Intellectual Property Rights FASD Elliot Grizzard

1AC Region IX Clark/Grizzard

“We value our heritage of innovation and exploration – it is not only part of our history; it is
the key to our future. This future—a future of innovation, exploration and growth that
benefits the entire world—rests on a basic, inherent respect for intellectual property rights
and a system that protects them.”

This reality as established by Chris Israel1, the US Coordinator for IPR Enforcement, is the
reason that my partner and I stand Resolved: that the United States Federal Government
should significantly reform its policy towards Russia.

In order to provide clarity for the round, we offer Section 1: Definitions

Intellectual Property Rights or IPRs, are defined by the Congressional Research
Service2 as, “IPR are legal rights granted by governments to encourage innovation and creative output. They ensure that creators reap the benefits of their inventions or
works and may take the form of patents, trade secrets, copyrights, trademarks, or geographical

indications.”

Before we look at a specific way in which to affirm the resolution, we first need to
understand the current system in Section 2: Background
Since experiencing US trade pressure in the late 90s, Russia has more or less enforced IPRs
to a certain degree culminating in a 2006 bilateral enforcement agreement.

That’s
Point A) The Agreement
Robert Bird and Daniel Cahoy3, both associate professors, report:
“In November 2006, Russian and American trade representatives signed a “Side Letter” formally known as the U.S.-
Russia Bilateral Market Access Agreement on Intellectual Property Rights.30 This letter was negotiated in the
context of Russia’s continuing efforts to accede to the World Trade Organization (WTO).31 The letter establishes a binding blueprint for

Russia to improve intellectual property enforcement, strengthen various [and] laws, and fully implement the Agreement
on Trade-related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights [or] (TRIPS).32”

Unfortunately, while this initial act of goodwill was iconic of a new level of economic
cooperation, it has proved little more than that. And that’s
Point B) Deadlines Violated
The US Trade Representative4 in 2010 reports:
“In the IPR Bilateral Agreement, Russia committed to fight optical disc and Internet piracy,
enact legislation to protect against unfair commercial use of undisclosed test or other data
generated to obtain marketing approval for pharmaceutical products, deter piracy and counterfeiting through
enhanced criminal penalties, strengthen border enforcement, and conform its laws to
international IPR norms. Russia’s continued delays in fully implementing this Agreement are particularly
1
Chris Israel [U.S. Coordinator for International Intellectual Property Enforcement] “Examining U.S.
Government Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights” November 7, 2007 Testimony before the Senate
Committee on the Judiciary, Office of the U.S. Coordinator for International Intellectual Property Enforcement
<accessed May 30, 2010> http://www.stopfakes.gov/pdf%5CCoordinators_Testimony.pdf (EG)
2
Shayera Ilias [Analyst in International Trade and Finance] & Ian F. Fergusson [Specialist in International
Trade and Finance] “Intellectual Property Rights and International Trade” February 5, 2009 CONGRESSIONAL
RESEARCH SERVICE <accessed May 30, 2010> (EG)
3
Robert C. Bird [Assistant Professor, School of Business, University of Connecticut] & Daniel R. Cahoy
[Associate Professor of Business Law, Smeal College of Business, the Pennsylvania State University] “The
Emerging BRIC Economies: Lessons from Intellectual Property Negotiation and Enforcement”
NORTHWESTERN JOURNAL OF TECHNOLOGY AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY, Vol. 5, No. 3, pp. 400-
425(Summer 2007) <accessed June 17, 2010> (parenthesis added for clarification) (EG)
4
“2010 Special 301 Report: Russia” April 30, 2010 Office of the United States Trade Representative,
Ambassador Ron Kirk, United States Trade Representative <accessed July 22, 2010>
http://www.ustr.gov/webfm_send/1906 (EG)
Page 1 of 6
 Intellectual Property Rights FASD Elliot Grizzard
1AC Region IX Clark/Grizzard
troubling, since, with respect to several of the obligations, the IPR Bilateral Agreement established an
agreed-upon deadline of June 1, 2007.”

In light of the preceding information, my partner and I offer,

Section 3: The Plan
The Unites States Federal Government through an act of Congress and the President will
enact the following mandates
Mandate 1: Requirements: Russia must come into compliance with the ‘U.S.-Russia
Bilateral Market Access Agreement on Intellectual Property Rights’ as evaluated by the US
Trade Representative’s annual progress report.

Mandate 2: Enforcement Timeline: Deadline for compliance will be 3 years from an

affirmative ballot. If non-compliance persists Russia will be designated a Priority Foreign
Country, however, sanctions will be pursued independent of this designation. Specifically,
privileges under the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) and Most Favored Nation
(MFN) trade status will be revoked.

These mandates will be enforced by the necessary bodies of the US Federal Government5
and are open to clarification by the affirmative team.

Before we look at the specific benefits of the affirmative plan, we need to look at whether
the plan is feasible in…

Section 4: Solvency
Compelling Russia to enforce its end of the IPR agreement will improve the intellectual
property situation in Russia.
Solvency A) Pressure is Needed
Michael Mertens6 with the Miami International & Comparative Law Journal argues that:
“Among the world leaders in global music piracy, Russia has one of the largest piracy
problems.29 Its pirate market value currently stands at $332 million.30 In the past, Russia’s piracy problem was restrained to physical piracy of CDs, but as the country has
quickly entered the digital age, a new problem has emerged. 31 Russia has now developed a thriving online music sales business, and these websites are slowly gaining popularity in

the U.S. and elsewhere. These websites prove that despite constant pressure by the U.S. and the international community, Russia has consistently failed
to curb it[.]s piracy problem. Even pressure from the World Trade Organization32 to conform to its standards required for admission has failed. Copyright infringers are
finding novel ways such as the Internet to pirate their goods, while the Russian government still struggles to police and prosecute the more traditional types of piracy.33 In

order to fight Internet piracy and prevent it from becoming an even larger problem, the U.S.
must take a two-pronged approach. First U.S. copyright owners must set an example to Russia by suing the infringers, regardless of their chance of success. Second, the U.S.
must take drastic steps to pressure the Russian government to solve the piracy problem itself by impos[e]ing trade sanctions.”

5
Necessary bodies include: Department of State, U.S. Trade Representative, U.S. International Trade
Commission and the National Intellectual Property Law Enforcement Coordinating Council
6
Michael F. Mertens [J.D., University of Tulsa Law School; B.A., University of Iowa] “Thieves in Cyberspace:
Examining Music Piracy and Copyright Law Defciencies in Russia as It Enters the Digital Age” MIAMI
INTERNATIONAL & COMPARATIVE LAW REVIEW (2006) [14 U. Miami Int'l & Comp. L. Rev. 139, 2006] (EG)
[Brackets Added]
Page 2 of 6
 Intellectual Property Rights FASD Elliot Grizzard
1AC Region IX Clark/Grizzard

Solvency B) Piracy Reduced

Focusing on key aspects of the US-Russia agreement there are three main components
First: Improved laws. The agreement outlines required amendments to copyright law,
imposing criminal rather than civil penalties on pirates, and bringing laws into compliance
with its treaty obligations.

Second: Efficiency. Agencies are granted broader powers, laws are clarified to expedite
enforcement, & raid processes are improved. These steps are designed to make
enforcement more effective and efficient, which will significantly contribute to
implementation of…

Component Three: Enforcement. Most significantly, deterrent penalties are implemented,

internet & optical disc piracy is combated, and border enforcement is improved.

All these steps culminate in our Impact: Piracy Significantly Reduced

As the International Intellectual Property Alliance (IIPA)7 states:

“Compliance with the IPR Agreement will help to significantly reduce piracy, which harms all

creators – [the] U.S. and Russian alike – and should be appropriately reflected in Russia’s Special

301 status.”

However, in order to fully appreciate the outlined progress, an understanding of Intellectual

Property’s benefits is required.
Section 5: Justifications
Justification 1: Economics
What makes this topic so important is that its effects are not merely domestic.
Point A) Multinational Devastation
Professors of law, Ahdieh, Ragavan and Francis along with attorneys at law, Lee and
Noonan8 collaborated to interpret the long terms effects of Russian piracy on the US and
found that:
“The International Intellectual Property Alliance has estimated that Russian piracy of IP costs U.S. industries $1.7 billion in 2005 alone, and the

estimate is $6.5 billion over the last five years.”

7
IIPA, 2010
8
Robert B. Ahdieh [Professor of law and the director of the Center on Federalism and Intersystemic
Governance at Emory Law School] Zhu (Julie) Lee [Partner at the law firm Foley & Lardner LLP] Srividhya
Ragavan [Associate professor of law at University of Oklahoma College of Law] Kevin Noonan [Partner at the
law firm McDonnell, Boehnen, Hulbert & Berghoff LLP] & Clinton W. Francis [Professor of law at Northwestern
University School of Law] “The Existing Legal Infrastructure of BRICs: Where Have We Been and Where Are
We Going?” NORTHWESTERN JOURNAL OF TECHNOLOGY AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY, Vol. 5, No. 3,
(Summer 2007) <accessed May 30, 2010> (EG)
Page 3 of 6
 Intellectual Property Rights FASD Elliot Grizzard
1AC Region IX Clark/Grizzard
And the Congressional Research Service9 estimated losses of “more than $2.8 billion in losses in
2008” alone.

Apart from the US however, IPRs have implications for Russia as well. The Coalition for
Intellectual Property Rights10 found that:
“Yet, Russia’s rampant counterfeiting and trademark violations are estimated to cost billions of

dollars annually in lost revenues to businesses operating in Russia, and to Russia’s federal
and regional budgets it costs hundreds of millions of dollars each year in lost taxes, duties
and investment.”

While improvement in IPR enforcement doesn’t necessarily result in immediate eradication

of economic problems, enforcement is a long-term, ultimately positive investment.
Point B) Long Term Economic Growth
David Hindman11 JD, highlights the advantages in 2007 saying:
“Strong IP rights encourage economic development in several ways: (1) by promoting domestic
innovation through protecting nascent technology; (2) by preventing “brain drain” (the loss of human resources) through
ensuring that innovators are rewarded for their efforts; and (3) by fostering technology
transfers such as FDI.80”

As you can see, the economic implications of intellectual property are great, however,
Intellectual Property Rights reach far beyond the dollar into the realm of human life itself.
Justification 2: Global Health
Point A) Counterfeit Proliferation
A 2006 New York Times12 article explains Russia’s situation reporting:
“Russians, already adept at burning pirated DVD’s, rolling their own Marlboro cigarettes and
printing knockoff Nike T-shirts, have turned to the more delicate art of making fake

9
Jim Nichol, Coordinator [Specialist in Russian and Eurasian Affairs] William H. Cooper [Specialist in
International Trade and Finance] Carl Ek [Specialist in International Relations] Steven Woehrel [Specialist in
European Affairs] Amy F. Woolf [Specialist in Nuclear Weapons Policy] Steven A. Hildreth [Specialist in Missile
Defense] Vincent Morelli [Section Research Manager] “Russian Political, Economic, and Security Issues and
U.S. Interests” RL33407 (January 29, 2010) CONGRESSIONAL RESEARCH SERVICE <accessed July 23, 2010>
www.opencrs.com (EG)
10
Coalition for Intellectual Property Rights [The Coalition for Intellectual Property Rights (CIPR) is a private-
public partnership dedicated solely to the advancement of intellectual property protection and reform in the
Baltic States, Russia, Ukraine, and other countries of the former Soviet Union; CIPR is accredited with formal
Observer Status by the intergovernmental CIS Interstate Council on Industrial Property Protection. The U.S.-
Russia Business Council is an Associate Member of CIPR] “Intellectual Property Rights: A Key to Russia’s
Economic Revival” 2010 <accessed July 12, 2010> http://www.cipr.org/activities/articles/RBWipr.pdf (EG)
11
David Hindman [J.D., May 2006, University of Arizona, James E. Rogers College of Law; Masters in Business
Administration, May 2006, University of Arizona; B.S., Mechanical Engineering, 2002, Brigham Young
University.] “THE EFFECT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY REGIMES ON FOREIGN INVESTMENTS IN DEVELOPING
ECONOMIES” ARIZONA JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL & COMPARATIVE LAW Vol. 23, No. 2 (2006) pp. 467-492
<accessed June 17, 2010> (EG)
12
ANDREW E. KRAMER “Drug Piracy: A Wave of Counterfeit Medicines Washes Over Russia” September 5,
2006 NEW YORK TIMES <accessed June 16, 2010>
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/05/business/worldbusiness/05fake.html (EG)
Page 4 of 6
 Intellectual Property Rights FASD Elliot Grizzard
1AC Region IX Clark/Grizzard
prescription medicine. Counterfeit prescription drugs are proliferating in Russia, and in many other
countries, according to industry experts and the [FDA] Food and Drug Administration.”

Unfortunately as has been extensively documented, counterfeiting is not a victimless

crime. In fact the damage caused by one counterfeit product should be enough to warrant
change.
Point B) Counterfeiting Kills
The US-Russia Experts Forum13 in 2007 documents that:
“Furthermore, counterfeit medicines and alcoholic beverages, which often contain deadly

chemicals, and counterfeit automobile and airplane parts, which can malfunction, have
created an unacceptable health and safety crisis in Russia. Over 30,000 Russians die each
year from drinking bootleg vodka.9”
It is only by enforcing IPRs that Russia can most effectively reduce domestic exposure to
harmful counterfeit products.

Point C) IPRs Solve

The International Intellectual Property Institute14 argues that:

13
Vyacheslav Gavrilov [PhD in Juridical Sciences, Kazan State University; JSD 2006; Served as the dean of the
International Law Department and head of the International Law’s Chair of the Law Institute at the Far
Eastern National University (FENU) since 1995; Former assistant and associate professor of law at FENU;
Author of 60 scientific publications devoted to actual problems of international public and private law,
including two monographs and textbook “International Private Law: Course of Lectures”; Member in the
Executive Committee of the Russian Association of International Law and cofounder and attorney of the Board
of Lawyers “Etalon” in Vladivostok] & Kevin M. Reichelt [JD, University of Oregon School of Law; Bachelor of
Science in Biology and Neurophysiology, University of Oregon; LLM Public International Law, University
College London; Provides for IIPI (International Intellectual Property Institute) critical research on IP policy and
trading efforts in developing countries, organizes conferences addressing areas of concern regarding IP and
development, and engages in report writing and various projects at the Institute; Technology Entrepreneur
Fellow where he researched and advised on the marketability of patented technologies developed at the
University of Oregon and the US Department of Energy’s Pacific Northwest National Laboratory] “The Fight
against Counterfeiting and Piracy: IP Enforcement in the Russian Federation” Policy Brief (November 2007) US
– RUSSIA EXPERTS FORUM <accessed July 12, 2010> http://s251835929.onlinehome.us/reports/IIPI%20Russia
%20Policy%20Paper%20-%20Reichelt_Gavrilov%20ENG.pdf (EG)
14
Michele Forzley, [JD, MPH. Michele Forzley is a US-based lawyer and a representative to a US Commerce
Department Advisory Committee on Intellectual Property] “COUNTERFEIT GOODS AND THE PUBLIC'S HEALTH
AND SAFETY” July 2003 International Intellectual Property Institute [EG] <accessed March 1, 2009>
http://www.iipi.org/reports/Counterfeit_Goods.pdf
Page 5 of 6
 Intellectual Property Rights FASD Elliot Grizzard
1AC Region IX Clark/Grizzard
�Citizens in countries with well-developed drug and consumer product safety regulations, border enforcement mechanisms and intellectual
property laws have a lower risk of exposure to and harm from counterfeit goods.”

The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace15 concludes their report on Russian piracy
highlighting that:
“Senior representatives of the Russian business community believe that government and business alike cannot afford to wait

any longer to address the piracy problem, for Russia’s sake as much as that of the
international community.”

If Russia enforces the IPR Agreement, billions of dollars are gained not just by Russia, but
by U.S. businesses. Furthermore, thousands of lives are saved through decreased
counterfeiting. The economic & humanitarian consequences alike warrant an affirmative
ballot.

15
Matthew Ocheltree [Research assistant with the Trade, Equity and Development Project since February
2006, graduate of Harvard College and holds a Master of Studies in English literature from Oxford University]
& Sherman E. Katz [Adjunct professor of International Trade at the Johns Hopkins University School of
Advanced International Studies. Senior associate in the Trade, Equity and Development project at the
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, William M. Scholl Chair in International Business at The Center
for Strategic & International Studies in Washington D.C from February 2000 to February 2006, During 30
years of practicing international trade law, he represented U.S. and foreign corporations, governments, and
multilateral institutions in trade policy issues, including national trade regulation and litigation, World Trade
Organization negotiations, agreements and dispute settlement] “Intellectual Property Rights as a Key
Obstacle to Russia’s WTO Accession” Carnegie Paper No. 73, (October 2006) The CARNEGIE ENDOWMENT
FOR INTERNATIONAL PEACE [The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace is a private, nonprofit
organization dedicated to advancing cooperation between nations and promoting active international
engagement by the United States] <accessed July 10, 2010>
http://www.carnegieendowment.org/publications/index.cfm?fa=view&id=18781 (EG)
Page 6 of 6