[gemy]

Originally Posted by pstinard

Yaaaaay!!!! I think I found it. It would be the Intellectual Property Rights provisions of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). Here are links to the trade agreement itself (major headache to read, but might be worth the bother) and to an analysis of what it means:

NAFTA - Chapter 17

NAFTA's Intellectual Property Provisions | Dr Dobb's

I am pretty certain that the portion you are referring to is the Trade Secrets section, which would protect manufacturing techniques. I think that's pretty reasonable. I couldn't find anything about funders of research owning the research, but I think that's a reasonable intellectual property right. (For instance, when I worked at Iowa State University, if I patented something, the patent was owned by Iowa State University.) HOWEVER, in the case of medicines and therapies, they are still required to prove that medicines and therapies that are being marketed are safe and effective, and to provide information about side effects. Those are basic food and drug laws. Here is the analysis of the Trade Secrets section of NAFTA:

On December 17, 1992 the leaders of the United States, Mexico, and Canada signed the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), which contains the most comprehensive multilateral intellectual property agreement ever concluded. NAFTA was initiated on January 1, 1994 and is expected to create the largest free trade zone in the world with an anticipated gross national product totaling over $6 trillion.


NAFTA's intellectual property provisions create the highest legal standards for protection and enforcement of intellectual property ever negotiated. NAFTA provides companies wishing to do business in Canada, Mexico, and the U.S. (and future NAFTA member countries) with the means not only to protect their intellectual property, but also with better laws for doing business in general. Prior to NAFTA, U.S., Canada, and Mexican standards for the protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights differed and inhibited the willingness of companies to risk business ventures in foreign countries.

[..]

NAFTA's scope of intellectual property protection includes copyright, trademarks, trade secrets, and patents. In addition, NAFTA also protects semiconductors, geographical indications, satellite broadcast signals, industrial designs, and sound recordings. NAFTA's benefits are not limited to those industries whose primary goods rely on intellectual property rights protections, but rather for any company that seeks to protect its trademarks, logos, and/or trade secrets.

[..]
Trade Secrets


Trade secret law is designed to prevent the unauthorized use and disclosure of confidential information and to provide owners with a means to seek damages and injunctions. Both Canada and the U.S. have high standards for the protection of trade secrets. One problem for high-tech companies and other industries in trying to conduct international business, however, has been the lack of protection for confidential information in many foreign countries, including Mexico. In addition, various countries place limitations on how long proprietary information can remain confidential. This lack of protection can frustrate development projects and wreck strategic alliances when the disclosure of confidential information is critical to the transaction.



NAFTA is the first international agreement to afford protection for trade secrets. Due to NAFTA, Mexico has comprehensive national provisions for the protection of trade secrets. NAFTA requires each member country to provide legal means to prevent unauthorized disclosure of trade secrets that are in a tangible form. Under NAFTA, countries may not limit the duration of protection of trade secrets or discourage or impede the voluntary licensing of trade secrets. This feature, which is a first for any international agreement, should alleviate some of the reluctance to do business because of the lack of trade secrets protection.

Thanks Phil - I had already looked at NAFTA - surely research results should not qualify as IP - Intellectual Property? I also looked at NRC and saw the same language being used. And this does not to speak specifically to scientific research studies. Sighhh.