A highly flawed report that employs the mantle of global health to take aim at innovation and manufacturing was released today by a U.N. panel, representing a real missed opportunity to focus the world on collaborative and effective solutions that could make a substantial difference for real people facing access barriers. Read More
From cutting-edge advances in information technology, energy-efficiency and lifesaving medical devices and medicines, California’s manufacturers are global leaders in innovation.
At the forefront of innovation is research and development (R&D). The manufacturing industry in California spent $81.7 billion on R&D in 2012—ranking it first nationally. From years of R&D stems manufacturers’ trade secrets and proprietary intellectual property (IP), which is the lifeblood of the industry and the key to creating new consumer goods and generating more effective and efficient technologies. Therefore, there is nothing more critical to California’s manufacturers than the guarantee that their IP will be protected.
Unfortunately, recently introduced legislation would require manufacturers in the pharmaceutical, biopharmaceutical and biotech-related industries to disclose proprietary operational information and data. The bill’s sponsors likely had the best intentions in mind, as it is important that we work to reduce our nation’s health care costs and access. However, this legislation would have the opposite effect. Mandating manufacturers of medical devices and medicines to turn over sensitive data, such as the cost of R&D, would have no impact on controlling costs, but would severely hamper their ability to compete.
The legislation singles out one industry, but devalues the work of all innovators and would send a chilling effect across the manufacturing industry. R&D is risky and expensive, but the rewards are tremendous and should not be desensitized. In California alone, total output from manufacturing was $255.53 billion in 2014, employing 1,271,000 Californians. Manufacturers are the lead drivers of innovation, creating economic growth and jobs. Legislators in California must understand how critical strong IP protections are to protecting the industry and the state’s economy.
Protection of trade secrets and other forms of intellectual property are a fundamental necessity for manufacturers to succeed in today’s intensely competitive global marketplace. No industry should be forced to turn over to the government highly sensitive, proprietary information that tears down longstanding intellectual property protections and weakens their ability to innovate and grow their businesses.
Yet, there are proposals currently in the Minnesota state legislature that would require manufacturers in the pharmaceutical industry to disclose historically protected confidential information about their businesses, such as research and development costs, pricing strategies and production and marketing expenses. This information lies at the very heart of the operational strategy of any business in any industry and is a critical component for success, and the unintended consequences of transparency legislation would put Minnesota manufacturers at a serious disadvantage, undercutting their ability to innovate and compete. Read More
Recent proposals that would require manufacturers in the pharmaceutical industry to disclose sensitive and proprietary business information, such as pricing on specific products, marketing costs, planned research investments, anticipated profits and manufacturing production costs, would set a dangerous precedent that will deliver chilling impacts to our global competitiveness and further dampen prospects for more robust economic growth.
President Obama introduced the idea in his 2017 budget proposal, and the issue is occasionally amplified in the Halls of Congress and on the campaign trail.
Such a move would certainly be sweeping and dramatic, directly impacting the innovators who are leading research and development—pharmaceutical, bio-pharmaceutical, bio-tech and related industries. Even thought these proposals—some at the state and others at the federal level—target one sector, manufacturers across all sectors don’t like the idea of hampering innovation. Read More
NAM Vice President of International Economic Affairs Linda Dempsey and NAM Vice President and Deputy General Counsel Patrick Forrest co-authored this blog post.
Manufacturers welcome the U.S. government’s strong rejection of Canada’s arguments in a pending investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS). Like the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM), the U.S. government has made clear that Canada cannot self-define core intellectual property (IP) obligations in the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). In a filing to the NAFTA tribunal hearing the case, the United States also fully affirmed that patents are investments that are protected from expropriation, meaning that the governments cannot seize or invalidate them without fair compensation. IP rights are of high importance to manufacturers in the United States and the good-paying jobs manufacturing provides throughout the country. Read More
Today, NAM President and CEO Jay Timmons continued the 2016 State of Manufacturing Tour with stops in Philadelphia, Pa.
Manufacturing plays a critical role in Pennsylvania, employing more than 569,000 workers and contributing nearly $80 billion to the state’s economy. Pennsylvania’s economy, like many manufacturing-intensive states, also relies heavily on foreign markets, exporting more than $36 billion in manufactured goods in 2014. Speaking at GlaxoSmithKline, Timmons shared his vision for how manufacturing in America can reach its full potential and highlighted how government policies can help or hinder those efforts. Read More
Technology and the deployment of it across the shopfloors and throughout the products of the manufacturing industry has raised cybersecurity to a C-suite priority. Manufacturers know that strong cybersecurity means strong economic security. The NAM has therefore joined more than 45 other industry groups calling for passage of S. 754, the Cybersecurity Information Security Act (CISA) of 2015. Read More
The NAM has been an advocate for policy solutions that will assist manufacturers in pursuing trade secret thieves and therefore strongly supports legislation introduced late yesterday in both the House and Senate that will increase the efficiency in how our industry defends and protects its intellectual property (IP).
As Members of the 114th Congress descend on Washington for orientation, and the 113th Congress convenes for the upcoming lame duck session, manufacturers stand ready to work with our leaders to advance policies that will enable us to continue to grow and create jobs. Manufacturers believe that now is the time to set aside the differences that have resulted in gridlock, and focus on the pro-growth policies that brought voters to the polls. Simply put, it is time to govern and grow. Read More
Manufacturers know that intellectual property is the basis of America’s innovative economy, and protecting intellectual property (IP) rights assures manufacturers that their inventions will be secure as they build their companies and create jobs. Manufacturers face many challenges in protecting their IP, and they need allies in the federal government to help halt illicit imports that infringe on their rights.
Several Congressional leaders recently called on the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to more effectively protect U.S. patent holders from imports that infringe their patents, without disrupting legitimate trade. Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus and Ranking Member Orrin Hatch sent a recent letter to the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to inquire about CBP’s resources and processes for enforcing exclusion orders. Rep. Howard Coble, Chairman of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property & the Internet, also sent a letter expressing his concerns about CBP’s process for enforcing exclusion orders. Rep. Coble called for DHS to conduct an independent review of CBP’s enforcement procedures and make recommendations that would improve fairness, transparency and efficacy.
Under Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) is charged with investigating allegations of unfair import practices that involve patent infringement. If the ITC finds that a violation has occurred, it directs CBP to deny entry of the infringing product into the United States. Patent holders that prevail in these costly, technical and often contentious cases should expect robust enforcement from CBP. A survey conducted in FY2010 found that more than half of respondents believed infringing goods had been imported after ITC issued an exclusion order.
The NAM will continue working to ensure lawmakers pursue a manufacturing growth agenda that recognizes IP as the basis of an innovation economy and supports trade.