Given that Chinese counterfeiting has benefits as well as costs, and considering China's historical resistance to Western pressure, trying to push China to change its approach to intellectual property law is not worth the political and diplomatic capital the United States is spending on it.

The Supreme Court ruled on June 13, 2013, that Myriad Genetics could not patent human genes they isolated from the bloodstream, because the company "did not create anything," but that synthetic forms of the genes may be eligible for patents.

A new virus discovered in Saudi Arabia is raising deep concerns over its lethality. An intellectual property dispute could be impeding efforts to contain it, writes CFR's Laurie Garrett.

The Commission on the Theft of American Intellectual Property (The IP Commission), with members from the "private sector and public service in national security and foreign affairs, academe, and politics," released its report on May 22, 2013. The Commission addresses theft by cyber means and pinpoints China as a main concern.

Representatives from U.S. Departments of Commerce, Defense, Homeland Security, Justice, State, Treasury, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, and the Office of the United States Trade Representative collaborated to create this strategy, addressing threats to the intellectual property and innovation of the U.S. economy.

The U.S. patent system has generated growing debate over whether it helps foster innovation or stifles it through unnecessary protections, as this Backgrounder explains.

Sebatian Mallaby argues that excessive patent protections in the tech industry threaten innovation.

The Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property was signed on March 20, 1883 and was revised or amended on various occasions, the last of which was on September 28, 1979.

The Protocol Relating to the Madrid Agreement Concerning the International Registration of Marks was adopted on June 27, 1989; it was amended in October 2006 and November 2007. It concerns the international registration of trademarks and is administered by the World Intellectual Property Organization.

The Madrid Agreement Concerning the International Registration of Marks was signed in 1891, revised at Brussels in 1900, Washington in 1911, the Hague in 1925, London in 1934, Nice in 1957, Stockholm in 1967, and amended in 1979. It concerns the international registration of trademarks and is administered by the World Intellectual Property Organization.

Two controversial U.S. anti-piracy bills have spotlighted the growing challenge of how to protect intellectual copyrights, particularly across international borders, without compromising Internet freedom.

Senator Ron Wyden and Representative Darrell Issa proposed on January 18, 2012, the Online Protection and Enforcement of Digital Trade Act (OPEN) as an alternative for SOPA and PIPA, two Congressional bills related to intellectural property online that opponents said compromised free speech, innovation, access to information online, and the infrastructure of the Internet.

U.S. Representative Lamar Smith introduced the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) on October 26, 2011; the Senate proposed a related bill, PROTECT IP Act (PIPA). SOPA's full title states that its aim is "to promote prosperity, creativity, entrepreneurship, and innovation by combating the theft of U.S. property, and for other purposes." Opponents of the bills state that they will restrict free speech, innovation, and access to online information and proposed Online Protection and Enforcement of Digital Trade Act (OPEN Act).

Matthew Slaughter explains how stronger Chinese protection of intellectual property rights could create American jobs.

Senator Patrick Leahy introduced PROTECT IP Act (Preventing Real Online Threats to Economic Creativity and Theft of Intellectual Property Act (PIPA)) on May 12, 2011; the House introduced a similar bill, SOPA, on October 26, 2011. PIPA's goal is to prevent access to "rogue websites dedicated to the sale of infringing or counterfeit goods." Opponents of the bills state that they will restrict free speech, innovation, integrity of online infrastructure, and access to online information and proposed Online Protection and Enforcement of Digital Trade Act (OPEN Act).

The Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) was signed by Australia, Canada, Japan, Morocco, New Zealand, Singapore, South Korea and the United States in October 2011, and in January 2012 by the EU and 22 EU member states. The treaty will come into force after ratification by six countries. The treaty regards standards for enforcement of intellectual property rights.

Christine A. Varney, assistant attorney general for antitrust at the U.S. Department of Justice, speaks about the need for regulation of price fixing and clear punishments for antitrust violations.

This module features teaching notes for Reforming U.S. Patent Policy: Getting the Incentives Right by author Keith E. Maskus, along with other resources to supplement the text. This Council Special Report acknowledges the importance of patent protection for innovation but also warns against blind adherence to the mantra that more protection will necessarily produce more innovation.