Overige

IEF 38

Rectificatie

De voorzieningenrechter heeft terecht geen spoedeisend belang aangenomen voor rectificatie van uitingen in 2001 en 2003. Gedaagde zou meer dan twee jaar geleden onjuiste uitlatingen hebben gedaan over Milieutech c.s., waardoor haar reputatie, goede naam en faam en imago zou zijn aangetast. Zij vordert in kortgeding gedaagde te gebieden over te gaan tot het plaatsen van een paginagrote rectificatie in Twentse Courant Tubantia. Dit terwijl dit geschil kennelijk in de bodemprocedure al bij het Hof ligt. Het is onbegrijpelijk waarom nu pas in kortgeding een rectificatie wordt gevorderd. Lees vonnis

IEF 20

Piraterij

The Food and Drug Administration and several major drug makers are expected to announce initiatives today that will put tiny radio antennas on the labels of millions of medicine bottles to combat counterfeiting and fraud. Among the medicines that will soon be tagged are Viagra, one of the most counterfeited drugs in the world, and OxyContin, a pain-control narcotic that has become one of the most abused medicines in the United States. The tagged bottles - for now, only the large ones from which druggists get the pills to fill prescriptions - will start going to distributors this week, officials said.

Experts do not expect the technology to stop there. The adoption by the drug industry, they said in interviews, could be the leading edge of a change that will rid grocery stores of checkout lines, find lost luggage in airports, streamline warehousing and add a weapon in the battle against cargo theft.

"It's basically a bar code that barks," said one expert, Robin Koh, director of applications research at the Auto-ID Labs of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. The technology, Mr. Koh said, could "make supply chains more efficient and more secure."

Wal-Mart and the Department of Defense have already mandated that their top 100 suppliers put the antennas on delivery pallets beginning in January. Radio tags on vehicles and passports could become a central tool in government efforts to create a database to track visitors to the United States. And companies are rushing to supply scanners, computer chips and other elements of the technology.

The labels are called radio-frequency identification. As in automated highway toll collection systems, they consist of computer chips embedded into stickers that emit numbers when prompted by a nearby radio signal. In a supermarket, they might enable a scanner to read every item in a shopping cart at once and spit out a bill in seconds, though the technology to do that is still some distance off.

For drug makers, radio labels hold the promise of cleaning up the wholesale distribution system, where most counterfeit drugs enter the supply chain, often through unscrupulous employees at the small wholesale companies that have proliferated in some states.

Initially, the expense of the system will be considerable. Each label costs 20 to 50 cents. The readers and scanners cost thousands of dollars. But because the medicines tend to be very expensive and the need to ensure their authenticity is great, officials said, the expense is justified.

Costs are still far too high for individual consumer goods, like the amber bottles that pharmacies use to dispense pills to individuals. But prices are expected to plunge once radio labels become popular, so drug makers represent an important set of early adopters.

Privacy-rights advocates have expressed reservations about radio labels, worrying that employers and others will be able to learn what medications people are carrying in their pockets. Civil-liberties groups have voiced similar concerns about ubiquitous use of the technology in the marketplace. But under the current initiatives, the technology would not be used at the retail level.

The food and drug agency's involvement is crucial because drug manufacturers cannot change a label without the agency's approval. In its announcement, the agency is expected to say that it is setting up a working group to resolve any problems that arise from the use of radio antennas on drug labels.

Counterfeit drugs are still comparatively rare in the United States, but federal officials say the problem is growing. Throughout the 1990's, the F.D.A. pursued about five cases of counterfeit drugs every year. In each of the last several years, the number of cases has averaged about 20, but law-enforcement officials say that figure does not reflect the extent of the problem.

Last year, more than 200,000 bottles of counterfeit Lipitor made their way onto the market. In 2001, a Sunnyvale, Calif., pharmacist discovered that bottles of Neupogen, an expensive growth hormone prescribed for AIDS and cancer patients, were filled only with saltwater.

"We've seen organized crime start to get involved," said William Hubbard, an associate food and drug commissioner. With some drugs costing thousands of dollars per vial, the profit potential is huge, he said.

The weak point, Mr. Hubbard said, is the wholesaler system, which ships more than half of the 14,000 approved prescription drugs in the United States. While three large companies - McKesson, Cardinal and AmerisourceBergen - account for more than 90 percent of drugs that are sent through wholesalers, there are thousands of smaller companies throughout the country, many little more than a room with a refrigerator.

State pharmacy boards are responsible for regulating drug wholesalers, but most boards do almost nothing to police them.

In many states, only a small fee and a registration form are needed to set up shop. A 2003 report by a Florida grand jury found that the state had 1,399 approved wholesalers, one for every three pharmacies in Florida.

Radio labels fight counterfeiting by providing a unique identifier that is almost impossible to copy. When pharmacists receive delivery, they should be able to pass a wand over the bottles and, through an online database, check the history of each.

Any bottles that have been reported missing or previously sold, have an unusual delivery history or are not recognized by the system will be flagged as suspicious.

Makers of prescription narcotics say radio labels could help cut down on the booming trade in stolen pills.

"We get calls once a week from state troopers saying they got a guy with one of our bottles," said Aaron Graham, chief security officer for Purdue Pharma, the maker of OxyContin.

With radio labels, Purdue will be able to trace those bottles to individual pharmacies. "If that pharmacy was robbed, we'll know for certain that that guy is in possession of stolen property," Mr. Graham said.

Radio labels could conceivably help ensure that imported drugs are safe, Mr. Hubbard of the F.D.A. said. But drug manufacturers are unlikely to put radio labels on drugs sold in other parts of the world for many years, he said. The F.D.A. has been a fierce opponent of legalizing drug imports.

"This is about securing the domestic supply," said Tom McGinnis, the F.D.A.'s chief pharmacist.

So far, the agency is relying on a nonprofit industry group, EPCglobal, based in Lawrenceville, N.J., to set standards for radio labels.

The labels will remain voluntary until 2007. After that, the agency may require the labels and specify which types must be used, Mr. Hubbard said.

November 15, 2004
Tiny Antennas to Keep Tabs on U.S. Drugs
By GARDINER HARRIS

Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company | Home | Privacy Policy | Search | Corrections | RSS | Help | Back to Top

IEF 18

Mediarecht

Vonnis: Rechtbank Utrecht, 10 november 2004. zaak 176332/HA ZA 04-822 Westbroek, Schnetz tegen Van Zanten. Eisers maken bezwaar tegen mededelingen die gedaagde over hen doet in een krantenartikel. "Ook met Henk Westbroek en Leefbaar Utrecht-partijvoorzitter Broos Schnetz heeft hij wel eens een glaasje gedronken in de kroeg, om de onenigheid uit te spreken. 'Na afloop waren we weer grote vrienden. Westbroek bood zich zelfs weer aan als columnist! Maar een dag later kreeg ik een brief op hoge poten: "Geachte mijnheer de hoofdredacteur, u kunt dan misschien wel aardig drinken, maar nu staat er wéér zo'n kutstuk in uw krant." Lees vonnis

IEF 15

Domeinnamen

Domeinnaamkaping makkelijker

Top Level DomainDomeinkaping is dankzij nieuwe regels van ICANN gemakkelijker geworden. De nieuwe regels - die vrijdag in werking worden gesteld - zijn eigenlijk bedoeld om het overzetten van domeinnamen te vereenvoudigen. Er treedt nu echter een onbedoelde bijwerking op, waardoor eventuele kwaadwillenden makkelijker een domeinnaam kunnen kapen. Dit is mogelijk omdat een overdracht van een domeinnaam na vijf werkdagen nu altijd zal worden uitgevoerd, behalve wanneer de eigenaar dit expliciet geweigerd heeft.

De huidige regels staan een overgave pas toe wanneer de eigenaar positief heeft gereageerd op de afstandsverklaring. Hierdoor zijn vooral domeinnamen met gedateerde e-mailadressen en onjuiste adresgegevens kwetsbaar geworden, omdat niet reageren dus een positief bericht is voor de aanvrager. De ICANN heeft voor eventuele geschillen met betrekking tot de domeinnaamoverdracht een onafhankelijke geschillencommissie gevormd. Hiermee probeert de organisatie eventueel misbruik van de nieuwe regels tegen te gaan.

Hostingbedrijven spelen in op de nieuwe situatie door bijvoorbeeld de domeinnamen te laten locken door de klanten. Dankzij dit hulpmiddel kan de domeinnaam niet meer worden overgeschreven naar een andere eigenaar.

IEF 14

Piraterij

Persbericht Commissie, 10 november:EU strengthens fight against piracy and counterfeiting beyond its borders. In an effort to halt the increase in piracy and counterfeiting the European Commission has today, (wednesday 10 november) adopted a strategy for the enforcement of intellectual property rights in third countries. The action plan focuses on vigorous and effective implementation and enforcement of existing IPR laws. It proposes to identify priority countries where enforcement actions should be concentrated. Stress will be put on technical cooperation and assistance to help third countries fight counterfeiting but the Commission will not hesitate to trigger all bilateral and multilateral sanction mechanisms against any country involved in systematic violations. The Commission will foster awareness raising of users and consumers in third countries and support the creation of public-private partnerships for enforcement.

IP/04/1352

 

Brussels, 10 November 2004

 

EU strengthens fight against piracy and counterfeiting beyond its borders

In an effort to halt the increase in piracy and counterfeiting the European Commission has today adopted a strategy for the enforcement of intellectual property rights in third countries. The action plan focuses on vigorous and effective implementation and enforcement of existing IPR laws. It proposes to identify priority countries where enforcement actions should be concentrated. Stress will be put on technical cooperation and assistance to help third countries fight counterfeiting but the Commission will not hesitate to trigger all bilateral and multilateral sanction mechanisms against any country involved in systematic violations. The Commission will foster awareness raising of users and consumers in third countries and support the creation of public-private partnerships for enforcement.

 

EU Trade Commissioner Pascal Lamy said: “Piracy and counterfeiting continue to grow every year and have become industries, increasingly run by criminal organisations. This is a serious problem for us but also for third countries whose companies are also suffering the consequences of violation of their own intellectual property rights. “ He added: “Some of these fakes, like pharmaceuticals and foodstuffs constitute an outright danger to the public, while others undermine the survival of EU’s most innovative sectors, confronted with the misappropriation of their creations. Adopting new legislation on intellectual property is one thing. But devising the right tools to enforce it is another. This is now our priority”

 

This Strategy sets the guidelines for the European Commission in the coming years towards a reduction of the level of IPR violations taking place beyond the EU borders, worldwide. It follows a logical sequence of recent initiatives taken by the EU to tackle this problem within the EU and at its border.

 

It is not the EU purpose to re-invent the wheel, but to show that we are committed to work more and better in an area where putting in place legislation is not sufficient. It is essential that third countries accompany the commitments agreed to in the WTO and in bilateral agreements by a genuine willingness to tackle the problem at their borders, in their courts, and in their streets. From our part, we must ensure that our right-holders are effectively protected against the misappropriation of their property and our citizens in general against the dangers of piracy and counterfeiting

 

The Strategy in detail:

 

Identifying priority countries: EU action will focus on the most problematic countries in terms of IPR violations. These countries will be identified according to a regular survey to be conducted by the Commission among all stakeholders.

Awareness raising: promote initiatives to raise public awareness about the impact of counterfeiting (loss of foreign investment and technology transfer, risks to health, link with organised crime, etc.) and make available to the public and to the authorities of third countries concerned a “Guidebook on Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights”.

Political dialogue, incentives and technical co-operation: ensuring that technical assistance provided to third countries focuses on IPR enforcement, especially in priority countries; exchanging ideas and information with other key providers of technical co-operation, like the World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO), the US or Japan, with the aim of avoiding duplication of efforts and sharing of best-practices.

4 IPR mechanisms in multilateral (including TRIPs), bi-regional and bilateral agreements: raising enforcement concerns in the framework of these agreements more systematically; consulting trading partners with the aim of launching an initiative in the WTO TRIPs Council, sounding the alert on the growing dimension of the problem, identifying the causes and proposing solutions and strengthening IPR enforcement clauses in bilateral agreements..

Dispute settlement - sanctions: recall the possibility that right-holders have to make use of the Trade Barriers Regulation or of bilateral agreements, in cases of evidence of violations of TRIPs; in addition to the WTO dispute settlement, recall the possibility to use dispute settlement mechanisms included in bilateral agreements in case of non-compliance with the required standards of IPR protection.

Creation of public-private partnerships: supporting/participating in local IP networks established in relevant third countries; using mechanisms already put in place by Commission services (IPR Help Desk and Innovation Relay Centres) to exchange information with right-holders and associations; build on the co-operation with companies and associations that are very active in the fight against piracy/counterfeiting.

See also IP/04/540, IP/04/1059

For more information:

http://europa.eu.int/comm/trade/issues/sectoral/intell_property/index_en.htm

http://europa.eu.int/comm/taxation_customs/customs/counterfeit_piracy/index_en.htm

 

hier

IEF 12

Domeinnamen

Zowel gedaagden (als bestuurders van de Vereniging LPF) als de fractieleden maken gebruik van de namen ‘LPF’ en/of ‘Lijst Pim Fortuyn’, precies dezelfde namen worden door eiseres gebruikt, voor zo goed als dezelfde activiteiten. Het gevaar voor verwarring bij het publiek is groot. Het feit dat er nu kennelijk twee groeperingen zijn die het gedachtegoed van Pim Fortuyn beweren uit te dragen, brengt niet met zich mee dat zij beide bevoegd zijn de namen ‘LPF’ en Lijst Pim Fortuyn’ te gebruiken. Eiseres heeft immers de oudste rechten. Leden die zich afscheiden, zoals gedaagden en de fractieleden, kunnen hun werkzaamheden onder een nieuwe naam voortzetten die evenwel niet verwarring bij het publiek mag geven. Of gedaagden en de fractieleden gebruik van de namen ‘LPF’ en Lijst Pim Fortuyn’ maken ‘in het economisch verkeer’, als vereist door artikel 13 Eenvormige Beneluxwet op de merken, kan in het midden blijven, nu eiseres de onrechtmatigheid van het gebruik van deze namen ook baseert op artikel 6:162 BW.

Volledige uitspraak

IEF 15309

Vijf weken tevoren berichten over voornemen inroepen ander octrooi

Vzr. Rechtbank Noord Holland 23 september 2015, IEF 15309 (Teva tegen Astrazeneca)
Contractenrecht. Octrooirecht. Beslag. Astrazeneca, houdster van EP1289506B1, stelt dat Teva met de verkoop van een astma-inhalator DuoResp Spiromax 160μg/4,5μg en 320μg/9μg inbreuk maakt en er is beslag gelegd. Tijdens een eerder kort geding hebben partijen afspraken gemaakt, waarin is opgenomen dat Astrazeneca vijf weken van te voren schriftelijk bericht indien ze een ander octrooi dan EP1085877 B1 wil inroepen tegen de DuoResp Spiromax 320μg/9μg. Het conservatoire bewijsbeslag wordt opgeheven en de voorzieningenrechter gebiedt Astrazeneca om vijf weken voorafgaand aan het inroepen in Nederland van een ander octrooi tegen de DuoResp Spiromax de procesadvocaat over dat voornemen te berichten op straffe van een dwangsom van €100.000 per keer.

4.3. De beperkte uitleg die Astrazeneca geeft aan de onder 2.1.5 weergegeven afspraken tussen partijen kan vooralsnog niet worden gevolgd. Door verlof te vragen voor bewijsbeslag op grond van de stelling dat DuoResp Spiromax 320 vermoedelijk inbreuk maakt op EP 506 met het doel bewijs van die inbreuk te verkrijgen wordt dat octrooi in strijd met de afspraken tegen Teva ingeroepen zonder voorafgaande waarschuwing. Astrazeneca handelt aldus in strijd met haar verplichtingen jegens Teva.

4.6. Dat geldt ook voor zover het bewijsbeslag het productieproces van DuoResp Spiromax 160 zou moeten betreffen omdat DuoResp Spiromax 160 en DuoResp Spiromax 320, naar Astrazeneca stelt, volgens hetzelfde productieproces worden gemaakt en de inbreuk in het verzoekschrift voornamelijk is onderbouwd aan de hand van de resultaten van onderzoek naar de eigenschappen van DuoResp Spiromax 320. De betwisting van Teva van de inbreuk zou dus evengoed betrekking hebben op DuoResp Spiromax 160.