4 Things to Know About Intellectual Property and COVID-19 Vaccines; U.S. Chamber of Commerce, December 9, 2021

U.S. Chamber of Commerce; 4 Things to Know About Intellectual Property and COVID-19 Vaccines

Intellectual property enabled the discovery of lifesaving COVID-19 vaccines. Here’s why calls to waive IP rights would undermine medical innovation and our ability to respond to the next pandemic.

"Key takeaways

• Some governments, including the United States, are considering a proposal to waive intellectual property laws for COVID-19 vaccines.
• But waiving intellectual property laws could jeopardize medical innovation, including the development of new or adapted vaccines to combat COVID-19 variants like Omicron.
• Waiving intellectual property rights for COVID vaccines could have ripple effects on innovators and investments across industries."

Open Access, Open Source, and the Battle to Defeat COVID-19; JD Supra, April 22, 2020

PerkinsCoie, JD Supra; Open Access, Open Source, and the Battle to Defeat COVID-19

"No legal development over the past decades has had a greater impact on the free flow of information and technology than the rise of the open access and open source movements. We recently looked at how AI, machine learning, blockchain, 3D printing, and other disruptive technologies are being employed in response to the coronavirus pandemic; we now turn to how two disruptive legal innovations, open access and open source, are being used to fight COVID-19. Although the pandemic is far from over, there are already promising signs that open access and open source solutions are allowing large groups of scientists, healthcare professionals, software developers, and innovators across many countries to mobilize quickly and effectively to combat and, hopefully, mitigate the impact of the coronavirus."

How a rigid fair-use standard would harm free speech and fundamentally undermine the Internet; Los Angeles Times, June 1, 2017

Art Neill, Los Angeles Times; How a rigid fair-use standard would harm free speech and fundamentally undermine the Internet

"In a recent Times op-ed article, Jonathan Taplin of the USC Annenberg Innovation Lab claimed that an “ambiguous“ fair use definition is emboldening users of new technologies to challenge copyright infringement allegations, including takedown notices. He proposes rewriting fair use to limit reuses of audio or video clips to 30 seconds or less, a standard he mysteriously claims is “widely accepted.”

In fact, this is not a widely accepted standard, and weakening fair use in this way will not address copyright infringement concerns on the Internet. It would hurt the music, film and TV industries as much as it would hurt individual creators...

Fair use is inextricably linked to our 1st Amendment right to free speech. We are careful with fair use because it’s the primary way consumers, creators and innovators share new ideas. It’s a good thing, and it is worth protecting."