The Knowledge Police

David Orozco
{"title":"The Knowledge Police","authors":"David Orozco","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2405316","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article provides an in depth analysis and critique of the Office of the Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator’s (IPEC’s) efforts to date. This is an important subject since the IPEC has, under the Pro-IP Act, a mandate to serve as an effective interagency coordinator and strategic advisor to the Legislature and the President in all areas related to intellectual property enforcement. Intellectual property enforcement has risen to the highest levels of policymaking, and national public discourse. As discussed in this article, the IPEC has failed to adequately coordinate the various federal agencies that have overlapping authority in this area. The main reasons for this failure are the IPEC’s lack of strategic planning, which prevent it from prioritizing resources and activities among agencies and the inability to integrate patents as a key enforcement issue. Another important issue is the confusion between the roles of the IPEC and the IPR Center, which seems to be in some cases a more effective coordination vehicle than the IPEC. Policymakers, legislators and oversight bodies may view these findings as a helpful aid to promote greater accountability and effective management within the IPEC.","PeriodicalId":81461,"journal":{"name":"Hofstra law review","volume":"43 1","pages":"4"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-03-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hofstra law review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2405316","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article provides an in depth analysis and critique of the Office of the Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator’s (IPEC’s) efforts to date. This is an important subject since the IPEC has, under the Pro-IP Act, a mandate to serve as an effective interagency coordinator and strategic advisor to the Legislature and the President in all areas related to intellectual property enforcement. Intellectual property enforcement has risen to the highest levels of policymaking, and national public discourse. As discussed in this article, the IPEC has failed to adequately coordinate the various federal agencies that have overlapping authority in this area. The main reasons for this failure are the IPEC’s lack of strategic planning, which prevent it from prioritizing resources and activities among agencies and the inability to integrate patents as a key enforcement issue. Another important issue is the confusion between the roles of the IPEC and the IPR Center, which seems to be in some cases a more effective coordination vehicle than the IPEC. Policymakers, legislators and oversight bodies may view these findings as a helpful aid to promote greater accountability and effective management within the IPEC.
知识警察
本文对知识产权执法协调员办公室(IPEC)迄今为止的工作进行了深入的分析和批评。这是一个重要的问题,因为根据《保护知识产权法》,国际知识产权委员会的任务是在与知识产权执法有关的所有领域担任有效的机构间协调员和立法机关和总统的战略顾问。知识产权执法已上升到政策制定和国家公共话语的最高水平。正如本文所讨论的,IPEC未能充分协调在这一领域具有重叠权力的各种联邦机构。这种失败的主要原因是IPEC缺乏战略规划,这使它无法在各机构之间优先安排资源和活动,也无法将专利作为一个关键的执法问题加以整合。另一个重要问题是国际知识产权委员会和知识产权中心的作用之间的混淆,知识产权中心在某些情况下似乎是一个比国际知识产权委员会更有效的协调工具。决策者、立法者和监督机构可能会将这些调查结果视为有助于在IPEC内促进更大的问责制和有效管理。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信