Coordination and Strategic Planning of the Federal Effort Against Intellectual Property Infringement: Request of the Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator for Public Comments Regarding the Joint Strategic Plan, 8137-8139 [2010-3539]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 35 / Tuesday, February 23, 2010 / Notices that each application accurately describes all material terms of the transaction which is the subject of the exemption. Signed at Washington, DC, this 17th day of February, 2009. Ivan Strasfeld, Director of Exemption Determinations, Employee Benefits Security Administration, U.S. Department of Labor. [FR Doc. 2010–3444 Filed 2–22–10; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510–29–P OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET Coordination and Strategic Planning of the Federal Effort Against Intellectual Property Infringement: Request of the Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator for Public Comments Regarding the Joint Strategic Plan mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES AGENCY: Office of Management and Budget, Executive Office of the President. ACTION: Request for written submissions from the public. SUMMARY: The Federal Government is currently undertaking a landmark effort to develop an intellectual property enforcement strategy building on the immense knowledge and expertise of the agencies charged with enforcing intellectual property rights. By committing to common goals, the Government will more effectively and efficiently combat intellectual property infringement. In this request for comments, the Government, through the office of the Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator (‘‘IPEC’’), invites public input and participation in shaping an effective intellectual property enforcement strategy. This new effort is mandated by the Prioritizing Resources and Organization for Intellectual Property Act of 2008, Public Law 110–403 (Oct. 13, 2008) (‘‘the PRO IP Act’’ or ‘‘the Act’’) which created, within the Executive Office of the President, the position of the IPEC. The Act requires the IPEC to chair an interagency intellectual property enforcement advisory committee in order to develop an Administration strategy for enforcement against intellectual property infringement: The Joint Strategic Plan. The IPEC is currently working with the interagency advisory committee to develop this intellectual property enforcement strategy. This request for comments and for recommendations for an improved enforcement strategy is divided into two parts. In the first, the IPEC seeks written VerDate Nov<24>2008 16:25 Feb 22, 2010 Jkt 220001 submissions from the public regarding the costs to the U.S. economy resulting from intellectual property violations, and the threats to public health and safety created by infringement. In the second part, the IPEC requests detailed recommendations from the public regarding the objectives and content of the Joint Strategic Plan and other specific recommendations for improving the Government’s intellectual property enforcement efforts. Responses to this request for comments may be directed to either of these two parts, or both, and may include a response to one or more requests for information found in either part. DATES: Submissions must be received on or before Wednesday, March 24, 2010, at 5 p.m. ADDRESSES: All submissions should be sent electronically via intellectualproperty@omb.eop.gov. Publication and Confidential Information Submissions filed in response to this request will be made available to the public by posting them on the Internet. For this reason, please do not include in your comments information of a confidential nature, such as sensitive personal information or proprietary information. If you have confidential business information that would support your recommendation or that you believe would help the Government formulate an effective enforcement strategy, please let us know, and we may request that additional information. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas L. Stoll, Office of the Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator, at (202) 395–1808. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Through the PRO IP Act, Congress created the IPEC, to serve within the Executive Office of the President, and an interagency advisory committee specifically tasked with formulating and implementing a Joint Strategic Plan to improve the effectiveness of the U.S. Government’s efforts to protect the rights of intellectual property owners and to reduce the costs of and threats posed by intellectual property infringement, in the U.S. and in other countries. The IPEC seeks public input, in the form of written comments, on the formulation of a Joint Strategic Plan and on the U.S. Government’s intellectual property enforcement efforts. Part I The Joint Strategic Plan must contain an analysis of the threat posed by violations of intellectual property rights, including the costs to the U.S. economy PO 00000 Frm 00107 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 8137 resulting from such violations, and the threats to public health and safety created by infringement. Thus, the IPEC seeks written submissions from the public identifying the costs to the U.S. economy resulting from infringement of intellectual property rights, both direct and indirect, including any impact on the creation or maintenance of jobs. In addition, the IPEC seeks written submissions identifying threats to public health and safety posed by intellectual property infringement, in the U.S. and in other countries. Submissions directed to the economic costs of violations of intellectual property rights must clearly identify the methodology used in calculating the estimated costs and any critical assumptions relied upon, identify the source of the data on which the cost estimates are based, and provide a copy of or a citation to each such source. Submissions directed to threats to public health or safety must include a detailed description of the threat, identify the source of the information substantiating the existence of that threat and provide a copy of or a citation to each such source. The issues and challenges that pertain to adequate and appropriate enforcement of intellectual property are changing rapidly. Therefore, if desired, submissions may also identify and discuss emerging or future threats to the U.S. economy or to health and safety over the next five to ten years. Part II The IPEC requests written submissions from the public that provide specific recommendations for accomplishing one or more of the objectives of the Joint Strategic Plan, or other specific recommendations for significantly improving the U.S. Government’s enforcement efforts. Recommendations may include, but need not be limited to: Proposed legislative changes, regulations, executive orders, other executive action, guidelines, or changes in policies, practices or methods. Recommendations should include a detailed description of a preferred method for accomplishing the recommendation. If a submission includes multiple recommendations, the IPEC requests that the submission rank the recommendations in order of priority, where possible. The objectives of the Joint Strategic Plan include: • Reducing the supply of infringing goods, domestically and internationally; • Identifying weaknesses, duplication of efforts, waste, and other unjustified E:\FR\FM\23FEN1.SGM 23FEN1 8138 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 35 / Tuesday, February 23, 2010 / Notices impediments to effective enforcement actions; • Promoting information sharing between participating agencies to the extent permissible by law; • Disrupting and eliminating infringement networks in the U.S. and in other countries; • Strengthening the capacity of other countries to protect and enforce intellectual property rights; • Reducing the number of countries that fail to enforce intellectual property rights; • Assisting other countries to more effectively enforce intellectual property rights; • Protecting intellectual property rights in other countries by: • Working with other countries to reduce intellectual property crimes in other countries; • Improving information sharing between law enforcement agencies in the U.S. and in other countries; and • Establishing procedures for consulting with interested groups within other countries. • Establishing programs to enhance the enforcement efforts of foreign governments by providing training and technical assistance designed to: • Enhance the efficiencies and minimize the duplication of U.S. Government training and assistance efforts; • Prioritize deployment of U.S. Government resources to those countries in which programs can be carried out most effectively and will have the greatest impact on reducing the number of infringing products in the relevant U.S. market, protecting the intellectual property rights of U.S. rights holders, and protecting the interests of U.S. persons otherwise harmed by infringements in other countries. mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES Supplemental Comment Topics In addition to the foregoing, the IPEC requests information and/or recommendations on the following list of additional supplemental topics. The submission of responses to one or more of the following topics below is entirely optional. 1. Suggest methods to improve the adequacy, effectiveness and/or coordination of the various Federal departments, agencies and programs that are charged with enforcement of intellectual property. 2. Identify specific existing enforcement actions, methods, procedures or policies employed by the U.S. Government or governments of other countries that have been particularly effective at curtailing or preventing infringement (including, if VerDate Nov<24>2008 16:25 Feb 22, 2010 Jkt 220001 possible, specific examples illustrating the effectiveness of those methods). 3. Identify specific existing processes involving cooperation between stakeholders and the U.S. Government (or between stakeholders and other governments) that have been particularly effective at curtailing or preventing infringement. 4. Provide examples of existing successful agreements, in the U.S. or abroad, that have had a significant impact on intellectual property enforcement, including voluntary agreements among stakeholders or agreements between stakeholders and the relevant government. 5. Suggest methods for strengthening information sharing between stakeholders and U.S. Government agencies to improve intellectual property rights enforcement efforts, including methods the U.S. Government can use to obtain more accurate information concerning the identities, corporate structures and locations of those suspected of intellectual property infringement. 6. Suggest new methods for rights holders and importers to provide information to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) on distribution and supply chains. Such information could enable CBP to increase the effectiveness of its process for selecting (‘‘targeting’’) imports for inspection by creating a segment of trusted imports, which would allow CBP to better focus its targeting on high risk imports and imports for which advance information is lacking. 7. Describe existing technology that could or should be used by the U.S. Government or a particular agency or department to more easily identify infringing goods or other products. 8. Suggest approaches for increasing standardization among authentication tools and technologies applied by rights holders to products to enable identification of these goods as genuine through a physical examination of the goods or product. 9. Suggest how state and local law enforcement authorities could more effectively assist in intellectual property enforcement efforts, including whether coordination could be improved, if necessary, and whether they should be vested with additional authority to more actively participate in prosecutions involving intellectual property enforcement. 10. Describe the adequacy and effectiveness of the reporting by the various agencies responsible for enforcing intellectual property infringements, such as the reporting of investigations, seizures of infringing PO 00000 Frm 00108 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 goods or products, prosecutions, the results of prosecutions, including whether any further voluntary reporting of activities should be made, in keeping with other federal law. 11. Suggest methods to improve the adequacy, effectiveness and/or coordination of U.S. Government personnel stationed in other countries who are charged with enforcement of intellectual property, including but not limited to: a. Department of Justice IP Law Enforcement Coordinator (IPLEC) program; b. U.S. Patent and Trademark Office ´ Intellectual Property attaches program; c. Food and Drug Administration foreign country offices; d. Foreign Agricultural Service; e. Department of Commerce International Trade Administration Foreign Commercial Service officers; f. Department of Commerce International Trade Administration ´ compliance attaches; g. Department of Homeland Security/ Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Department of Homeland Security/ ´ Customs and Border Patrol attaches and other representatives; h. Department of State’s Foreign Service officers and post leadership; and i. Office of the U.S. Trade ´ Representative IP attache. 12. Suggest ways to improve the adequacy, effectiveness and/or coordination of the enforcement training and technical assistance provided by the U.S. Government, including (but not limited to): a. Identification of specific countries or geographical regions that could benefit from U.S. Government training and technical assistance and the program areas where training and assistance should focus; b. Suggestions for how to leverage resources or partnerships to broaden the impact of U.S. Government training and assistance; and c. Suggestions to enhance industry participation in relevant training programs. 13. Suggest specific measures to further secure the domestic and international supply chains to minimize the threat posed by infringing goods or products. 14. Suggest specific methods to limit or prevent use of the Internet to sell and/or otherwise distribute or disseminate infringing products (physical goods or digital content). 15. Provide information on the various types of entities that are involved, directly or indirectly, in the distribution or dissemination of infringing products and a brief E:\FR\FM\23FEN1.SGM 23FEN1 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 35 / Tuesday, February 23, 2010 / Notices description of their various roles and responsibilities. 16. Discuss the effectiveness of recent efforts by educational institutions to reduce or eliminate illegal downloading over their networks. Submissions should include recent specific examples. 17. Suggest specific strategies for reducing the threats to public health and safety caused by the use or consumption of infringing goods (for example, counterfeit drugs, medical devices, biologics, and ingested consumer products). 18. Discuss the possible application of World Trade Organization provisions, including, but not limited to, those on anti-dumping, subsidies, standards and safeguard measures in cases where failure to enforce intellectual property laws in other jurisdictions produces unfair cost or other advantages for the production or distribution of goods and services or otherwise disadvantages U.S. right holders. 19. Suggest specific strategies to significantly reduce the demand for infringing goods or products both in the U.S. and in other countries. 20. Provide specific suggestions on the need for public education and awareness programs for consumers, including a description of how these programs should be designed, estimates of their cost, whether they should focus on specific products that pose a threat to public health, such as counterfeit pharmaceuticals, or whether should they be general infringement awareness programs. The above list of topics for discussions and recommendations is not intended to limit the scope of the submissions. Rather, the public is encouraged to submit any detailed concrete recommendation for significantly improving intellectual property rights enforcement. SUMMARY: This notice sets forth the agenda of the forthcoming meeting of the National Museum and Library Services Board. This notice also describes the function of the Board. Notice of the meeting is required under the Sunshine in Government Act. TIME AND DATE: Tuesday, February 23, 2010 from 9:30 a.m. until 1 p.m. AGENDA: Nineteenth Meeting of the National Museum and Library Services Board. I. Welcome. II. Approval of Minutes. III. Financial Update. IV. Legislative Update. V. Board Program. VI. Board Updates. VII. Closing Remarks by the Director. VIII. Adjourn. (Open to the Public.) PLACE: The meetings will be held in the Room MO–9 of the Old Post Office, located at 1100 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20506. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elizabeth Lyons, Director of Special Events and Board Liaison, Institute of Museum and Library Services, 1800 M Street, NW., 9th Floor, Washington, DC, 20036. Telephone: (202) 653–4676 or Email: elyons@imls.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The National Museum and Library Services Board is established under the Museum and Library Services Act, 20 U.S.C. 9101 et seq. The Board advises the Director of the Institute on general policies with respect to the duties, powers, and authorities related to Museum and Library Services. If you need special accommodations due to a disability, please contact: Institute of Museum and Library Services, 1800 M Street, NW., 9th Fl., Washington, DC 20036. Telephone: (202) 653–4676; TDD (202) 653–4614 at least seven (7) days prior to the meeting date. Dated: February 18, 2010. Victoria A. Espinel, United States Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator. Dated: February 16, 2010. Kate Fernstrom, Chief of Staff. [FR Doc. 2010–3539 Filed 2–22–10; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7036–01–P [FR Doc. 2010–3306 Filed 2–22–10; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3110–01–P NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES NATIONAL FOUNDATION ON THE ARTS AND THE HUMANITIES Sunshine Act Meeting Institute of Museum and Library Services; Sunshine Act Meeting of the National Museum and Library Services Board AGENCY: Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS), NFAH. ACTION: Notice of meeting. VerDate Nov<24>2008 16:25 Feb 22, 2010 Jkt 220001 TIME AND DATE: 9:30 a.m., Tuesday, March 9, 2010. PLACE: NTSB Conference Center, 429 L’Enfant Plaza, SW., Washington, DC 20594. STATUS: The one item is open to the public. PO 00000 Frm 00109 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 8139 MATTER TO BE CONSIDERED: 7954A Safety Study—Introduction of Glass Cockpit Avionics into Light Aircraft. NEWS MEDIA CONTACT: Telephone: (202) 314–6100. The press and public may enter the NTSB Conference Center one hour prior to the meeting for set up and seating. Individuals requesting specific accommodations should contact Rochelle Hall at (202) 314–6305 by Friday, March 5, 2010. The public may view the meeting via a live or archived webcast by accessing a link under ‘‘News & Events’’ on the NTSB home page at http:// www.ntsb.gov. FOR MORE INFORMATION CONTACT: Candi Bing, (202) 314–6403. Friday, February 19, 2010. Candi R. Bing, Alternate Federal Register Liaison Officer. [FR Doc. 2010–3692 Filed 2–19–10; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 7533–01–P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [NRC–2010–0055] Biweekly Notice; Applications and Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses Involving No Significant Hazards Considerations I. Background Pursuant to section 189a.(2) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission or NRC) is publishing this regular biweekly notice. The Act requires the Commission publish notice of any amendments issued, or proposed to be issued and grants the Commission the authority to issue and make immediately effective any amendment to an operating license upon a determination by the Commission that such amendment involves no significant hazards consideration, notwithstanding the pendency before the Commission of a request for a hearing from any person. This biweekly notice includes all notices of amendments issued, or proposed to be issued from January 28, 2010, to February 10, 2010. The last biweekly notice was published on February 9, 2010 (75 FR 6408). Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses, Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a Hearing The Commission has made a proposed determination that the E:\FR\FM\23FEN1.SGM 23FEN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 35 (Tuesday, February 23, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8137-8139]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-3539]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET


Coordination and Strategic Planning of the Federal Effort Against 
Intellectual Property Infringement: Request of the Intellectual 
Property Enforcement Coordinator for Public Comments Regarding the 
Joint Strategic Plan

AGENCY: Office of Management and Budget, Executive Office of the 
President.

ACTION: Request for written submissions from the public.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Federal Government is currently undertaking a landmark 
effort to develop an intellectual property enforcement strategy 
building on the immense knowledge and expertise of the agencies charged 
with enforcing intellectual property rights. By committing to common 
goals, the Government will more effectively and efficiently combat 
intellectual property infringement. In this request for comments, the 
Government, through the office of the Intellectual Property Enforcement 
Coordinator (``IPEC''), invites public input and participation in 
shaping an effective intellectual property enforcement strategy.
    This new effort is mandated by the Prioritizing Resources and 
Organization for Intellectual Property Act of 2008, Public Law 110-403 
(Oct. 13, 2008) (``the PRO IP Act'' or ``the Act'') which created, 
within the Executive Office of the President, the position of the IPEC. 
The Act requires the IPEC to chair an interagency intellectual property 
enforcement advisory committee in order to develop an Administration 
strategy for enforcement against intellectual property infringement: 
The Joint Strategic Plan. The IPEC is currently working with the 
interagency advisory committee to develop this intellectual property 
enforcement strategy.
    This request for comments and for recommendations for an improved 
enforcement strategy is divided into two parts. In the first, the IPEC 
seeks written submissions from the public regarding the costs to the 
U.S. economy resulting from intellectual property violations, and the 
threats to public health and safety created by infringement. In the 
second part, the IPEC requests detailed recommendations from the public 
regarding the objectives and content of the Joint Strategic Plan and 
other specific recommendations for improving the Government's 
intellectual property enforcement efforts. Responses to this request 
for comments may be directed to either of these two parts, or both, and 
may include a response to one or more requests for information found in 
either part.

DATES: Submissions must be received on or before Wednesday, March 24, 
2010, at 5 p.m.

ADDRESSES: All submissions should be sent electronically via 
intellectualproperty@omb.eop.gov.

Publication and Confidential Information

    Submissions filed in response to this request will be made 
available to the public by posting them on the Internet. For this 
reason, please do not include in your comments information of a 
confidential nature, such as sensitive personal information or 
proprietary information. If you have confidential business information 
that would support your recommendation or that you believe would help 
the Government formulate an effective enforcement strategy, please let 
us know, and we may request that additional information.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas L. Stoll, Office of the 
Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator, at (202) 395-1808.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Through the PRO IP Act, Congress created the 
IPEC, to serve within the Executive Office of the President, and an 
interagency advisory committee specifically tasked with formulating and 
implementing a Joint Strategic Plan to improve the effectiveness of the 
U.S. Government's efforts to protect the rights of intellectual 
property owners and to reduce the costs of and threats posed by 
intellectual property infringement, in the U.S. and in other countries. 
The IPEC seeks public input, in the form of written comments, on the 
formulation of a Joint Strategic Plan and on the U.S. Government's 
intellectual property enforcement efforts.

Part I

    The Joint Strategic Plan must contain an analysis of the threat 
posed by violations of intellectual property rights, including the 
costs to the U.S. economy resulting from such violations, and the 
threats to public health and safety created by infringement. Thus, the 
IPEC seeks written submissions from the public identifying the costs to 
the U.S. economy resulting from infringement of intellectual property 
rights, both direct and indirect, including any impact on the creation 
or maintenance of jobs.
    In addition, the IPEC seeks written submissions identifying threats 
to public health and safety posed by intellectual property 
infringement, in the U.S. and in other countries.
    Submissions directed to the economic costs of violations of 
intellectual property rights must clearly identify the methodology used 
in calculating the estimated costs and any critical assumptions relied 
upon, identify the source of the data on which the cost estimates are 
based, and provide a copy of or a citation to each such source.
    Submissions directed to threats to public health or safety must 
include a detailed description of the threat, identify the source of 
the information substantiating the existence of that threat and provide 
a copy of or a citation to each such source.
    The issues and challenges that pertain to adequate and appropriate 
enforcement of intellectual property are changing rapidly. Therefore, 
if desired, submissions may also identify and discuss emerging or 
future threats to the U.S. economy or to health and safety over the 
next five to ten years.

Part II

    The IPEC requests written submissions from the public that provide 
specific recommendations for accomplishing one or more of the 
objectives of the Joint Strategic Plan, or other specific 
recommendations for significantly improving the U.S. Government's 
enforcement efforts. Recommendations may include, but need not be 
limited to: Proposed legislative changes, regulations, executive 
orders, other executive action, guidelines, or changes in policies, 
practices or methods.
    Recommendations should include a detailed description of a 
preferred method for accomplishing the recommendation. If a submission 
includes multiple recommendations, the IPEC requests that the 
submission rank the recommendations in order of priority, where 
possible.
    The objectives of the Joint Strategic Plan include:
     Reducing the supply of infringing goods, domestically and 
internationally;
     Identifying weaknesses, duplication of efforts, waste, and 
other unjustified

[[Page 8138]]

impediments to effective enforcement actions;
     Promoting information sharing between participating 
agencies to the extent permissible by law;
     Disrupting and eliminating infringement networks in the 
U.S. and in other countries;
     Strengthening the capacity of other countries to protect 
and enforce intellectual property rights;
     Reducing the number of countries that fail to enforce 
intellectual property rights;
     Assisting other countries to more effectively enforce 
intellectual property rights;
     Protecting intellectual property rights in other countries 
by:
     Working with other countries to reduce intellectual 
property crimes in other countries;
     Improving information sharing between law enforcement 
agencies in the U.S. and in other countries; and
     Establishing procedures for consulting with interested 
groups within other countries.
     Establishing programs to enhance the enforcement efforts 
of foreign governments by providing training and technical assistance 
designed to:
     Enhance the efficiencies and minimize the duplication of 
U.S. Government training and assistance efforts;
     Prioritize deployment of U.S. Government resources to 
those countries in which programs can be carried out most effectively 
and will have the greatest impact on reducing the number of infringing 
products in the relevant U.S. market, protecting the intellectual 
property rights of U.S. rights holders, and protecting the interests of 
U.S. persons otherwise harmed by infringements in other countries.

Supplemental Comment Topics

    In addition to the foregoing, the IPEC requests information and/or 
recommendations on the following list of additional supplemental 
topics. The submission of responses to one or more of the following 
topics below is entirely optional.
    1. Suggest methods to improve the adequacy, effectiveness and/or 
coordination of the various Federal departments, agencies and programs 
that are charged with enforcement of intellectual property.
    2. Identify specific existing enforcement actions, methods, 
procedures or policies employed by the U.S. Government or governments 
of other countries that have been particularly effective at curtailing 
or preventing infringement (including, if possible, specific examples 
illustrating the effectiveness of those methods).
    3. Identify specific existing processes involving cooperation 
between stakeholders and the U.S. Government (or between stakeholders 
and other governments) that have been particularly effective at 
curtailing or preventing infringement.
    4. Provide examples of existing successful agreements, in the U.S. 
or abroad, that have had a significant impact on intellectual property 
enforcement, including voluntary agreements among stakeholders or 
agreements between stakeholders and the relevant government.
    5. Suggest methods for strengthening information sharing between 
stakeholders and U.S. Government agencies to improve intellectual 
property rights enforcement efforts, including methods the U.S. 
Government can use to obtain more accurate information concerning the 
identities, corporate structures and locations of those suspected of 
intellectual property infringement.
    6. Suggest new methods for rights holders and importers to provide 
information to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) on distribution 
and supply chains. Such information could enable CBP to increase the 
effectiveness of its process for selecting (``targeting'') imports for 
inspection by creating a segment of trusted imports, which would allow 
CBP to better focus its targeting on high risk imports and imports for 
which advance information is lacking.
    7. Describe existing technology that could or should be used by the 
U.S. Government or a particular agency or department to more easily 
identify infringing goods or other products.
    8. Suggest approaches for increasing standardization among 
authentication tools and technologies applied by rights holders to 
products to enable identification of these goods as genuine through a 
physical examination of the goods or product.
    9. Suggest how state and local law enforcement authorities could 
more effectively assist in intellectual property enforcement efforts, 
including whether coordination could be improved, if necessary, and 
whether they should be vested with additional authority to more 
actively participate in prosecutions involving intellectual property 
enforcement.
    10. Describe the adequacy and effectiveness of the reporting by the 
various agencies responsible for enforcing intellectual property 
infringements, such as the reporting of investigations, seizures of 
infringing goods or products, prosecutions, the results of 
prosecutions, including whether any further voluntary reporting of 
activities should be made, in keeping with other federal law.
    11. Suggest methods to improve the adequacy, effectiveness and/or 
coordination of U.S. Government personnel stationed in other countries 
who are charged with enforcement of intellectual property, including 
but not limited to:
    a. Department of Justice IP Law Enforcement Coordinator (IPLEC) 
program;
    b. U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Intellectual Property 
attach[eacute]s program;
    c. Food and Drug Administration foreign country offices;
    d. Foreign Agricultural Service;
    e. Department of Commerce International Trade Administration 
Foreign Commercial Service officers;
    f. Department of Commerce International Trade Administration 
compliance attach[eacute]s;
    g. Department of Homeland Security/Immigration and Customs 
Enforcement and Department of Homeland Security/Customs and Border 
Patrol attach[eacute]s and other representatives;
    h. Department of State's Foreign Service officers and post 
leadership; and
    i. Office of the U.S. Trade Representative IP attach[eacute].
    12. Suggest ways to improve the adequacy, effectiveness and/or 
coordination of the enforcement training and technical assistance 
provided by the U.S. Government, including (but not limited to):
    a. Identification of specific countries or geographical regions 
that could benefit from U.S. Government training and technical 
assistance and the program areas where training and assistance should 
focus;
    b. Suggestions for how to leverage resources or partnerships to 
broaden the impact of U.S. Government training and assistance; and
    c. Suggestions to enhance industry participation in relevant 
training programs.
    13. Suggest specific measures to further secure the domestic and 
international supply chains to minimize the threat posed by infringing 
goods or products.
    14. Suggest specific methods to limit or prevent use of the 
Internet to sell and/or otherwise distribute or disseminate infringing 
products (physical goods or digital content).
    15. Provide information on the various types of entities that are 
involved, directly or indirectly, in the distribution or dissemination 
of infringing products and a brief

[[Page 8139]]

description of their various roles and responsibilities.
    16. Discuss the effectiveness of recent efforts by educational 
institutions to reduce or eliminate illegal downloading over their 
networks. Submissions should include recent specific examples.
    17. Suggest specific strategies for reducing the threats to public 
health and safety caused by the use or consumption of infringing goods 
(for example, counterfeit drugs, medical devices, biologics, and 
ingested consumer products).
    18. Discuss the possible application of World Trade Organization 
provisions, including, but not limited to, those on anti-dumping, 
subsidies, standards and safeguard measures in cases where failure to 
enforce intellectual property laws in other jurisdictions produces 
unfair cost or other advantages for the production or distribution of 
goods and services or otherwise disadvantages U.S. right holders.
    19. Suggest specific strategies to significantly reduce the demand 
for infringing goods or products both in the U.S. and in other 
countries.
    20. Provide specific suggestions on the need for public education 
and awareness programs for consumers, including a description of how 
these programs should be designed, estimates of their cost, whether 
they should focus on specific products that pose a threat to public 
health, such as counterfeit pharmaceuticals, or whether should they be 
general infringement awareness programs.
    The above list of topics for discussions and recommendations is not 
intended to limit the scope of the submissions. Rather, the public is 
encouraged to submit any detailed concrete recommendation for 
significantly improving intellectual property rights enforcement.

    Dated: February 18, 2010.
Victoria A. Espinel,
United States Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator.
[FR Doc. 2010-3539 Filed 2-22-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3110-01-P