Thread by @hhesterm

A thread on trade agreements - namely the CPTPP - and why the devil is in the detail (thread)

1) You will have heard a lot of rather general statements on the CPTPP. "These are roughly the economic gains - altogether I favor membership, but more because of its strategic value than immediate economic benefits" (yes, I'm guilty of that, too. /2

2) Behind these headlines, there's a whole number of really complex questions that make a significant difference in reality - and that also illustrate why more eyes on an FTA is better, to spot any issues. /3

3) I will only give you one issue, that the @HLIntAgreements has pointed out, but that can make quite a bit of a difference. /4

4) CPTPP legally is an agreement that is largely based on the incorporation of TPP, with some exceptions. /5 dfat.gov.au/sites/default/…

5) TPP is a free trade agreement that - like all modern free trade agreements - has provisions on intellectual property, requiring parties to align their laws according to the content of the agreement. /6

6) With regard to patents, TPP requires parties to provide for a grace period. What is a grace period?

7) Patents are granted on inventions that are new, useful and non-obvious. The question here is: what is new. If it has been published before, for example, it isn't new. You cannot patent it. (I simplify a bit)

8) In some countries, however, there's a grace period: if the inventor herself published the invention, she can still get a patent if she files within 12 months.

9) Now the TPP makes this mandatory

10) Quitte a few of the TPP provisions on intellectual property are amongst those provisions not applicable in the context of the CPTPP (referred to as "suspended"). But Art. 18.38 on the grace period is not suspended (not listed here).

11) Now the UK is also a party to the European Patent Convention. That's a system with 38 member states (no an EU system) harmonizing and simplifying filing for patents within Europe. epo.org/about-us/found…

12) The EPC does not have a grace period. In fact, its rules require a different approach to novelty.

13) Now this difference has already led to discussions between patent offices in the Tegernsee process. Their conclusion: harmonization of grace periods is difficult.

14) As the two provisions in the CPTPP and the EPC are incompatible, at first sight this puts a stark choice to the UK: leave the EPC to join the CPTPP? The economic cost would be significant (and IMHO might well turn the net benefit of the CPTPP negative).

15) However, that's not necessarily the case. The UK can set a red line and make clear that it cannot join the CPTPP if that means leaving the EPC. I am rather confident that this issue can be resolved and the UK exempted from that provision.

16) My point here is: these "technical" "little" things can have an enormous difference. We need to make sure that a) they're identified properly and b) evaluated properly and c) taken account of in UK positions.

17) Here's the HoL Committee's letter on the topic committees.parliament.uk/publications/6…