Comments on: Should Green Technology Be Subject To Compulsory Licensing?

By: of course

of course — Fri, 05 Mar 2010 00:57:05 +0000

of course, green technologies are as important as medicines, so they should be subject to compulsory licensing, and also there should be strict limits on the patentablity criteria of such technologies

By: Dan Ballard

Dan Ballard — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 01:35:48 +0000

My link expired. See http://bit.ly/82MsSE and scroll down to p. 376 for the text of Section 1120A.

By: uberVU - social comments

uberVU - social comments — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 01:06:57 +0000

Social comments and analytics for this post…

This post was mentioned on Twitter by TheIPCenter: Should Green Technology Be Subject To Compulsory Licensing? http://bit.ly/8foThO...

By: Dan Ballard

Dan Ballard — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 23:55:24 +0000

Congress has already addressed this issue.

The draft of this year’s Foreign Relations Authorization Act (HR 2410) was modified by the Larsen-Kirk amendment (at Section 1120A – entitled “Statement Of Policy Regarding Climate Change” which passed unanimously) to state that it is U.S. policy for the Executive Branch to “prevent any weakening of, and ensure robust compliance with and enforcement of, existing international legal requirements … for the protection of intellectual property rights” related to the so-called “green” technologies (and the provision then goes on to list many of them). See http://bit.ly/7TLgG6

The bill is currently in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee where no substantive changes are expected.

By: Tweets that mention Patent Baristas » Should Green Technology Be Subject To Compulsory Licensing? -- Topsy.com

Mon, 23 Nov 2009 22:52:01 +0000

[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by PriorSmart, China Cleantech. China Cleantech said: Should Green Technology Be Subject To Compulsory Licensing? – Patent Baristas (blog) http://bit.ly/6QHWa5 [...]