International Law

US-China S&ED - Confusing Talk About IP and Greentech

By Stan

I approach this topic with some trepidation as I am neither an expert in environmental matters nor government procurement rules. That said, Charlie had an interesting post today at CEL regarding the ongoing bilateral talks in D.C.

There has been some speculation as to the meaning of some of Obama’s comments to the delegation, including this one:

And the best way to foster the innovation that can increase our security and prosperity is to keep our markets open to new ideas, new exchanges, and new sources of energy.

What’s he talking about? Carbon tariffs, Chinese protectionism, tech transfer, ???

Technology transfer is certainly an important issue, but while in a very broad sense ?weakening intellectual-property protections? in the context of such transfers could be seen as a failure ?to keep our markets open,? the President?s words don?t admit to this reading easily.  It would have been much clearer to say ?and the best way to foster innovation is to protect the legal frameworks which have proven to be the most effective drivers of new solutions?, etc.

I agree. Many other ways to talk about IP protection. Sure, “new exchanges” could include tech transfer, but this is a blanket statement, not a specific pronouncement about problems encountered by IP owners.

(...)
Read the rest of US-China S&ED - Confusing Talk About IP and Greentech

© Stan for China Hearsay, 2009. | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us

Full post as published by China Hearsay on July 28, 2009 (boomark / email).