyrights.

Brazil details retaliation on US copyright
Published: 3:12AM Tuesday March 16, 2010
Source: Reuters

Brazil revealed a preliminary list of US patents and intellectual property rights it could restrict unless both countries settle a long-standing dispute over US cotton aid.

It is the second set of measures Brazil has unveiled in a week to pressure Washington to obey a ruling by the World Trade Organization that found the US cotton subsidies and export credit guarantee program illegal.

Diplomats, trade experts and business leaders are closely watching the case, one of a few in which the WTO has allowed cross-retaliation, in which the wronged party can retaliate against a sector not involved in the dispute.

Brazil would become the first country ever to apply cross retaliation under WTO rules.

The new measures, which are still subject to public hearings, would suspend for a limited time US patents on pharmaceuticals, chemicals and biotechnology.

They would allow Brazil to restrict copyrights in the music and audiovisual industry.

More:
http://tvnz.co.nz/business-news/brazil-details-retaliation-us-copyright-3417752

Our Latin cousins are REALLY not stupid.

The one that's violating WTO agreements?

Brazil, if the story was accurate.

Theft of intellectual property tramples on the rights of individuals who hold those rights. The WTO, by allowing that theft, are Thieves and Thugs.

And let me stress again: it's not theft. It's the LEGAL application of sanctions derived from an INTERNATIONAL TREATY. You may dislike it and say it's wrong all you like, but you can't call it "theft". At least, not without looking like an idiot.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

By the way, "those who benefit from support of the cotton industry" can be legitimately considered to be the entire country.

* Why did you use the nicer-looking term "support" instead of "subsidies"?

Instead of large US corporate interests! The horror!

even in the interest of their own citizens.

shouldn't we?

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

If the American copyright owners want protection, they can make their government stop cotton subsidies. Simple.

How else can Brazil retaliate against the US? Start a war?

if one agrees with WTO which i bet most people here DON'T ***unless*** it's being used against the US, in which case it's okey-dokey (see: situational ethics)...

but it's still stealing in the same sense that civilly forfeiting a person's house because of some bogus asset forfeiture clause related to a drug crime they are never convicted of is stealing.

legalized theft is still theft

hth

Are they a-OK?

is this one of those "two wrongs make a right" arguments?

the point is IT'S STEALING.

The US refused to let go of the subsidies for years and years, even after they were declared irregular! That's WHY Brazil was given the right to retaliate.

and the people who are being retaliated against are artists, musicians, etc. who took no part in the alleged initial incident

it's THEFT

hth

Brazil announces it may break US patents on movies, music, drugs, chemicals in WTO dispute
By Associated Press
1:12 p.m. EDT, March 15, 2010

BRASILIA, Brazil (AP) — Brazil says it may let local companies break U.S. patents on products including movies, music, pharmaceutical products and chemicals.

The World Trade Organization says Brazil can take punitive action because the United States has failed to get rid of illegal subsidies provided to American cotton farmers.

The list of products targeted for patent breaks was released Monday in the Brazil's official gazette.

Brazil last week announced $591 million in possible sanctions against other U.S. products through higher tariffs. The WTO authorized Brazil a total of $829 million in sanctions.

Brazilian and U.S. officials say they will try to negotiate a deal so the sanctions are not imposed.

http://www.courant.com/technology/sns-ap-lt-brazil-us-cotton-dispute,0,1182469.story

(My emphasis.)

The nation state is incompatible with "free trade."

Does that mean we get to copy Brazilian music free of copyright restrictions?

I bought a Brazilian CD as a gift at Christmas. Does that mean that the person who received it can copy it and sell it here for profit? Quid pro quo? Seems to me that if the Brazilians break our copyright laws, then we can break theirs.

I oppose free trade. I support permitting countries to govern themselves.

other countries that govern trade, pollution, passport/visa requirements for travelers, educational exchanges or anything else, that is its sovereign right. It is a sovereign right to decide which agreements it signs up for and which it stays away from.

But if a country does sign an international agreement that regulates behavior in some way and has a set of penalties for violating mutually agreed upon rules, it has given up a certain amount of sovereignty presumably for a benefit that the country deemed greater than the cost or it would not have signed the agreement. Surely a country has the right to make this decision. History is full of examples of countries agreeing to do or not do something in exchange for another country promising something. Some treaties have tough enforcement mechanisms, others don't and are pretty much just words on a piece of paper.

If a nation state agrees to "free trade" who is to say that it does not have the sovereign right to give up some of its sovereignty if it decides it is in the national interest. Germany's free trade with France does not destroy either's ability to govern itself. Our free trade with Canada does not destroy either's ability to govern itself.

If the concept of the nation state is incompatible with "free trade", would a 1% tariff on imports (so that trade would not be "free") restore a country's "sovereignty"? 25%? 100%? Or if not in terms of tariffs what kinds of restrictions on trade would a nation state need to satisfy those who value sovereignty over all. No trade at all so that each nation state is like an island.

Prior Post:

"But if a country does sign an international agreement that regulates behavior in some way and has a set of penalties for violating mutually agreed upon rules, it has given up a certain amount of sovereignty presumably for a benefit that the country deemed greater than the cost or it would not have signed the agreement. If a nation state agrees to "free trade" who is to say that it does not have the sovereign right to give up some of its sovereignty if it decides it is in the national interest."

But we have a major problemo!

Trade depends on the value of a countries currency and countries like China can manipulate their currency to increase their exports at the expense of every other country, a huge loophole in this WTO agreement. A real free trade agreement from the WTO has to also include the value of a counties currency, and not allow manipulation of a countries currency, without this there is no free trade.

same environmental and employment standards including pay. We should not be trading with countries like China and India in which the pay and environmental standards are so different from ours without making some kind of adjustment in the price at which the goods are imported that would encourage nations with which we trade to raise their standards.

and other lost taxes that result from importing an item and selling it here rather than manufacturing it here.

Free trade has been anything but free to most Americans. Yes we now get to buy cheap low quality shxt from China via Wal-mart for those who can still afford it. Most Americans under the age of 40 have little concept of the reduction in level of quality that typical Americans can now afford. It used to be that Americans could afford high quality Made in America tools, clothes and shoes and the people that made this stuff could afford them too. Now you need to be a lawyer or Goldman Sachs guy to afford US quality clothes, etc. The typical consumer stuff today gets used for a couple years and then goes into filling our landfills with more poisonous metals and additives.

I still make an effort to buy American when I can but it has become a losing battle, and the fault can be laid directly at the feet of every President and Congress since Carter and I include Bill Clinton as one of the worst. As a nation we've been losing our standard of living. The only thing keeping us going has been the increase in government and personal debt since Reagan. This slide didn't occur by accident; it was done by plan. Keeping Americans poor is the easiest way to keeping us manipulated. Middle class results in a politically involved people. Poverty results in the pied piper syndrome.

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

The US has been a major proponent of draconian intellectual property rights agreements in the UN's World Intellectual Property Organization and in other international venues.

We have been very protective of copyrights to Hollywood's movies, etc. But the service exports in many cases involve license income from patents or from services which make use of patented technology.

On the other hand, there is no way to actually enforce the payment of economic rents on intellectual property if other countries decide not to do so.

In the longer run, it won't matter since other countries are rapidly gaining intellectual property assets that will dwarf the United States'.

Brazil has been hit before because of our own subsidies, but WE complied.

s

I recall Rabs broke a story last week detailing some of this

"Brazil Raises Tariffs on U.S. Goods, to Break Patents (Update3)"


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x4298351

For some reason beyond understanding some people just start foaming at the mouth concerning anything Latin American. They've clearly not taken the time to get any grasp of US actions concerning everything south of our border for the last 100 years.
It's a pity when they get livid while still not knowing anything, isn't it?

That's what keeps propagandists in business, with such an easy job molding perception among the mentally lame. Lots and lotsa people willing to let the corporate media telling what to believe.

Glad you caught rabs' previous thread on the subject. :hi:

...they cry foul. Like all bullies, they are cowards that can dish it but can't take it.

You only have to look upthread.

to steal intellectual and copywrited property. Nice thievery when you get it I guess.

and the ball is in the U.S.'s court. The U.S. can prevent it easily by doing the RIGHT thing.