Click to edit Master title style,Click to edit Master text styles,Second level,Third level,Fourth level,Fifth level,*,An IP Chapter in an Australia-China FTA?中澳自由贸易协定?中的知识产权章节,An IP Chapter in an Australia-China FTA?中澳自由贸易协定?中的知识产权章节,金佰莉维思假设,副院长法务,澳大利亚知识产权研究院,Kimberlee Weatherall,Associate Director(Law),Intellectual Property Research Institute of Australia,Issues,问题,Should,intellectual property provisions be included in a bilateral free trade agreements(FTAs)between Australia and China?,What models,exist for an IP Chapter?,Are there,other,options for drafting such a chapter?,知识产权条款是否应该包括进澳中之间的双边自由贸易协定FTA？,知识产权章节以何种形式存在于自由贸易协定中？,起草此类章节有无其他方案？,Should intellectual property provisions be included in an Australia-China FTA?知识产权条款是否应包括进?澳中自由贸易协定?中？,Generally accepted view that IP provisions,are,legitimate part of comprehensive FTA,Important in ensuring a level playing field and facilitating trade,Absence of effective IP is a barrier to trade,一般认为知识产权章节是全面自由贸易协定中的合法组成局部。,在确保公平竞技场和为贸易提供便利方面非常重要,有效知识产权的缺失是一种贸易壁垒,Do Australia and China have congruent interests in this area?,澳大利亚和中国在这个领域是否,有共同的利益？,Common ground:,Emphasis on innovation economy,Neither presently has significant comparative advantage in this area,Differences:,Australias TRIPS-plus standards,Chinas need for flexibility and existing stakeholders,共同根底：,侧重创新经济,目前，双边在这个领域都没有明显的相对优势,差异,澳大利亚的TRIPS+标准,中国对制度灵活性和当前相关利益方的需要,Models for an IP Chapter,知识产权章节的模式,Australian precedents show two varieties:,cooperation agreements (eg Singapore,Thailand),Comprehensive agreements(United States-Australia FTA),澳大利亚的先例有两种变体：,合作协定如新加坡、泰国,全面协定澳美自由贸易协定,The Australian stakeholders concerns,澳大利亚,相关利益方,的顾虑,Poor coordination of government ministries and agencies and bureaucratic delays;,Local protectionism;,Problematic thresholds before investigations or criminal prosecutions will occur;,Non-transparent processes;,Over-reliance on administrative enforcement.,Difficulties obtaining rights,政府部门和机构的协调不够，官僚作风，办事拖拉,；,地方保护主义；,在调查或刑事起诉前必须越过的门槛限制令人质疑；,不透明的程序；,过度依赖行政执法；,获得专利权面临的困难,Another model,?其他模式？,Third approach that comprehends:,Some harmonisation of laws where appropriate,dynamic element:mechanisms for,ongoing,addressing of substantive legal differences and enforcement issues,US and EU negotiated mechanisms may provide a model,.,第三种途径包括：,相关适用法律的协调,动态条款：在现行根底上建立一个持续处理实质性法律偏差问题和执行问题的机制,与美国和欧盟谈判达成的机制可作为仿效的模板,