1-Mundo-ASIPI-7-Eng

Page 1


Number 7 / July 2025

English Version

© This edition of MUNDO ASIPI by the Inter-American Association of Intellectual Property (ASIPI). www.asipi.org

All rights reserved by ASIPI

Luis Henriquez President ASIPI

Juli Gutiérrez Zanelli Director

Clara Sporleder Editor

Marcela Montañés Contributor

Saúl Alvarez Lara Designer

On cover

The maquilishuat, whose name comes from a nahuat word that means: five leaves, is the national tree of El Salvador. It is an imposing and beautiful tree from the Bignonaceae family, native to Central America, which can reach up to ten meters in height. When it blooms, the calyx of its bell-shaped flowers with pink or magenta petals dominates the landscape. The maquilishuat was the protagonist in the ASIPI seminar: Intellectual Property and innovation: Alliance for Regional Development, which was held in San Salvador between June 8 and 10, 2025. With this meeting, identified with the image of the maquilishuat, ASIPI reaffirms its commitment to the progress of an integrated and innovative Intellectual Property in Latin America.

Disclaimer

All content in this magazine is provided for informational purposes only. The editorial team strives to ensure it is as accurate, faithful, and up-to-date as possible. However, ASIPI is not responsible for omissions or typographical errors and reserves the right to update, modify, or remove the content and access to the magazine at any time. Responsibility for the opinions expressed in signed articles, studies, and other contributions lies solely with their authors.

ASIPI does not guarantee that the technical and operational functions of the digital magazine will be uninterrupted, error-free, or free from viruses or other harmful components. Under no circumstances will ASIPI be liable for any damage or harm resulting from the use or consultation of the magazine. The magazine may include links to external websites whose content and design are beyond ASIPI’s control. ASIPI is not responsible for the content, timeliness, accuracy, or quality of such external sites, nor should their inclusion be understood as an endorsement or promotion of third-party products and/or services.

editorial

TALENT, INNOVATION, AND A SHARED FUTURE

In a world of constant transformation, innovation stands as a driving force for development. But for innovation to truly flourish, it needs an ecosystem that supports and nurtures it. At ASIPI, we firmly believe that such an ecosystem is built on three fundamental pillars: the talent of our region, collaboration among strategic stakeholders, and the strengthening of public policies that promote a robust, flexible, and forward-looking intellectual property framework.

Now more than ever, we must build bridges between sectors, countries, and generations. We need policies that foster creativity and protect effort. We need to continue training, connecting, and transforming.

This edition of MUNDO ASIPI reflects the spirit that guides us: that of an association committed to placing intellectual property at the service of our region’s progress. Because when we speak of innovation, we are also speaking of education, inclusion, opportunity creation, and institutional development.

I invite you to explore these pages with an open mind and strategic vision — as one would explore a map full of possibilities. Because when we bring together our legal, technical, and human capacities, intellectual property not only protects what we create — it also empowers what is yet to come.

Thank you for being an active part of this community that is building the future.

FOREFRONT

ASIPI’S PARTICIPATION AS A USER ASSOCIATION BEFORE THE EUIPO: WHY AND FOR WHAT PURPOSE?

I. Functions of the EUIPO

The European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) is the EU agency responsible for managing European Union trademarks and registered designs. Recently, it has also been granted authority to manage geographical indications for craft and industrial products.

Another noteworthy aspect of its work is carried out through the European Observatory on Infringements of Intellectual Property Rights, whose main objective is to raise public awareness and provide data on IP protection and enforcement.

In addition, the EUIPO leads European and international cooperation efforts in the field of Intellectual Property. It plays a key facilitating role in the European Union Intellectual Property Network (EUIPN) and participates in an increasing number of EU-funded projects, managed through contribution agreements with the European Commission.

II. USER ASSOCIATIONS

In line with its cooperative and continuous improvement approach, the EUIPO maintains a long-standing, close, and regular relationship with intellectual property (IP) user associations. From official forums held twice a year (Liaison Meetings and User Group Meetings) to customer satisfaction surveys and panels, the EUIPO informs user associations about the latest developments in IP and collects their feedback to better plan and implement key components of its activities, such as the European Cooperation Projects (ECPs), Common Practices, and the EUIPO Strategic Plan (SP2030).

Primer plano

Users also participate in discussions on emerging technologies and the integration of artificial intelligence (AI) in IP examination processes, as well as on the user experience of EUIPO’s flagship tools such as TMview, DesignView, and GIview.

The EUIPO is committed to fostering strong relationships with user associations. It collaborates with prestigious international organizations based on the belief that alliances enable the sharing of knowledge, best practices, and expertise, ultimately improving the IP landscape.

III. ASIPI as a user association before the EUIPO

Building on the success of the European Cooperation Projects under SP2025, the EUIPO is expanding its dialogue with user associations through its Virtual Communities (VCs). As outlined in the Strategic Plan 2030, these VCs will serve as dedicated platforms for experts to share information, exchange best practices, and promote innovation. Through these virtual communities, the EUIPO seeks to facilitate ongoing dialogue, encourage collaboration, and ensure that the IP community remains up to date on the latest developments and trends.

User Group meetings offer a valuable platform for associations to exchange views, discuss procedures, practices, and tools, and address shared challenges.

Several types of meetings are held: Liaison Meetings, bilateral meetings, annual conferences of user associations, and the Stakeholder Quality Assurance Panels (SQAP) audits. The EUIPO also conducts customer panels and satisfaction surveys.

Currently, ASIPI actively participates in Quality Audits and contributes to various initiatives, such as the CP17 on practices regarding slogan protection and the working group on the protection of Geographical Indications for Craft and Industrial Products.

While the majority of ASIPI’s members focus their professional activity and interests on the Americas, there is a growing openness toward Europe. Understanding EU practices is increasingly relevant for providing better legal advice and fostering professional development.

From an institutional perspective, participating in these groups enhances ASIPI’s visibility within the international IP context and strengthens the reputation of our community.

The EUIPO’s commitment to hybrid meetings will further facilitate ASIPI members’ participation in various forums and projects, benefiting both parties.

IV. Lessons for ASIPI

The outcomes of EUIPO’s working group participation are highly positive and serve as inspiration to consider whether a similar dynamic could be established in Latin America—one that would enable the exchange of views between IP Offices and various associations or user groups. This would not be limited to national IP associations but could also include professional organizations, law enforcement bodies, and others that could add value by enhancing knowledge and driving legislative reforms aimed at greater harmonization, ultimately making the region more attractive for IP protection.

Such a model could undoubtedly stimulate foreign investment and support regional development.

Let us remember that SDG Goal 17 promotes partnerships as a means to generate synergies and optimize results. It is therefore not far-fetched to apply this approach to the field of Intellectual Property.

ASIPI could lead this initiative by fostering regular meetings between IP Offices and user groups in each country and potentially establishing a regional virtual network of all participants.

Who knows—over time, this could lead to the creation of a supranational body in the region, with potential support from WIPO cooperation programs.

Thinking big is essential for progress, and ASIPI is undoubtedly prepared to lead this project, which promises significant benefits and results.

DIALOGueS

For this edition, we invited representatives from intellectual property offices and academic leaders from the region to share their insights. From their respective areas of action, each plays a key role in the defense, promotion, and education of intellectual property. In these pages, we explore the main challenges they face, the initiatives they are driving, and their perspectives on relevant intellectual property issues.

Deputy Director–General IP Sector and Innovation Ecosystems, WIPO

In this interview, we speak with Marco M. Aleman, Assistant Director-General of the IP and Innovation Ecosystems Sector at WIPO, who leads support for researchers, SMEs, and national innovation strategies. He shares his perspective on the main global challenges facing the IP system, international cooperation, and WIPO’s role in strengthening innovation ecosystems in Latin America and around the world.

1. What have been the main findings of the studies conducted by your sector over the past year regarding innovation and the impact of IP on economic growth? Is there any particular study you would like to highlight?

The 2024 World IP Report titled “Shaping Innovation Policies for Development” emphasizes the importance of adapting innovation policies to the specific context of each ecosystem. To this end, an innovative methodology was developed to map and characterize the diverse innovation capacities of countries, analyzing the interaction between scientific, technological, and industrial knowledge in innovation ecosystems, and evaluating their complexity as an indicator of value.

A key revelation from the study is that the most advanced innovation ecosystems are not necessarily those with the most capabilities, but those that specialize in complex capabilities and complement them with related knowledge that enhances their development.

The report also notes that among all innovation capacities, technological ones—especially those related to electronics, audiovisuals, and semiconductors—are the most complex. These capacities are not only rare but also tend to thrive almost exclusively in highly diversified ecosystems.

Moreover, the report emphasizes that there is no single path to acquiring complex capabilities. Each ecosystem can find different ways to recombine its existing knowledge and acquire new knowledge to develop capacities. This is illustrated through case studies in agricultural technologies, motorcycles, and video games.

In all these scenarios, IP instruments, along with other innovation policies, play a crucial role in improving the flow of knowledge among the actors in the innovation ecosystem, contributing to its development and generating benefits for the population.

2. In your experience, what are the main challenges faced by member states in developing their IP and innovation ecosystems?

Many developing innovation ecosystems face numerous challenges. I would like to highlight a few that I believe are particularly relevant to our region.

First, access to data. Innovation policies work best when they consider the characteristics of the place where they are implemented. The lack of reliable data that at least attempts to describe the innovative activities taking place in a country reduces the transformative power of policies, as they are not supported by empirical evidence.

Second, the fragility of connections between ecosystem actors. Developing ecosystems often suffer from a lack of links between academia, industry, and government, either due to institutional failures, lack of infrastructure, or funding. For example, it is common to find countries where scientific and product innovation activity is high but not accompanied by internationally patentable technological advances. This merely indicates a failure in the ecosystem, as it cannot generate technological innovation capabilities based on the efforts made by other agents.

Third, human capital. One of the main reasons for income disparities between countries, and even between regions within a country, is the capacity for know-how. This knowledge is very difficult to transfer and develop, and it tends to concentrate in certain places that allow it to flourish. Countries face the challenge of training individuals specialized in high-impact areas and creating conditions so that, once this know-how is developed, it remains in the ecosystem and generates a critical mass that attracts related talent.

3. What specific strategies does WIPO use to strengthen IP and innovation ecosystems in member states, and how are these strategies adapted to the particular needs of each country?

WIPO employs various specific strategies to strengthen IP and innovation ecosystems in member states, adapting them to the particular needs of each country. These strategies include knowledge and technology transfer, covering the entire technology lifecycle—from conception to market dissemination and commercialization. The organization also has an IP for Business Division, which focuses on helping companies effectively use IP in their business strategies. The Inventor Assistance Program is another key initiative that provides direct support to individual inventors and small businesses. Additionally, WIPO offers alternative dispute resolution mechanisms to efficiently and effectively resolve IP-related disputes. A crucial component of WIPO’s strategy is the collection and analysis of IP data and statistics, allowing for a better understanding of trends and needs in this field.

Together, these initiatives enable WIPO to develop more effective and tailored National IP Strategies (NIPS). By leveraging the data and experience gained through these programs, the organization can design strategies that better align with the specific needs and unique context of each member state, thereby strengthening their IP and innovation ecosystems more precisely and effectively. This personalized approach ensures that the strategies implemented are relevant and effective for each country, maximizing the positive impact on their respective IP and innovation ecosystems.

4. How do you believe economic analysis and statistical data can contribute to public policy formulation in IP and innovation in developing countries?

Economic analysis and statistical data provide a solid foundation for informed, evidence-based decision-making, allowing policymakers to better understand the specific dynamics of their IP and innovation ecosystems.

“Bottom-up” methodologies that use statistical data to describe the real world are particularly valuable in this context. These approaches (such as those developed for the report I highlighted) enable the implementation of public policies focused on smart specialization and/ or diversification, tailored to the realities and potential of each country or region. For example, these strategies can help identify possible av-

enues for diversification into new activities that are complementary to those already existing in the ecosystem, thereby pursuing a gradual development of capacities. On the other hand, they can also help developing countries identify opportunities to leapfrog technologically, bypassing intermediate development stages and directly adopting more advanced technologies.

Furthermore, statistical data analysis allows us to measure the untapped technological potential of innovation ecosystems. This is crucial for developing countries, as it can reveal opportunity areas that might go unnoticed with more traditional approaches. By identifying these hidden potentials, countries can design specific policies to foster innovation in promising sectors, thus maximizing the impact of their investments in IP and innovation.

In summary, economic analysis and statistical data provide the tools necessary for more precise and effective policy formulation in IP and innovation. They allow developing countries to make the most of their limited resources, focusing on high-potential areas and tailoring their strategies to their unique contexts, ultimately accelerating their economic and technological development.

5. What collaboration opportunities do you identify between WIPO and other international associations to strengthen the development of innovation and IP ecosystems at the regional level?

WIPO has strong potential to establish and strengthen collaborations with various international associations, which can significantly contribute to the development of innovation and IP ecosystems at the regional level.

One key collaboration opportunity is between WIPO and UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization). This alliance could focus on strengthening science and technology systems in different regions. Together, they could develop comprehensive programs that not only foster innovation but also enhance the capacity of educational and research systems to generate and protect new knowledge.

Another potentially valuable collaboration would be between WIPO and the IDB (Inter-American Development Bank). This partnership could focus on strengthening industrial and innovation policies at the regional level. The IDB, with its experience in financing and economic development in Latin America and the Caribbean, could work with

WIPO to design and implement policies that effectively integrate intellectual property into industrial development and innovation strategies. These collaborations could result in initiatives such as joint training programs, shared research projects, or the creation of regional platforms for knowledge and best practice exchange. Additionally, they could facilitate policy harmonization among countries in a region, promoting a more cohesive and effective approach to the development of innovation and IP ecosystems.

Ultimately, these international partnerships have the potential to create a multiplier effect, leveraging the resources and experiences of

multiple organizations to more comprehensively address the complex challenges faced by innovation and IP ecosystems in different regions of the world.

On another note, we have initiatives with international non-governmental organizations, for example, we work with ATUM (Association of University Technology Managers) to organize a high-level annual meeting of Experts and Technology Transfer Officers, and we recently participated in the ASIPI meeting in El Salvador where several colleagues from my team discussed various WIPO initiatives at the regional and international level regarding innovation.

CARLOS MARÍA GALLO

We spoke with Carlos María Gallo, President of the National Institute of Industrial Property (INPI) of Argentina, who shares recent advances in the office’s modernization, the strengthening of its connection with the innovation ecosystem, and strategies to foster a culture of intangible asset protection in the country.

1. Since your appointment at INPI, various initiatives have been launched to improve the management of industrial property in Argentina. What do you consider to be the main achievements of your administration so far, and what challenges lie ahead?

One of the main goals of this administration has been to reintegrate the Institute into the innovation and development ecosystem, seeking greater participation in the international and regional bodies that comprise it. Notable participations include:

• Innovation Summit organized by Universidad Austral.

• 2024 Annual Conference on Intellectual Property and Innovation in Latin America organized by the Center for Intellectual Property and Innovation (CPINN) at Universidad de San Andrés (UdeSA), Argentina.

• AmCham Summit 2024 organized by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce in Argentina.

• Symposium on Intellectual Property by the Global Intellectual Property Alliance (GLIPA) and CPINN at UdeSA.

• Best Practices Workshop on the Promotion and Protection of Industrial Property Rights through Technology and Innovation Support Centers (TISCs), within the framework of the Ibero-American Industrial Property Program (IBEPI).

• AmCham Summit 2025 organized by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce in Argentina.

In terms of cooperation, collaboration with IP offices in the Mercosur region has been intensified, outlining working plans for ongoing engagement.

Exchanges and training initiatives have also been developed with other agencies, including the EUIPO, EPO, JPO, and the French INPI. These collaborations have produced promising results.

At the national level, we’ve strengthened ties with innovation and technology sectors, expanding training and support offerings in partnership with WIPO through the Argentine TISC Network. We have also relaunched the Master’s in Intellectual Property and Innovation at UdeSA, open to both local and foreign students.

Another key objective has been to foster a culture of industrial property, raising awareness of the value of intangibles and their strategic use in Argentina, through events, courses, and forums highlighting the importance of the work conducted by this office.

2. The modernization and digitization of processes is a key trend for IP offices worldwide. What advancements has INPI implemented in this regard, and how have they impacted efficiency and accessibility for applicants?

Argentina’s INPI adopted digital and electronic processing tools prior to the 2020 pandemic, giving us an advantage over countries that implemented them later. This know-how, along with constant reviews of our operating systems, allows us to confirm that all procedures are now carried out digitally, remotely, and are accessible 24/7, 365 days a year once the user logs in.

Applicants have a designated electronic address where notifications and decisions are sent, and deadlines run and expire automatically without human intervention.

This system has positively impacted processing times, reducing delays. Currently, a trademark application without objections can be resolved in approximately 4 to 6 months.

DIaLOGueS

3. Argentina is a country with high potential in innovation and technological development. How is INPI working to strengthen industrial property protection and promote innovation investment in the country?

INPI is strengthening industrial property protection and promoting innovation by organizing training activities—such as workshops and seminars—on technical, practical, and legal aspects of IP, emphasizing the importance of comprehensive protection of intangible assets.

We actively participate in national and international fairs and events, providing INPI officials the opportunity to interact with innovators, entrepreneurs, and key stakeholders in the IP field.

Awareness campaigns target SMEs, entrepreneurs, researchers, and the general public to highlight the benefits of protecting innovations and developments to boost competitiveness and reach new markets.

INPI also offers online guides and educational videos explaining various IP procedures to help users understand and manage their intangible assets independently.

As National Coordinator, INPI organizes and promotes workshops and training sessions on patent law through WIPO’s TISC Program.

Additionally, we co-host WIPO Training Seminars on strengthening the capacity of university-based TISCs in Argentina to manage and commercialize intellectual property.

4. Education and training in industrial property are fundamental for enabling more entrepreneurs, companies, and innovators to benefit from the IP system. What initiatives has INPI developed in this regard, and how are you working to broaden access to this knowledge?

As previously mentioned, this administration has prioritized reaching entrepreneurs, businesses, and innovators more directly and effectively. Agreements with the Argentine Chamber of Small and Medium Enterprises have been established to conduct joint workshops and seminars on the benefits of intensive use of industrial property and timely registration of intangible assets.

Talks have also been held at universities, industrial parks, municipalities, and provincial governments to address these sectors specifically.

J OãO N EGRãO

We spoke with João Negrão, Executive Director of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO), who shares the office’s strategic vision toward 2030, centered on sustainability, innovation, and inclusion. In this interview, he reflects on the regulatory challenges of the digital economy, the opportunities for interregional cooperation, and the key role of IP as a driver of economic growth and competitiveness.

1. The new strategic plan of the EUIPO sets key objectives for the coming years. What would you say are the fundamental pillars of this plan and what motivations have driven its design?

The Strategic Plan 2030 of the EUIPO (SP 2030) focuses on delivering high-value intellectual property (IP) services and products, enhancing customer experience, operational efficiency, and legal certainty. Based on over 2,000 individual contributions, it reflects a shared vision to achieve a more effective, inclusive, and sustainable IP ecosystem that drives innovation, competitiveness, and economic growth.

The plan is structured around five key goals: optimizing operational efficiency and effectiveness; increasing the value of products and services; improving access to the system; fostering trust and respect for IP; and ensuring the sustainability of the European IP Network. These objectives are driven through six priority areas, including customer focus and quality, as well as education and the promotion of innovation.

Our plan highlights the use of emerging technologies such as Artificial Intelligence (AI) to enhance IP services and streamline operations, with an ethical and human-centered approach. EUIPO will

continue to invest in technology and promote IP rights as enablers of growth and innovation, particularly for SMEs, youth, and underrepresented groups. As part of its sustainability commitment, it also works to reduce its carbon footprint and to protect IP rights linked to green technologies.

By prioritizing sustainability, inclusion, and technological advancement, EUIPO supports businesses and innovators through initiatives that help them thrive in a dynamic global economy. Strengthening the innovation ecosystem is essential to boost European competitiveness, ensuring that businesses, entrepreneurs, and researchers fully leverage the value of IP. SP 2030 outlines the roadmap for these efforts until 2030.

2. Intellectual property plays a central role in global innovation and economic development. From your position at EUIPO, how do you think the regulatory framework should evolve to meet the challenges of the new digital economy and artificial intelligence?

We must rethink the IP framework so that it is truly useful and accessible to today’s creators, designers, startups, and SMEs. This includes considering whether current rights are sufficient to protect new forms of creation, such as those generated by AI, or whether we should expand the scope of the system. In my view, it should evolve towards a more dynamic, transparent, and collaborative vision, always from an ethical and responsible perspective, and focusing on three key aspects.

First, legal clarity, as it is crucial to establish clear rules on who holds ownership of AI-generated content. At EUIPO we have published a study on generative AI and copyright that can help lawmakers propose regulations that align with the current environment. Second, access to resources—with initiatives like the Copyright Knowledge Center planned to launch later this year—which will help authors better understand their rights and obligations in digital environments. And finally, licensing and mediation, which promote simplified mechanisms so that creators and AI developers can reach agreements that ensure transparency and fairness. Moreover, cooperation between international organizations—such as the World Intellectual Property Organization, other IP offices, institutions, and market actors—is essential to adapt the IP system to emerging technologies.

3. From Europe, what initiatives or projects of the EUIPO could benefit Latin American countries in terms of intellectual property, and how do you see collaboration between regions to strengthen IP protection?

EUIPO has actively collaborated with Latin American countries since 2017 through European Union (EU)-funded projects, as well as through bilateral cooperation spanning decades, currently supported by 12 active memorandums of understanding with countries in the region. In the coming years, a wide variety of activities will be carried out in the region as part of the upcoming editions of the AL-INVEST Next IPR and CarIPI projects, as well as through strategic IP alliances focused on topics like AI and inclusiveness.

These activities will continue to promote the strategic use of IP for sustainable development and innovation. Planned activities include modernizing legal frameworks, tailored mentoring, judicial cooperation through judge networks, and promoting inclusion through initiatives like the Ingenias LATAM award for innovative women, aligned with SP 2030 priorities.

Interregional cooperation is key to strengthening IP systems, as it allows global challenges to be addressed more effectively. We apply this cooperation in other regions as well, adapting our support to local contexts. Events with partners such as ASIPI—like those on plant varieties and green trademarks—illustrate how we tailor collaboration to the real needs of users.

4. Intellectual property has become increasingly relevant in an ever more interconnected world. How do you view the role of IP in today’s economy and what legislative or policy changes might be needed to maximize its positive impact?

Recent EUIPO studies show that IP-intensive industries account for around 50% of GDP in countries like Brazil and Mexico, a proportion comparable to the EU. However, only a small portion of SMEs (about 10% in the EU) protect their IP. This underscores the need for strong IP systems adapted to global challenges in order to maximize their economic impact on both sides of the Atlantic.

IP is essential for competitiveness and innovation, especially in sectors such as biotechnology, AI, and the circular economy. To maximize its impact, I believe it is essential to adapt current legal frameworks, reflecting realities such as AI-generated content cre -

ation—as previously mentioned—and the use of big data, ensuring that copyright continues to protect human creativity. It is also necessary to promote mechanisms such as the SME Fund, which allows IP to be used as collateral to access capital, and to expand IP literacy, particularly among youth and other underrepresented groups, to close gaps and foster inclusive participation. IP should be seen not only as protection, but as a driver of inclusive and collaborative economic growth.

5. In the context of innovation and sustainability, what challenges and opportunities do you identify for intellectual property in emerging sectors such as biotechnology, artificial intelligence, and the circular economy?

In these emerging sectors, IP faces key challenges and opportunities. In biotechnology, there is a real need to protect inventions in genetics and personalized medicine, while promoting equitable access to critical technologies.

Regarding AI, it is important to highlight that in the face of current questions about the ownership of AI-generated content, we need legislative frameworks that balance innovation and rights protection.

As for the circular economy, IP can facilitate the design of durable and reusable products, but to do so, policies are needed that incentivize sustainable solutions without stifling innovation.

S ETH E RICSSON

Program Director at Munich Intellectual Property Law Center (MIPLC)

Seth Ericsson, Program Director at the Munich Intellectual Property Law Center (MIPLC), shares a global and interdisciplinary perspective on intellectual property education. In this interview, he highlights the role of academic training in shaping future IP leaders, the importance of integrating new technologies and ethical frameworks into the curriculum, and the value of international collaboration.

1. Can you briefly introduce the Munich Intellectual Property Law Center and its mission within the global IP landscape?

The Munich Intellectual Property Law Center (MIPLC) is a unique collaboration between four institutions: the Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition, the University of Augsburg, the Technical University of Munich, and George Washington University Law School.

Our mission is twofold. First, we aim to train the next generation of global leaders in IP. This goes beyond teaching legal doctrine. It’s about helping students develop the analytical tools and critical mindset needed to navigate today’s complex and fast-changing IP landscape. We welcome students from around the world and from many professional backgrounds, and we work hard to prepare them for careers that are both globally engaged and locally impactful.

Second, we see ourselves as a space for dialogue. IP is no longer just a legal field. It’s intertwined with economics, ethics, technology, and policy. We actively bring those threads together in our teaching and research. Our goal is to contribute to a deeper and more nuanced understanding of how IP can support innovation and fair competition, not only in theory but in practice.

2. What academic programs and specialized courses does the Center offer for professionals interested in intellectual property law?

Our flagship offering is the one-year, full-time LL.M. in Intellectual Property and Competition Law. The program is taught entirely in English and attracts lawyers, engineers, scientists, and economists from across the globe.

What makes it special is the degree of flexibility. In addition to a strong foundational curriculum, students can choose from a wide range of electives that reflect their personal interests and career goals, whether in patents, copyright, digital regulation, or data protection. We also bring in visiting faculty from leading institutions and firms worldwide, so the classroom experience remains closely connected to practice.

3. How does the Center foster innovation in the field of IP, and could you share any recent projects or initiatives related to this?

Innovation is central to what we do: in the classroom, in research, and in how we approach collaboration.

Our close relationship with the Max Planck Institute allows us to integrate cutting-edge research directly into our teaching. Recent discussions on AI and generative technologies, for example, have already shaped how we approach classroom conversations and thesis supervision.

Beyond research, we create opportunities for interdisciplinary exchange. Many of our students come from non-legal backgrounds, and we encourage them to draw on that experience. We host regular workshops and our Lecture Series invites leading thinkers to present new ideas and challenge conventional thinking. These events often spark unexpected conversations and sometimes new research or policy proposals.

4. What are the main challenges and opportunities you see for the future of IP education, and how important is collaboration with international organizations in that vision?

One of the biggest challenges is the speed at which technology is moving. Laws and institutions often lag behind innovation. So we have to prepare students not just to work with today’s rules, but to think critically about what tomorrow’s legal frameworks might need to look like.

Another challenge is the need for interdisciplinary thinking. IP doesn’t exist in a vacuum — it touches everything from business and ethics to global development and public health. Integrating those perspectives is essential but not always easy.

At the same time, I see incredible opportunities. The global demand for IP expertise is growing. Digital tools allow us to build cross-border learning environments and simulate real-world legal scenarios. And there’s growing recognition that IP can be part of the solution to global challenges, whether it’s green technology, vaccine access, or digital inclusion.

This is where international collaboration becomes essential. Working with organizations like WIPO, EPO, and EUIPO allows our students to engage with real-world processes and policy development. These partnerships also help keep us as educators grounded — they remind us that IP doesn’t just happen in classrooms or journals, but in the messy, fast-paced world where people are trying to innovate, compete, and create across borders.

Ultimately, we try to instill in our students a simple but powerful idea: collaboration and mutual understanding aren’t just strategies. They’re essential to progress. The world is complex, but the desire to build, connect, and solve problems is something we all share.

GABRIEL LEONARDOS

President of the Brazilian Intellectual Property Association (ABPI)

Gabriel Leonardos, president of the Brazilian Intellectual Property Association (ABPI), concludes his second term leading the institution with a reflective and forward-looking perspective on the present and future of intellectual property in Brazil.

1. As your term leading ABPI comes to an end, what do you consider to be the main developments in intellectual property in Brazil in recent years? What challenges remain to strengthen the IP ecosystem in the country?

I assumed the presidency of ABPI in January 2022, and at the end of this year, my second and final two-year term will conclude. The challenges facing intellectual property in Brazil have always been significant. First, there is a lack of resources at the Brazilian IP Office (INPI): limited funding, insufficient personnel, and unreliable IT systems. ABPI has long advocated for the financial autonomy of INPI, but to date, no progress has been made. INPI collects official fees that exceed the budget authorized by Congress by a factor of three or four, and the rest is blocked by the federal government.

Brazil’s deindustrialization is another major challenge, reflected in the low number of patent applications filed with INPI—just around 27,000 per year, a figure that has remained stagnant since 2020. In contrast, trademark applications have grown significantly, from 300,000 per year in 2020 to 450,000 in 2024—an increase of 50% that has not been matched by INPI’s examination capacity, resulting in significant delays, especially in handling oppositions and appeals, which require experienced examiners. Additionally, ABPI must monitor numerous bills under discussion in the National Congress that propose amendments to the Industrial Property Law (IPL), many of which aim to weaken the law—reducing protection or making patent grants more difficult. ABPI works vigorously to promote positive legislative proposals and prevent those that threaten innovation by favoring copycat industries. The debates are intense, but so far, ABPI has successfully preserved the core of the 1996 IPL.

However, the absence of a national innovation strategy based on IP has hindered the adoption of necessary improvements. The IPL is now outdated after nearly 30 years in force.

2. The ABPI International Congress will celebrate its 45th edition in August 2025. What key topics will shape the event’s agenda, and what impact do you expect it to have on the IP debate in Brazil and the region?

This year’s ABPI Congress will have a major impact as we return to São Paulo, Brazil’s industrial and financial capital. Key topics will in-

clude Brazil’s new Artificial Intelligence (AI) law, which has already passed the Senate and is awaiting a vote in the Chamber of Deputies. I believe this law could strongly influence the development of AI legislation in other countries in the region.

3. Intellectual property is a key driver of innovation and competitiveness. From your perspective, what strategies should Brazil adopt to establish itself as a regional IP leader and attract more innovation investment?

Brazil does not offer enough tax incentives for innovation. The country has a high tax burden—33% of GDP, compared to the Latin American average of 22%. Only an aggressive tax incentive framework will encourage entrepreneurs to take on the risks inherent to innovation investment.

4. Globally, IP faces challenges such as artificial intelligence, digital trade, and sustainability. How do you see Brazil and ABPI positioning themselves in these debates, and what regulatory changes might be needed to adapt to this new reality?

In all three areas—AI, digital trade, and sustainability—Brazil is making significant progress. AI regulation is expected soon. E-commerce in Brazil is efficient, advanced, and equipped with effective anti-piracy tools. Brazil is also among the most environmentally sustainable countries, thanks to its clean and renewable energy matrix and agricultural sector, which preserves vast protected areas in accordance with strict environmental laws.

However, protectionist agricultural lobbies in developed countries are powerful and often spread misinformation about Brazil’s environmental practices. I believe Brazil’s energy and agricultural strength, grounded in sustainable methods, will increasingly shape global trade and investment.

A recent law approved by the National Congress aims to impose trade countermeasures against protectionist practices by other countries. This law will likely be tested soon, and there is great anticipation regarding its effectiveness in opening up markets.

BETWEEN THE LINES

WHEN TERROIR SHIFTS: CLIMATE, WINE, AND THE LEGAL FRAGILITY OF PLACE

How climate change is challenging the foundations of geographic indications in Latin America’s wine regions— and what comes next.

A couple of years ago, I taught a class on Wine and Geographic Indications in Napa Valley, California. One of our guest speakers was Dan Petroski, founder and winemaker at Massican Winery. In a region where “Cabernet is king,” Massican makes only white wines—using grapes that are anything but typical for Napa. When asked whether climate change influenced his choice of varietals, Petroski replied: “A hundred percent.”

That answer stayed with me. What will happen in this storied wine region when King Cabernet is dethroned?

It’s widely known that climate change is disrupting agriculture around the world, and viticulture is one of the most visible examples. Wine has become something of a canary in the coal mine for industries that depend on the rhythms of nature to thrive.

What’s discussed far less, however, is how climate change challenges the foundations of intellectual property, particularly geographic indications (GIs) and designations of origin (DOs). These legal protections are the backbone of the global wine economy, conferring economic value, cultural identity, and consumer trust. But they’re also inherently fragile: built on the assumption that terroir—place plus climate—will remain relatively stable.

And there’s the rub. Climate doesn’t stay still.

When Champagne Packs Up and Moves North

Take Champagne. For centuries, the region’s cool, marginal climate was ideal for high-acid grapes like Chardonnay and Pinot Noir. But today, Champagne is harvesting an average of 13 days earlier than before 1988. Warming temperatures have led to riper fruit, lower acidity, and stylistic shifts that some producers embrace, and others fear. At the same time, places like southern England, once considered inhospitable to fine wine, are thriving. Temperatures there have already risen by about 1°C since the 1980s and are expected to climb another 1.4°C by 2040, creating the conditions for Pinot Noir, Chardonnay, and Meunier to flourish.

What happens when the climate of Champagne migrates across the Channel? And what becomes of the GI when its terroir follows suit? Let’s just say headlines like “UK to Unseat Champagne Wine Production”1 don’t exactly pop the corks in Reims.

Latin American Terroir in Flux

Latin America has a rich and rapidly evolving wine industry, and GIs and DOs across the region are closely tied to climate, particularly altitude, latitude, and seasonal variability. These GIs are deeply vulnerable to climate shifts.

Mendoza’s wine identity is built on its high-altitude desert climate at the foothills of the Andes, and the combination of intense sunlight, cool nights, and low rainfall is essential for the vibrant color and acidity of its signature Malbec. In Chile, the cool, coastal DO of the Casablanca Valley, influenced by the Humboldt Current, is known for crisp white wines like Sauvignon Blanc and Chardonnay; the maritime climate, with its cool fog and breezes, delay ripening and promote acidity. However, rising temperatures and reduced fog intrusion are shortening ripening periods and pushing harvests earlier, and yields have declined in some vintages. The Valle de Guadalupe GI in the northern Baja California region of México is dependent on a Mediterranean-desert hybrid climate with extreme diurnal shifts for its bold reds, like Tempranillo, Grenache, and Nebbiolo. Water scarcity in the region is increasingly a problem, along with heat spikes that push grapes to overripen. The DO Vale dos Vinhedos in Brazil and the GIs Canelones and Maldonado in Uruguay are experiencing effects of climate change similar to one another; unpredictable rainfall in humid climates increases risk of disease and rot on the vines, threatening production of Tannat and Merlot. In Maldonado specifically, sea-level rise and coastal changes present an added threat.

These examples are not hypothetical. They are happening now. And they matter, both legally and economically.

Legal Cracks in the Vines

GIs and DOs legally tether a product’s identity to a place. But when the climate that defines that place begins to change—or disappear—what happens to the protection?

GIs and DOs are strategic assets that shape the wine industry’s structure, enduring value, and very identity. And they are inherently dependent on climate conditions, as a key part of what makes that terroir distinct. Many GIs/DOs specify permitted grape varieties (chosen

Euronews with AP, “UK to Unseat Champagne Wine Production Due To Climate Change,” (Aug. 14, 2022), at https://www.euronews.com/2022/08/14/uk-to-unseat-champagne-wineregion-due-to-climate-change-finds-study. 1.

for their suitability for local climate); harvest dates and/or sugar levels influenced by ripening patterns); minimum/maximum alcohol (related to temperature-driven sugar development); yield; and vineyard altitude or orientation (regulating exposure and heat). GIs are quality-control mechanisms, often with production standards that must be met for certification.

Adaptive Strategies, Practical and Legal

Producers across the region are employing a variety of adaptive mitigation strategies in viticulture and winemaking in an effort to slow the effects of climate change and maintain quality. Winemakers are exploring higher elevations and experimenting with new canopy and irrigation techniques. The trellising of trees in northern Chile, in the Codpa Valley and Pica Oasis, is notable, as are the efforts in Bolivia’s Cotagaita and Cintis Valleys. Producers in Argentina, Brazil, and Chile are working on local genotypes to develop drought-resistant varietals. Brazil has also been a pioneer in double-cropping, an innovative, bud-forcing strategy used also in Europe and China. Like Petroski at Massican, some winemakers are experimenting with more heat-tolerant grapes, such as Grenache or Touriga Nacional, or reviving indigenous varieties.

Regardless of efforts to slow impact, there are inevitable legal and policy implications to the system of GIs. Climate change is pressuring wine appellations to revise their rules—what grapes can be grown, what practices allowed, how boundaries are drawn.

Zoning changes, such as the creation of Sub-GIs, can be beneficial where elevation or other conditions can compensate for heat and a cooler, longer growing season preserves acidity and taste, such as in in Argentina’s Uco Valley and Luján de Cuyo. Other regulatory authorities have sought to expand qualifications for DOs. In recent years,

for example, Bordeaux AOC approved new grape varieties to adapt to warming, breaking centuries of tradition. (I may not have passed my wine certification exam if I had to remember 19 Bordeaux grapes instead of 5!)

Many traditional DO systems have strict rules that are difficult to amend, potentially locking producers into conditions that no longer match reality. Although Mexico, Uruguay, Peru, and Colombia currently have less-developed wine GI frameworks than other Latin American countries, they are also actively debating the future. Mexico’s Baja California faces severe drought and rising temperatures, prompting discussions about new DOs that combine terroir and resilience. Uruguay and Peru are exploring climate-informed zoning, while Colombia, leveraging its GI experience with coffee, may offer a model for inclusive, small-producer-centered GI governance.

Between Tradition and Transformation

Ultimately, climate change is forcing a legal and philosophical reckoning: Should a GI be rooted in historical conditions, or evolve with changing climate realities? Some producers and policymakers lean toward flexibility, updating rules and embracing sustainability. Others resist, seeking to preserve the cultural heritage embedded in traditional GIs. But either way, Latin America is a living laboratory, where terroir, tradition, law, and climate collide in real time. GIs are not just about geography anymore; they’re about resilience, reinvention, and redefining what makes a wine authentically “of place.”

As intellectual property professionals, we have a role to play in this dialogue—ensuring that the legal frameworks we help design and defend are not only rooted in heritage, but also equipped for the future. After all, if terroir is the soul of a wine, then climate is its lifeblood. And neither stays still for long.

DIVERSITY, EQUITY AND INCLUSION WE RESPECT

ASIPI We Respect: Values That Unite Us

On June 2, ASIPI officially launched We Respect: Values That Unite Us, an institutional campaign created to reaffirm the Association’s commitment to the principles that define our professional community. This new internal brand reflects and promotes the core values that have historically guided the ASIPI family: respect, diversity, inclusion, professional integrity, and dialogue.

But We Respect is much more than a campaign. It is a deep reflection of who we are and what we aspire to continue building together. It is an internal institutional brand that becomes a compass for our relationships, decisions, and actions.

As ASIPI President Luis Henriquez expressed at the launch: “We Respect” is a concrete way to show who we are and what we aspire to continue building together. We believe that respect is the foundation of all human and professional relationships. And we want every person who is part of ASIPI to feel valued, heard, and represented.”

How We Respect Was Born

We Respect was born from a deep conviction: values are not merely theoretical principles, but everyday practices that guide our actions and relationships. The initial campaign was developed within ASIPI’s Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Committee as part of the proposed activities for the current term, and was adopted institutionally.

The initial campaign was developed within ASIPI’s Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Committee as part of the proposed activities for the current term, and was adopted institutionally.

With this vision, We Respect aims to project both internally and externally the values that uphold ASIPI. It is not an isolated action nor just another communication initiative. It is a living institutional brand, an ethical and cultural beacon that defines how we interact, debate, collaborate, and grow as a professional community.

As Joana De Mattos, President of ASIPI’s Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Committee, stated in the launch video: “We Respect” is not

just a slogan: it is a call to collective action. At ASIPI, respect is a daily practice.”

A Living Culture That Projects Inward and Outward

With this initiative, ASIPI seeks to:

• Consolidate a culture of respect as the foundation of all internal and external interactions.

• Promote inclusive spaces where all voices are heard and differences are valued.

• Foster ethical and transparent professional practices.

• Encourage open dialogue as a tool for collective growth.

• Highlight practices and experiences that reflect our shared values.

• Inspire concrete and sustained actions over time.

We Respect is also a call to collective action. It challenges each of us to live out these values in our daily professional lives, in our decisions as ASIPI members, and as actors within the intellectual property system across the region.

A Clear Message: The Values That Unite Us

The campaign’s tagline — *Values That Unite Us* — summarizes its spirit. In a region rich in cultural, social, and professional diversity, shared values become the common ground from which to build community.

We Respect is not an isolated action, but part of ASIPI’s institutional DNA. Its goal is clear: to project a living culture of respect that can be felt within the community and beyond — in our relationships with the profession and society. As Luis Henriquez stated: “We want to promote a living culture of respect, one that inspires action, sparks conversations, and strengthens our community.”

The Pillars of We Respect

Some of the central pillars of the campaign include:

• Diversity: We value diversity of cultures, opinions, experiences, and backgrounds. We respect every voice within ASIPI

• Inclusion: We promote an environment where everyone has real opportunities for participation and growth.

• Ethics and Professional Integrity: We act with transparency, responsibility, and adherence to norms. Ethics strengthen our community.

• Mutual Respect Among Colleagues: We reject any inappropriate conduct. We promote healthy, collaborative, and horizontal professional relationships.

• Respect for Ideas: At the heart of intellectual property lies the recognition of others’ ideas. We defend innovation, knowledge exchange, and creativity.

• Education and New Generations: We support and guide future professionals with the same values that brought us here.

A Year Focused on the Inclusion of Persons with Disabilities

Although the campaign addresses multiple dimensions of respect, ASIPI has decided that the specific focus of We Respect in 2025 will be the respect and inclusion of persons with disabilities. This focus aligns with the Association’s commitment to promoting real equality of opportunity and raising awareness of the visible and invisible barriers that still persist in many professional settings. ASIPI aims to foster conversation, promote good practices, and provide tools that strengthen full inclusion at all levels of institutional participation.

How Is We Respect Being Implemented?

To ensure that values are lived and not just spoken, the We Respect campaign has an active action plan for the entire year, with monthly thematic axes, participatory activities, and multiple formats of dissemination. Some of the planned actions include:

• Social media posts with key messages, graphic materials, and videos.

• Testimonials from ASIPI members about what respect means in their professional lives.

• Webinars, articles, and reflective spaces on inclusion, diversity, and ethics in IP.

• An institutional action with national delegates to visually represent the entire ASIPI community united by this message.

The year will conclude with a major celebration in Buenos Aires, where the collected materials will be shared and those who actively promoted the campaign’s values will be recognized.

A Message That Transcends

ASIPI is much more than a professional association. It is a diverse, intergenerational, and constantly evolving community. *We Respect* arrives to reinforce this shared sense of belonging, offering a common narrative that unites members from different countries, disciplines, and paths.

In times of polarization and rapid change, ASIPI positions itself as an institutional actor that builds community through respect, active listening, and collaboration.

We Respect marks a starting point, but its true impact will be measured in how these values are embodied in the organization’s daily practice — in how we speak, decide, and work together.

ASIPI We Respect: a community with diverse paths, but one shared spirit. With values that unite us.

FROM RAID TO ALGORITHM: MULTILEVEL BRAND PROTECTION

IN A BORDERLESS PHYSICAL AND DIGITAL WORLD

The New Map of Counterfeiting

Maria, a Latin American entrepreneur, discovered that her artisanal brand was being sold on social media by an unknown seller. The imitations — 40% cheaper but significantly less durable — caused her to lose contracts in various cities. Her story reflects a shared reality across the region: product counterfeiting not only affects competitiveness, but also erodes trust in legitimate commerce. According to recent OECD studies, 3.3% of global trade involves counterfeit goods, and online sales have intensified this trend. Between 2020 and 2024, counterfeiting in digital environments increased by more than 150%, driven by platforms such as Amazon, Facebook Marketplace, or WhatsApp Business, where oversight remains limited. In Latin America, the problem runs deep. Industry chambers and IP associations report annual losses in the billions of dollars, while customs authorities face logistical, technological, and legal constraints. In this context, this article offers a reflection on a multilevel strategy to protect brands on three fronts: physical, border, and digital.

I. Physical Markets: The First Trench

Despite technological advances, the fight against counterfeiting still begins in informal markets, which represent between 30% and 50% of the economy in several countries in the region. These venues continue to see growing sales of counterfeit footwear, clothing, toys, cosmetics, and medicines. Andean legislation and other local regulations in Latin America offer important tools to combat this practice, but enforcement often faces barriers such as lack of resources or institutional corruption. In some countries, it has been reported that nearly a quarter of piracy cases involve bribery of officials, from the entry of goods to the disappearance of evidence. Judicial progress is also uneven. Cases often take 12 to 24 months to resolve, discouraging many brand owners from pursuing complaints. However, some recent cases have succeeded in linking counterfeiting to more serious crimes such as criminal association, raising legal severity and paving the way for more exemplary sanctions.

II. Borders: Between Legal and Technological Measures

Airports, seaports, and land crossings in Latin America are now critical points for brand protection. Regional legislation — such as Andean

Community decisions or trade agreements that include IP clauses — allows authorities to take border measures to detain suspicious goods. Several countries have strengthened the role of customs authorities, although manual protocols are still largely relied upon. Recent advances include the use of algorithms to analyze shipping documents, detect inconsistencies in barcodes, and cross-check logistics data to anticipate suspicious shipments. A recent operation in Ecuador stopped the entry of hundreds of thousands of counterfeit ink cartridges using these tools. What stood out was not just the quantity seized, but the cooperation between customs officials, technical experts, and brand representatives. Such synergy is key to preventing counterfeit products from reaching final consumers. Still, challenges remain: a comprehensive border strategy must combine modern legislation, advanced technology, and international cooperation.

III. The Digital Front: Piracy 2.0

The rise of e-commerce has changed the rules of the game. Instagram, TikTok, Facebook Marketplace, and messaging platforms have become parallel markets flooded with counterfeit goods. Traditional enforcement tools were not designed for these environments, and local regulations still lack clear mechanisms for holding digital platforms accountable. At the international level, change is underway. Some court rulings now require marketplaces to remove counterfeit products after formal notifications, and there is active discussion on requiring proactive monitoring systems. In Latin America, these reforms are still in progress but could draw inspiration from models like the EU’s Digital Services Act. Meanwhile, technologies such as web scraping, automated monitoring, and artificial intelligence are proving effective in detecting suspicious patterns. However, many platforms take weeks to remove illegal listings, allowing counterfeit goods to circulate freely. To overcome this barrier, a more efficient coordination is needed between rights holders, tech platforms, and regulatory authorities.

IV. Towards a 360° Strategy: The Synergy We Need

Protecting a brand today requires a comprehensive vision. Some necessary measures for a more effective defense include: • Clear assignment of institutional responsibilities: IP crimes must be handled by specialized units with proper training and resources.

Sobre Nosotros

“Con una historia de más de 50 años, BC&B ha evolucionado desde su origen como una firma boutique de propiedad industrial para llegar a ser el día de hoy una firma multidisciplinaria, que asesora a sus clientes no solo desde una perspectiva legal, sino desde una perspectiva comercial y de negocio, adaptándose en toda nuestra historia a unas necesidades del mundo real”

Leibnitz

Consultoría Legal

En BC&B prevemos, cuidamos, defendemos, y agregamos valor al patrimonio de nuestros clientes acompañándolos en todo momento con un capital humano altamente calificado y especializado; para así darles tranquilidad, velar por sus intereses e impulsar sus negocios mediante la cultura de la legalidad y la innovación

Servicios

Propiedad Intelectual

Derecho Corporativo

Litigio Civil y Mercantil

Litigio Administrativo

Societario

Fusiones y Adquisiciones

Contratos Comerciales

Gobierno Corporativo

Reestructuraciones

Franquicias y Distribución

Litigio Familiar

Arbitraie Comercial

Derecho Regulatorio

Derecho Migratorio

Comercio Exterior

Derecho Laboral

Entretenimiento

Adquisiciones Públicas

Consultoría de Negocios

Tenemos las soluciones que te permitirán lograrlo aprovechando al máximo los incentivos disponibles para maximizar tus ventajas competitivas Apoyamos a las pequeñas, medianas y grandes empresas a transformarse para potenciar su negocio

The Retail Community

Consolidamos la primera comunidad especializada en Retail & E-commerce de México

Servicios

Transformación Estratégica

Transformación y Lobbying Comercial

Innovación Sistemática para Retail Investigación Cualitativa y Cuantitativa del Consumidor/Cliente

Reclutamiento Comercial

Servicios de Nómina, Contabilidad e Impuestos

Transformación Digital Comercial

SIGNS CONTRARY TO PUBLIC ORDER AND GOOD CUSTOMS

1. Preliminary

Various trademark systems prohibit the registration of signs contrary to public order, morality, and good customs. This prohibition is derived from Article 6 quinquies B.3 of the CUP. Included in this prohibition are sexually explicit messages, vulgar or violent expressions, references to illegal drug consumption, as well as signs that disparage or attack certain ethnic minorities.

Public order, morality, and good customs are indeterminate legal concepts in constant evolution and review. The reference to public order and good customs introduces a “moving” factor, related to broad, flexible, and inclusive concepts that

adapt to the political and moral demands of society.

2. Signs Contrary to Morality and Good Customs

Some companies prefer to use aggressive marketing strategies by choosing scandalous or immoral trademarks (“shock value”) to capture consumers’ attention and increase market share. In the European Community system, the trademark “Fucking Freezing” was rejected for being a vulgar and offensive expression. Likewise, the mark “¡Que buenu ye! hijoputa” was denied because the average consumer of the identified products, representative of a medium public morality, would perceive

the controversial expression as severely offensive and therefore morally reprehensible.

I understand that the prohibition seeks to promote civility by denying the benefit of registration to trademarks that could cause deep offense to a significant part of the public. Thus, morality and welfare are preserved by discouraging the choice of this type of trademarks, since denial of registration means that the businessperson will hardly continue investing in an unprotected mark. Moreover, it is likely that a large part of consumers will abstain from purchasing products or services identified by immoral marks, which would interfere with the optimal satisfaction of consumer demand, affecting pricing and supply. The offensive mark would create an inefficient outcome, harming the substantial interest of commercial market growth1. In this way, the impediment to registering immoral or contrary-to-good-customs marks facilitates a non-offensive trade environment, fostering a suitable setting for market participation.

3. Signs Contrary to Public Order

Public order constitutes a limiting principle originated in Civil Law, conceptualized as the set of basic rules of legal, political, social, moral, and economic order that are absolutely mandatory for preserving the social order of a people at a given time. Public order is violated when breaking the law creates a probable risk of disrupting an orderly community life. I understand that this cause includes signs that incite violence, convey racist meanings, promote terrorism or xenophobia, etc. A trademark that insults groups of people based on race, gender, religion, and so on, disturbs commercial activity and undermines market stability similarly to discriminatory conduct.

Public order has been invoked in various countries to prevent the registration of trademarks evoking illicit substances in their commercialization, such as Cannabis. The mark “Opium” for perfumes was denied in Switzerland but accepted in France. Conversely, in France, the mark “Cannabia” was rejected for beers, given that the expression

refers to a prohibited narcotic in France.

4. Evaluation Criteria

The sign must be considered in itself, its design, structure, and meaning.

Most of the time, the contrariety of the sign to public order or good customs will result from its objective analysis, that is, regardless of the identified object. Thus, an obscene, discriminatory, or racist sign will be prohibited for any kind of product or service. However, some signs initially harmless may be prohibited in association with certain objects and not with others; for example, a religious image should not be considered prohibited for religious publications, but it would be for identifying condoms. The mark “Khoran” could be deemed neutral for clothing, but was considered offensive for identifying an alcoholic beverage, being highly offensive for Muslims.

To determine whether a mark is contrary to good customs or public order, one must consider the average sensitivity and tolerance of the type of consumer to whom the product or service is addressed. Thus, a mark should not be rejected because it offends the sensitivity of an exceptional minority of puritan citizens. The examiner should be strict when the sign is aimed at a particularly sensitive public, such as children or the elderly. On the other hand, more flexibility is possible when the identified object is aimed at specialized consumers and is sold under certain limitations.

The sign may affect a particular minority, and it must be evaluated whether the minority’s perception can be transferred to the general public; exaggerated perception by sensitive marginal groups, such as religious fanatics or overly moralistic persons, must be excluded2

The assessment of whether a sign is contrary to good customs cannot be based on the perception of the part of the public that is not offended at all, nor on that of those who are easily offended, but must be made based on the criteria of a reasonable person with average sensitivity and tolerance thresholds3

Snow, Ned, “Moral Judgments in Trademark Law”, en American University LR 66, 2017, p. 1093. Marbach, Eugen, “Die Verkehrskreise im Markenrecht”, en sic! 2007, p. 5.

Judgement of the General Court-417/10 de 9 March 2012, ¡Que buenu ye! HIJOPUTA.

SUMMARY OF THE BERLIN WORKSHOP ON TRADEMARK FILING AND OPPOSITION PROCEDURES

43rd ECTA ANNUAL CONFERENCE BERLIN, JUNE 2025

As part of the relationship between ECTA and ASIPI, a workshop took place during the annual meeting of ECTA in Berlin, Germany, on Wednesday, June 18, 2025. The session included speakers from the United Kingdom, China, United States of America, Mexico, and Peru. ASIPI was represented by Jorge Allende and Eryck Castillo in this two-hour event.

The workshop, inspired by Berlin’s multicultural character, was conceived as a comparative session highlighting trademark prosecution and contentious proceedings worldwide, covering jurisdictions such as the UK, EU, China, Peru, Mexico, and the United States. The program was divided into two distinct yet complementary parts.

General Overview of Trademark Filings

The first section of the workshop focused on the prosecution of trademarks, analyzing how various jurisdictions handle the acquisition and maintenance of trademark rights. Its objective was to give IP specialists a robust comparative overview of procedural requirements and best practices.

Key points included:

Intention to Use

• The session explored whether a declaration of genuine intent to use is needed at filing. Systems differ in this regard, with some requiring it to curb bad faith filings (notably in the UK), while others traditionally do not (for instance, Peru and Mexico), though China’s draft amendments signal movement towards requiring a declaration of intent to use. The US is open to intent to use applications, although use will be needed to secure registration.

Acquisition of Rights: First-to-File vs. First-to-Use

• The workshop compared first-to-file systems (e.g., China, Mexico) with systems that recognize rights through prior use (common law countries like the UK and the US). The role of unregistered rights and their enforceability was also discussed, highlighting the importance of understanding local priorities in brand protection.

Obligation of Use and Renewal

• Participants discussed the use requirements and vulnerability to non-use cancellation, typically arising after 3–5 years of non-use, depending on the country.

• The panel noted that most systems do not require evidence of use at renewal, though Mexico’s practice of requiring sworn declarations of use upon renewal and on the third anniversary was a noteworthy exception.

Scope of Goods and Services

• A comparative look was taken at how specific goods and services must be described: some jurisdictions allow class headings or broad terms (e.g., Peru, Mexico), while others (like China) demand greater precision. The importance of clear, precise descriptions to avoid future disputes or challenges was emphasized, namely by the UK and the US speakers.

Examination Practice

• Differences in examination on absolute grounds (e.g., distinctiveness, descriptiveness, morality) and relative grounds (conflicts with prior rights) were discussed.

• In the EU and UK, offices generally examine absolute grounds and leave relative conflicts to third parties during opposition. By contrast, the US, China, Mexico, and Peru conduct both absolute and relative grounds examination.

Absolute Grounds Specificities

• The workshop examined refusals related to non-distinctive or descriptive marks, personal names, geographic terms, or official insignia, with each jurisdiction applying culturally and legally rooted nuances.

Non-Traditional Marks

• The feasibility of registering non-traditional marks (3D shapes, sounds, motion marks, color combinations, smells) was compared. While all jurisdictions theoretically recognize these, practical acceptance varies greatly — for example, China’s reservations around motion/hologram marks, and Mexico’s more advanced acceptance of isolated colors.

Multiclass Filings

• Participants discussed whether multiclass applications are allowed, concluding that while many systems accept them (US, UK, EU, China, Peru), Mexico continues to operate single-class filings at the domestic level, though Madrid designations can cover multiple classes and be split.

Letters of Consent and Coexistence Agreements

• The discussion included whether offices accept letters of consent or coexistence agreements, as private settlement tools to allow conflicting marks to coexist on the register. Some systems apply strict scrutiny (like China), while others (Peru, US and Mexico) are more accommodating.

The unifying aim of Part I was to equip participants with a strategic, comparative understanding of how to best secure and maintain trademark rights globally, emphasizing practical differences that affect portfolio management and brand enforcement.

Overview of Opposition, Cancellation, and Invalidation Proceedings

The second part turned to contentious proceedings, focusing on oppositions and cancellations, as critical safeguards against problematic trademark registrations.

Opposition Systems and Grounds

• The panel highlighted how opposition procedures work across jurisdictions, particularly whether oppositions can be based on absolute grounds (e.g., lack of distinctiveness) or are limited to relative grounds (conflicts with earlier rights).

• It was noted that the EU focuses oppositions on relative grounds, while many other systems (e.g., US, Mexico, China, Peru, UK) allow absolute grounds to be raised, directly or through observations.

Similarity Assessments

• The discussion explored how examiners and courts assess similarity of marks, including dominant elements, word vs. figurative elements, and the role of market perception.

• Examples of cases were discussed by the panelists as to the viability of being successful in their jurisdictions.

• Additional criteria such as initial interest confusion, post-sale confusion, and the degree of consumer sophistication were also explored.

• The possibility that goods or services in different classes may still be considered similar (as in China) underscored the importance of holistic assessment.

Proof of Use

• Opponents in many systems must demonstrate genuine use of their earlier mark if it is over five years old. Timing and burden of proof requirements vary, but this principle is somehow similar in all juriosdictions..

• It was also discussed that outside of opposition, non-use cancellation actions typically require proof of use to defend a challenged registration.

Procedural Defaults and Consequences

• The session compared what happens if an applicant fails to respond to an opposition. Some countries treat the application as

abandoned (e.g., US and UK), while others decide on the merits regardless of a response (e.g., China, Peru, Mexico).

Suspension and Settlement Options

• Many jurisdictions provide cooling-off or suspension opportunities to allow the parties to negotiate settlements, with variable frameworks for requesting and extending these periods.

• Formal mediation mechanisms exist but are often underused; some countries, like the UK, are experimenting with pilot mediation schemes to alleviate hearing backlogs.

Acceptance of Coexistence Agreements

• Panelists highlighted that coexistence agreements can be influential, but the degree of deference trademark offices give them varies. In particular, there are public interest safeguards to ensure that consumer confusion is not created even where parties agree to coexist.

Deadlines and Extensions

• Jurisdictions were compared on opposition deadlines and whether they are extendable. Most systems have fixed time frames, though the UK allows an initial notice of threatened opposition to buy more time.

Appeals

• The possibility of challenging opposition decisions was discussed, with most jurisdictions offering administrative and/or judicial review routes, subject to local procedures and timeframes.

Awards of Costs

• Whether a successful party can recover costs was addressed. The UK and EU allow cost awards and the US also has a similar scenario, though they may be difficult to enforce, while the other countries generally do not award costs in opposition proceedings.

Cancellations/Invalidations

• The panel emphasized that invalidation and cancellation procedures often mirror opposition frameworks in their grounds and procedural paths, though the timing and evidentiary burdens differ.

Settlement and Mediation

• Beyond formal opposition processes, parties were encouraged to consider settlement and mediation at various procedural stages.

National trends, including new mediation laws in Mexico and the EU’s underutilized mediation center, were reviewed as possible future growth areas.

Overall Workshop Objectives and Takeaways

The principal aim of the workshop was to enhance the comparative knowledge of IP practitioners who handle global trademark portfolios, allowing them to:

• Grasp key differences and convergences in trademark law across important jurisdictions.

• Recognize how local practice nuances for example, declarations of intent to use, examination processes, acceptance of coexistence agreements, or proof of use requirements — can dramatically affect outcomes.

• Strategically plan prosecution and opposition approaches to reduce brand vulnerability internationally.

• Foster cross-border coordination and risk assessment, especially where local rules diverge on goods and services classification, opposition grounds, and dispute resolution mechanisms.

• Anticipate the impact of emerging trends, including stricter controls on bad faith filings, expanded protection of non-traditional marks, or new models of mediation and negotiation supported by IP offices.

Ultimately, by combining a thorough review of both prosecution (filing) and contentious (opposition/invalidation) phases, the workshop offered a practical roadmap to navigating the complex, jurisdiction-dependent nature of trademark rights worldwide. The participants were expected to leave better prepared to advise clients and manage filings and disputes across diverse legal systems in an increasingly interconnected global marketplace.

CONtests

WINNERS OF THE 2025 SUSTAINABLE FASHION CONTEST

In line with its commitment to Intellectual Property in the service of sustainable development, ASIPI launched the 2025 Sustainable Fashion Contest, inviting young legal professionals to reflect on the ethical, legal, and environmental challenges currently facing the fashion industry.

The winning articles in this edition address key issues such as upcycling, traceability in supply chains, human rights, traditional knowledge, and the role of the industry in building a fairer fashion ecosystem.

In this feature, we interviewed the authors of the three awarded articles:

place for:

the Andean Regime.

The Legal Intersection Between Sustainability and Human Rights in Fashion.

With different perspectives and approaches, they share their motivations, their insights on the role of law in this evolving field, and the message they hope to convey to the new generation of professionals committed to sustainability.

Wilson Armando Forero Colombia First place for Upcycling, Sustainability, and Trademarks: A Review of
Magda Alejandra Jones Colombia Second place for Made in Where!
Madeline Pamela De León Aquino República Dominicana Third

Contests

1. What motivated you to participate in ASIPI’s Sustainable Fashion contest, and how did the idea for your article come about?

My main motivation was the clear lack of legal literature on Fashion Law in Latin America. While researching sustainable fashion and law, I realized that nearly all available doctrine focused on European or U.S. jurisdictions, leaving a significant gap in our region. The idea stemmed precisely from that need: I wanted to interpret and adapt Fashion Law concepts to the regulations of the Andean Community. I found it challenging and intriguing to analyze how our regional legal framework addresses practices like upcycling, especially considering that Decision 486 was enacted in 2000 — long before these sustainable trends gained relevance.

It was necessary to build a bridge between the global theory of Fashion Law and the Latin American legal reality, so that new generations can understand and apply these concepts within our local contexts.

2. What legal aspects do you believe are the most urgent or challenging today to promote truly sustainable fashion in your country or region?

The most urgent challenge is the critical lack of regulatory awareness regarding sustainability. Legal practitioners have yet to fully incorporate environmental criteria into intellectual property decisions.

We need to develop guidelines that encourage creative reuse and establish collaboration mechanisms between trademark holders and sustainable entrepreneurs. It’s also essential to foster the development of specific case law in these matters, as we currently rely on analogous interpretations that don’t address the complexities of upcycling.

3. What role do you think intellectual property plays in the path toward a more ethical and responsible fashion industry?

In our region, intellectual property can be either a catalyst or an obstacle to sustainability. When applied rigidly, as is currently the case with Andean regulations, it can hinder valuable transformative practices like upcycling. The challenge lies in finding a smart balance within the CAN framework. Intellectual property must evolve to recognize that

not all infringements are harmful, especially when they serve legitimate environmental purposes.

It’s time for Andean intellectual property to become a tool that supports the transition to more responsible fashion, rather than stifling the circular innovation we so urgently need.

3. What message would you like to share with other young legal professionals interested in combining sustainability, innovation, and law?

I encourage you to get actively involved in sustainable Fashion Law, because Latin America urgently needs to develop its own doctrine in this field. We can no longer rely exclusively on foreign literature that doesn’t reflect our legal realities.

My advice is to explore uncharted legal territories in our region. Sustainability is transforming every industry, and Latin American law should lead this evolution — not follow it. Engage in real projects and collaborate with local designers and sustainable entrepreneurs.

Sustainable Fashion Law in Latin America is still under construction, and every contribution matters. It’s time for us to be protagonists — not spectators — of this legal evolution.

Magda Alejandra Jones

1. What motivated you to participate in ASIPI’s Sustainable Fashion competition, and how did the idea for your article emerge?

Participating in ASIPI’s Sustainable Fashion competition was, for me, an opportunity for connection. Since childhood, I dreamed of becoming a fashion designer, and although life led me down the path of law, for a time I felt I had betrayed that creative side of me. It was only when I discovered intellectual property and later fashion law that I realized I didn’t have to choose between two worlds—they could coexist.

The idea for the article stemmed from my interest in the challenges that fashion and sustainability face in an increasingly interconnected world. I was particularly struck by global events, such as the tariff war between China and the United States, and how this tension has impacted the fashion industry. Right when I was developing the article, France passed a law banning fast fashion from Chinese companies. There is a pattern among these events that is worth analyzing.

2. What legal aspects do you believe are most urgent or challenging today to promote truly sustainable fashion in your country or region?

In Latin America, the conversation about sustainability in fashion cannot be separated from the economic and social realities of the region. This role is not limited to large corporations or iconic haute couture houses; it extends to a vast majority of the sector, composed of small and medium-sized enterprises that earn their place each year in a highly competitive market. However, they do so in an environment that still doesn’t offer the support they deserve.

Informality remains a structural obstacle. In countries like Peru, according to data from specialized media, many micro textile enterprises still operate outside the fiscal system due to regulatory complexity and the lack of clear incentives to formalize sustainable practices. This results in less access to financing, lower institutional visibility, and constant vulnerability to unfair competition. In contrast, if specific legal and fiscal support mechanisms for circular fashion were strengthened,

it would stimulate economic growth and cultivate a business culture.

The Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC) has emphasized the enormous potential of the circular economy to generate employment and innovation in the region. In one of its reports, it estimates that adopting circular policies in sectors like textiles could create up to 450,000 jobs, while Colombia, for example, could save over 11 billion dollars a year with an efficient textile recycling system (Revolve Media, 2023).

Chile’s experience offers a hopeful example. There, initiatives like Ecocitex, which transforms used clothing into undyed recycled yarn, have scaled from informal models to regional references, thanks to seed capital access and support from institutions like CORFO.

However, legal protection should not be limited to economic incentives alone. It is also necessary to foster a framework that recognizes collective ownership, ancestral knowledge, and cultural practices that underpin many of these ventures. In this sense, fashion law and intellectual property play a crucial role: they can offer tools for traditional communities or sector creatives to protect their techniques, symbols, and narratives.

Moreover, as I mentioned in my essay, one of the most urgent legal aspects for promoting truly sustainable fashion is the need for clear and binding regulation on transparency and traceability in supply chains. Today, many brands still operate under opaque schemes, making it difficult to trace the origin of raw materials, working conditions, or environmental impact. Sustainability becomes reduced to greenwashing.

Ultimately, envisioning Latin American fashion requires going beyond rhetoric1, 2, 3

3. What role do you believe intellectual property plays in the path toward a more ethical and responsible fashion industry?

Intellectual property plays an absolutely strategic role in building a more ethical and responsible fashion industry. It is a democratizing tool.

1.

2.

3.

Jarpa, S. G., & Halog, A. (2021). Pursuing a circular and sustainable textile industry in Latin America (Cap. 6). En M. A. Gardetti & R. P. Larios-Francia (Eds.), Sustainable fashion and textiles in Latin America (pp. 105–130). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-1850-5_6 Rumiche, E., & Urteaga, A. (2023, 12 de noviembre). La economía circular: un pilar estratégico para la competitividad empresarial. Stakeholders. Recuperado de https://stakeholders.com.pe/medioambiente/produccion-y-consumo-responsable/la-economia-cir cular-impulsa-la-industria-textil-a-otro-nivel/ Rivas, C. (2025, 25 de febrero). Moda sostenible en Latinoamérica: ¿Un lujo inaccesible? Universo MOLA. Recuperado de https://universomola.com/moda-sostenible-en-latinoamerica-un-lujoinaccesible/?utm_source=ch atgpt.com

Fashion in Latin America goes beyond mere artistic expression; it is a robust industry that demands comprehensive legal protection. In this sense, it is imperative to examine the legal mechanisms designed to safeguard the interests of creators, designers, and entrepreneurs, recognizing fashion as a sector that significantly contributes to global economic and cultural development.

In Latin America, IP holds enormous potential to protect the ancestral knowledge of communities historically overlooked by the industry. Recognizing their techniques is also an act of reparation and justice.

Furthermore, IP protects the independent designer—the entrepreneur with a small printing workshop who discovers their graphics are being plagiarized and sold without permission—or creatives like photographers and models, who need legal certainty regarding the use of their work or image. Even influencers and brand ambassadors, who rely on their digital reputation, need regulations to support them if they become entangled in unrelated scandals that damage their name.

4. What message would you like to convey to other young legal professionals interested in combining sustainability, innovation, and law?

To those who feel that calling, I would say: don’t be afraid to break the mold. Law is not written in stone; it is alive, it breathes, and it transforms with those who practice it.

1. What motivated you to participate in ASIPI’s Sustainable Fashion competition, and how did the idea for your article emerge?

My motivation arose from the convergence of two major personal and professional interests: law and the fashion industry. I have always been passionate about analyzing how legal frameworks can help transform deeply rooted practices in sectors like textiles, which have historically had a significant environmental and social impact.

The idea for my article emerged from observing how the intersection of sustainability, human rights, and international law is often overlooked in the fashion context. I wanted to highlight the links between the waste generated by fast fashion, precarious working conditions, and the need for a more ethical and legal approach to drive true transformation.

2. What legal aspects do you believe are most urgent or challenging today to promote truly sustainable fashion in your country or region?

One of the greatest legal challenges is strengthening corporate accountability mechanisms, especially regarding supply chains. It is urgent that both international and local brands be legally required to ensure decent working conditions, respect for human rights—particularly of women and girls—and protection of Indigenous cultures when drawing inspiration from or using elements of their traditional knowledge.

Additionally, it is necessary to reinforce environmental oversight systems and create real legal incentives for companies to reduce their ecological footprint.

3. What role do you believe intellectual property plays in the path toward a more ethical and responsible fashion industry?

Intellectual property can be a key tool to protect traditional knowledge, safeguard local creativity, and promote fairer models of production and commercialization. On the one hand, it can prevent the misappropriation of cultural expressions without consent or benefit for Indigenous communities. On the other, it can encourage sustainable innovation by rewarding those who develop environmentally and labor-responsible materials, processes, or business models.

Madeline Pamela De León Aquino

The challenge is to ensure that this protection is not limited to large brands, but also empowers independent designers, artisans, and communities.

4. What message would you like to convey to other young legal professionals interested in combining sustainability, innovation, and law?

I would tell them that the law is a powerful tool for social and environmental change. We must not limit ourselves to traditional approaches: there is room for creativity, interdisciplinarity, and transformative action.

The fashion industry is at a critical point and needs legal voices that not only understand regulatory frameworks, but are also willing to question them and propose innovative solutions. As young professionals, we have the responsibility to drive a more just, inclusive, and sustainable future—wherever our work takes us.

OUR SCHOLARS AT THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY SUMMER INSTITUTE (IPSI) OF THE UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

FRANKLIN PIERCE SCHOOL OF LAW

As part of the agreement between ASIPI and the University of New Hampshire – Franklin Pierce School of Law, which grants exclusive scholarships to participate in the Intellectual Property Summer Institute (IPSI), this year we are proud to celebrate the participation of three new scholars: María Belén Rivera (Ecuador), Giovana Palacios (Peru), and Jesús Escobar (Mexico). In this interview, we spoke with them to learn about their impressions of the program, their academic and professional experience in the field of intellectual property, and how this opportunity is helping them grow as future leaders in the region.

1. What motivated you to participate in the scholarship?

The main motivation for me to participate in this scholarship was the reputation and prestige of the University of New Hampshire Franklin Pierce School of Law, internationally recognized for its excellence in the field of intellectual property. This institution has more than 50 years of experience as a global leader in the training of professionals in this field of law. Over time, it has consolidated its prestige through innovative academic programs and a community of graduates of the highest level, many of whom have become leaders in the legal and business fields, both nationally and internationally. Without a doubt, I wanted to follow in their footsteps and nourish myself with that knowledge and best practices to continue developing as a professional.

In addition, I had already had the opportunity to participate in a summer school before: the George Mason University IP Summer School in partnership with WIPO. That experience was unforgettable and transformative. It confirmed my interest in this type of intensive programs, which, although they demand a lot of effort, also offer immense academic and personal growth.

The essay contest organized by ASIPI, in alliance with UNH Frank-

lin Pierce, was the perfect opportunity to turn my dream into reality. The support of my loved ones was fundamental to take the last step and send the essay that led me to this good result. I have always loved exploring how intellectual property transforms over time and with technological advances. I am deeply excited to learn from the best, broaden my horizons and strengthen my IP education in such an inspiring environment as this prestigious university.

2. What do you think is the added value of this program in your professional practice?

First of all, the possibility of receiving education from one of the most prestigious institutions in intellectual property represents an invaluable opportunity for technical and academic growth. UNH Franklin Pierce not only stands out for its academic excellence, but also for having a faculty that combines classroom experience with practical market knowledge. This means that the knowledge taught is deeply rooted in the realities of professional practice, ensuring that it is applicable from the very beginning.

Moreover, in today’s dynamic and competitive legal environment, it is essential to stay up-to-date. Regulations, business trends and technologies change rapidly, so staying current and understanding the global context is essential to providing effective and creative legal solutions to clients. In this sense, UNH Franklin Pierce’s summer program offers up-to-date content, with an emphasis on current international intellectual property challenges. Being able to study these topics in a high-level environment, with peers from different countries, not only enriches the content, but also the approach from which it is analyzed.

Finally, the learning acquired in programs like this not only has a professional impact, but also a personal one. It will allow me to grow as a person, face new challenges, leave my comfort zone and reaffirm my commitment to excellence.

3. The opportunity of this scholarship arises from the ASIPIUNH Franklin Pierce alliance: what is your relationship with ASIPI and what do you value most in the Association?

My relationship with ASIPI began in 2022, when I joined as a member, but my link with the organization goes back several years. My first approach was during the ASIPI Congress in Rio de Janeiro in 2018.

Giovana Palacios Peru

Attending that event was a deeply enriching experience. It was there that I realized that strategic alliances with colleagues and true friendships were also possible within the professional world.

Since then, I have had the opportunity to actively participate in various spaces offered by the Association, both in face-to-face and virtual modalities. Conferences, workshops and forums have been fundamental to keep me updated and to continue developing professionally. But beyond the academic content, what I value most about ASIPI is its ability to create community. Initiatives such as the working committees, the projects as well as the clubs are spaces to learn, share ideas and create real connections with colleagues

from all over Latin America and beyond. ASIPI is a combination of work and camaraderie. Thanks to the Association, I have been able to meet incredible people, learn from their experiences and enrich my own perspective.

I cannot but highlight the positive impact of the partnership with UNH Franklin Pierce and the organization of the essay contest. This initiative reflects ASIPI’s commitment to continuing education and to strengthening the community of intellectual property professionals. Thanks to this alliance, today I have the opportunity to fulfill one of my dreams: to be part of the prestigious summer program at UNH Franklin Pierce and enjoy the experience of studying in Seattle.

1. What motivated you to apply for the scholarship?

My main motivation to apply was the opportunity to deepen my training in intellectual property within an academic environment of excellence such as the University of New Hampshire Franklin Pierce. The

program’s practical approach, the faculty’s solid track record, and the institution’s international prestige inspired me to submit my application. Additionally, I believed that presenting a case like MAGISTV— which has sparked relevant debate in Andean jurisdictions—could contribute a valuable perspective to the academic discussion.

2. What do you believe is the added value of this program for your professional practice?

The IPSI program represents a unique opportunity to strengthen my understanding of the international intellectual property system, particularly from a comparative perspective. I am confident that this course will enable me to provide more strategic and up-to-date advice to my clients, especially those looking to expand into international markets. Moreover, the chance to interact with experts and colleagues from around the world will enrich my professional outlook and allow me to build lasting networks of collaboration.

3. This scholarship opportunity arises from the ASIPI – UNH Franklin Pierce partnership. What is your relationship with ASIPI, and what do you value most about the Association?

My relationship with ASIPI has always been close and constructive. I deeply value the space the Association provides for professional growth and regional integration. Through its conferences, academic activities, and working groups—such as the Copyright Committee to

María Belén Rivera Ecuador

which I belong—ASIPI has been a key platform for exchanging experiences and best practices in the field of intellectual property, as well as a space to strengthen both business and personal relationships with remarkable individuals. What I value most is its constant commitment to excellence, Latin American integration, and support for new generations of professionals, as clearly demonstrated by this scholarship.

1. What motivated you to apply for the scholarship?

The agreement between ASIPI and the University of New Hampshire offers a unique opportunity to access top-tier legal education at a prestigious institution like Franklin Pierce School of Law. As an ASIPI member, I couldn’t miss the chance to enhance my professional de-

velopment through such a well-regarded and specialized intellectual property program.

2. What do you believe is the added value of this program for your professional practice?

One of the main added values of this program is the connection with an academically outstanding institution like UNH, which greatly enhances your professional profile. Additionally, the program offers the opportunity to engage with experts and peers from across the world, enriching both the practical and theoretical aspects of your professional practice in intellectual property.

3. This scholarship opportunity arises from the ASIPI – UNH Franklin Pierce partnership. What is your relationship with ASIPI, and what do you value most about the Association?

My relationship with ASIPI has been highly enriching. I believe it is a unique association not only for its strong support of the study and promotion of intellectual property in the region, but also for its international reach and the outstanding professional caliber of its members. What I value most is the opportunity to be part of an active, committed, and highly qualified community that meaningfully contributes to the professional development of its members.

Jesús Escobar Mexico

PROGRAMS iN progress

Fabrizio Módica

SECRETARY ASIPI ACADEMY COUNCIL

ACTIVITY REPORT / DECEMBER 2024 TO JUNE 2025

Between December 2024 and June 2025, ASIPI ACADEMIA remained highly active and committed to ongoing education in the field of intellectual property, carrying out various academic initiatives in collaboration with national and international institutions.

In January, MUNDO ASIPI published testimonials from the coordinators of three key courses held during the second half of 2024: “A 360° Vision of the Cannabis Industry,” “Introduction to Personal Data Protection,” and “Foundations of Competition Law for IP Lawyers.” These testimonials highlighted the strong academic impact and positive reception of the programs.

From January 27 to 30, a virtual IP training course was provided to civil court judges and magistrates of Guatemala, in cooperation with the country’s Judicial School. The first two sessions focused on Copyright and Related Rights, led by members Marcelo García Sellart, Eduardo Varela, Fabrizio Modica, Alfredo Corral, and Manuel Bernet. The following sessions addressed Distinctive Signs, with contributions from María Alejandra Pava, Ivón Hernández, Diego Chijane,

Jorge Chávarro, and María de los Ángeles Lombeyda. The course saw high attendance and received excellent feedback.

In February, the ASIPI ACADEMIA Council developed a mock case for the ASIPI–INTA–TJCA Moot Court, prepared by member Ricardo Gordó Llobel. Following favorable feedback, the case was finalized and the competition was officially launched in March, marking another successful edition of this key educational initiative.

A major milestone was the online seminar “Digital Culture and Intellectual Property: Current Copyright Issues in the 21st Century,” held from March 13 to April 10. Co-organized by the Ibero-American Chair of Digital Culture, ASIPI, and Colombia’s National Copyright Directorate, the seminar featured leading legal scholars, including ASIPI members Soledad Álvarez, Fabrizio Modica, Alfredo Corral, José Herrera Díaz, and Mercedes Castells. With 530 registrants and an average of 180 participants per session, the free event drew audiences from across Ibero-America as well as countries such as the United States, Germany, Australia, and Japan.

Several specialized courses were also successfully completed:

• “Fashion Law II – Advanced” (April 23), with 7 modules and 82 participants. Satisfaction surveys and contributions from students and faculty are expected, with the best works to be included in ASIPI’s upcoming Fashion Law book, scheduled for release at the end of 2025.

• “Trademark Law in the Age of Industry 4.0” (May 8), featuring 6 modules and 83 participants.

• “Geographical Indications and Appellations of Origin – Part II” (May 13), also with 6 modules and 83 participants.

Additionally, four course proposals for the second half of 2025 were received and are currently under review:

1. The ABCs of Regulatory Law (Regulatory Committee);

2. Franchising and Competition Law (Franchising and Competition Committees);

3. Neuro-Oratory and Public Speaking Techniques (ASIPI Young Committee);

4. Training Program for ASIPI Arbitrators.

These proposals were formally presented at the ASIPI Academia meeting held in El Salvador.

It was also decided to postpone to the first half of 2026 two courses planned in partnership with academic institutions:

• Technology Transfer (University of the Andes, Chile);

• Artificial Intelligence for IP Lawyers and Agents (Universidad Externado de Colombia).

As part of the preparation for the technology transfer course, a questionnaire was sent to ASIPI’s national delegates requesting information on entrepreneurship, research, and innovation centers in their respective countries. The goal is to gather relevant data for tailoring the course to the needs of technology entrepreneurs.

ASIPI ACADEMIA remains strongly committed to promoting innovative, accessible, and high-quality legal education for all stakeholders involved in intellectual property throughout the Ibero-American region.

LAWYERS WITH PURPOSE

Everyone in life has a purpose and I believe that the purpose of lawyers is no less important, because through our knowledge and our profession, we have the possibility to assist and support others and thus contribute to society.

“Advocate” from the Latin “advocare” means to intercede, to speak on behalf of someone, so lawyers have the tools to defend the interests of a third party and that is what we are dedicated to, this is the profession that, in general terms, has the most institutionalized PRO BONO work thanks to those colleagues who have identified with this purpose.

ASIPI offers us a great opportunity because, among other benefits, it allows us to acquire the commitment to carry out PRO BONO work and generate palpable, real and measurable changes, since by facilitating access to the services we provide in the ASIPI PRO BONO Program to vulnerable groups, whether they are individuals, communities, small and medium-sized companies and civil society organizations, we are generating a real social change.

Unfortunately, not all people have been able to access the same levels of training, education, training and this means that there are

still groups that are disadvantaged, in need, at risk of social exclusion and it is within our reach to contribute to reduce the gap in access to justice and achieve sustainable development of society.

PRO BONO, derived from Latin meaning “for the public good”, also called free justice, by others called social responsibility of the legal profession, in law firms included in the practices of CSR - corporate social responsibility - in short, this is the practice of legal work that involves providing a service with honesty, responsibility, diligence, integrity and consistency to ensure and achieve the confidence of those who access it, it is an ethical and professional responsibility. By the way, let us not confuse PRO BONO legal work with the -favor- we do for a relative or a friend by expediting a procedure or drafting a document.

Among the key principles of CSR we mention transparency, ethics and commitment to the community, so it is essential that in our organizations we promote volunteering so that all professionals offer PRO BONO legal advice, we will be delighted that every day more members of the Association join the ASIPI PRO BONO Program. It is very simple, we recommend reading the Regulations and sending

Margarita Zambrano
COORDINATOR ASIPI PRO BONO

us the signed Letter of Commitment, all of which can be found on the ASIPI website and the most important thing: to have the conviction and the decision to serve others. I anticipate that you will have the opportunity to live very interesting and enriching experiences, together we go further!

The objectives of the Program are oriented to support the ecosystem of entrepreneurship and innovation with legal advice at no cost of fees in all matters related to Intellectual Property as well as to promote education, respect and dissemination of such an important and current branch of law.

The activities carried out since the beginning of this noble cause, have allowed us to establish important bonds of communication, work and action not only among ASIPI members but also with the Committees, Commissions, Programs and with the National Delegates, which has resulted in the realization of more than twelve training workshops and conferences for entrepreneurs in seven countries, as well as personalized legal advice clinics in which each participant had the opportunity to talk with an ASIPI member to discuss their particular case.

On the other hand, it has been a great opportunity to strengthen cooperation ties with other institutions such as the World Intellectual Property Organization WIPO, which has entrusted us with seven cases of registration of collective trademarks of local communities. It is worth mentioning that the two cases initiated in Ecuador were concluded satisfactorily and two are being processed in Bolivia, one in Peru, one in Mexico and another in Panama.

We have visited the Directors of four National Industrial Property Offices and three of the Secretariats of Science and Technology with the purpose of carrying out a joint work to support the entrepreneurs who come to such institutions precisely to request legal advice and of course the public offices do not have specialized lawyers willing to sponsor their cases so they have referred them to the ASIPI PRO BONO Program.

Universities have also been recipients of our messages and training because they are centers of research and development, educators of future professionals who, without prejudice to their profession, need advice on Intellectual Property, so we have participated in

PROGRAMS iN Progress

the fairs of entrepreneurship, science and technology and training in different faculties. In the ASIPI Quito and ASIPI Panama Congresses we had the opportunity to be mentors and meet closely the students who participated in these events which allowed us to share with them the culture of PRO BONO legal advice, it is necessary to inculcate it from the beginning of their training as lawyers.

Private enterprise is part of our environment. ASIPI’s management and joint work allowed us to sign a Cooperation Agreement with the Fundación Corporación BI of Guatemala through which entrepreneurs who are trained in the entrepreneurship incubator, prior to starting their economic activities, also have access to the PRO BONO legal advisory services offered by the Association. Another important organization with which we participated in an event in Panama is AEI, Alliance for Entrepreneurship and Innovation.

The Chambers of Small and Medium Enterprises and Binational Chambers in four countries have received us with enthusiasm and share information about the Program on their social networks and with their partners. We have also had virtual conferences on general topics of Intellectual Property but also on specific issues that have

been requested for groups of entrepreneurs, small and medium entrepreneurs, in specific sectors of the industry.

We conclude then that PRO BONO legal work is not only about not establishing an economic retribution, but it is coated with a social objective that strengthens us as human beings, that leads us to reach ethical commitments, that allows us to trace a path and make a significant difference in the lives of other people to whom we give the opportunity to succeed, it is the way to give back to society for all that we have received.

Law is a humanistic discipline, it is a discipline of the social sciences. The search for the common good is definitely the guiding principle of Law, it is the unrestricted commitment to comply with the rules as the ultimate goal for the construction of a just society and in that society we want and must be the purposeful lawyers, who are willing to share our time and knowledge for the benefit of others.

My respect and consideration to each of the people who have selflessly participated in the work of the Commission and the ASIPI PRO BONO Program, my gratitude forever, infinite thanks!

Res judicata

ASIPI’s HARMONIZATION AND CASE LAW COMMITTEE

AI TRAINING AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY: THOMSON REUTERS V. ROSS INTEL. INC.1

Artificial intelligence (AI) has been particularly disruptive in the field of intellectual property. The advent of AI as a mass consumer service thanks to applications such as Perplexity, Gemini, and ChatGPT has captivated and alarmed lawyers, legislators, and the general public in equal measure. Multiple areas of debate and issues have been addressed by various jurisdictions, both judicially and politically. Among others, we can mention the status of AI as the author of copyrighted works, the use of AI as a search engine for patentability examinations, and the training of trademark detection algorithms.

However, one aspect of vital interest to both AI rights holders and service providers is the following question: Does training artificial intelligence systems with copyrighted works constitute an infringement

https://www.ded.uscourts.gov/sites/ded/files/opinions/20-613_5.pdf 1.

of those rights? Multiple ongoing legal proceedings, such as Authors’ Guild v. OpenAI and The New York Times v. OpenAI, have this question at their core. Thomson Reuters v. Ross Intel. Inc., decided on February 11, 2025, by the District Court of Delaware, United States of America, is one of the first decisions to rule on this matter.

Thomson Reuters, a well-known media conglomerate, offers a search engine and case law index service through its Westlaw platform. In addition to its general search function, the platform offers its users headnotes and its own numbering system. Ross Intel. Inc, on the other hand, is a competitor that sought to offer a search engine powered by artificial intelligence. Logically, this engine needed training. Ross initially attempted to license the Westlaw database, but Thomson

Reuters rejected the request, as they were direct competitors.

Faced with the refusal to license, Ross negotiated alternatives with third parties. In particular, Ross agreed with the company LegalEase to acquire the training data in the form of Bulk Memos. However, these memos were prepared by LegalEase staff using Westlaw’s headnotes directly. In response, Thomson Reuters sued Ross Intel. Inc. for copyright infringement.

During the proceedings, in 2023, the Court had rejected Thomson Reuters’ request to apply summary proceedings with respect to copyright infringement and fair use defenses. However, prior to the trial phase, the judge asked the parties to renew their requests for summary proceedings, which was decided in the judgment.

The decision can be summarized in two main sections: i) Do Westlaw’s notes constitute a copyrighted work? And ii) If so, was there an infringement of Thomson Reuters’ rights? On the first point, the judge concludes that these notes meet the “extremely low” threshold of originality required for copyright protection. The reasoning behind

the ruling explains that the notes as a whole are analogous to compilations, which merit copyright protection provided that the compiler applies a minimum degree of creativity to their selection and arrangement. Additionally, it concludes that each individual note is equally protectable by copyright, since, like a sculpture, the editor carefully chisels and selects the relevant aspects of each ruling.

Having decided the first point, the decision analyzes whether there was a reproduction of Thomson Reuters’ works and, if so, whether those copies were substantially similar. Although part of the case, particularly that relating to the numbering system, will be decided later in the trial phase, 2,830 batches of memoranda were compared and found to be virtually identical to the Westlaw notes. Based on this and considering that the database licensor, LegalEase, had access to Reuters’ works, the judge concluded that there was an infringement of the plaintiff’s rights with regard to the 2,830 identical memos. This leads to an analysis of Ross’s defenses, with particular emphasis on the Fair Use defense.

The US Fair Use system, unlike traditional continental legislation, whose exceptions and limitations to copyright are categorical and narrowly interpreted, depends on a case-by-case analysis that weighs four factors: the purpose of the use, the nature of the protected work, the portion used, and the potential effect on the market. Under the Fair Use rule, there may be situations in which the same use in different contexts may or may not result in infringement. In Ross’s case, this defense was dismissed because the commercial nature of Ross’s use and its adverse effect on Westlaw’s business as a direct competitor tipped the balance in favor of the plaintiff.

Although this first decision is favorable to rights holders who may be affected by artificial intelligence processes that reproduce their works, the context of the case seems to restrict this criterion from being categorically replicated in other situations, as the judge recognized that the factors of proportion and nature of the protected work benefited Ross. This means that the judge’s conclusion was based on the fact that Ross’s use was commercial in nature and, in addition, was a direct competitor. Therefore, it is worth asking what lies ahead for rights holders whose works are used in training when this is carried out by non-profit AI providers or those who do not compete in the same field.

ASIPI’s HARMONIZATION AND CASE LAW COMMITTEE

IMPORTANT OPINION OF THE GENERAL SECRETARIAT OF THE CAN ON PRECAUTIONARY MEASURES IN SEP PROCEEDINGS1

Telecommunications technologies have positioned litigation over Standard Essential Patents (SEPs) as one of the most interesting and constantly evolving topics in the field of intellectual property and technical solutions. In short, SEPs comprise a set of patents that have been declared by their owners as essential to achieving a technical standard or industrial specification, such as 4G, 5G, Bluetooth, or WiFi. Essentiality would mean that the requirements of the standard cannot be met without using the patented technology, which is why the patent must be accessible to the various economic actors in that market. Based on this, the SEP becomes a commitment on the part of the patent owner, who must license the patent to producers of the standardized technology on fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory terms (FRAND).

While the economic logic of FRAND terms is valid, since declaring a patent essential implies an increase in demand for patent licenses,

Gaceta Oficial del Acuerdo de Cartagena No. 5615: https://www.comunidadandina.org/DocOficialesFiles/Gacetas/GACETA%205615.pdf 1.

it has also been one of the most litigated issues regarding SEPs, specifically in infringement cases. When FRAND terms are implemented as a ceiling on the patent holder’s expected royalties or income, producers find themselves in a position where infringing the patent may be a more economically viable alternative than negotiating the respective license. This phenomenon, known as efficient infringement, is one of the main problems faced by SEP holders, and countries in the region such as Brazil and Colombia have stood out for offering such holders robust mechanisms to facilitate the success of litigation campaigns.

The usual defenses against patent infringement in this area are the non-essentiality of the patent (since essentiality arises from a usually unilateral declaration) or its invalidity. However, arguing invalidity in a country such as Colombia involves filing a lawsuit in another jurisdiction, known as contentious-administrative, in a separate process from the infringement proceedings, which means that the patent granted in the country is a solid right.

In this regard, Ruling No. 003-2025 of the General Secretariat of the Andean Community on the complaint filed by Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson (PUBL) against the Republic of Colombia is an example of the benefits of Latin American jurisdictions, particularly those of the Andean Community, in handling litigation related to Standard Essential Patents. Ericsson, holder of Colombian Patent No. 37362 for the invention “Monitoring of search space in wireless communication networks,” sued the company for infringement of its patent by Lenovo (Asia Pacific) Limited. During the proceedings before the Superintendency of Industry and Commerce (“SIC”), this administrative body granted the precautionary measures requested by Ericsson, as it considered that the requirements contained in Article 247 of Decision 486 had been verified.

In particular, the SIC determined that the existence of a patent owned by the plaintiff and a reasonable presumption of infringement had been demonstrated. The analytical method used by the SIC to assess the presumption of infringement is noteworthy, as it considered that (i) the claim alleged to have been infringed is essential to the 5G standard and (ii) the allegedly infringing product is compatible with that standard. Despite the verification of the requirements of Andean regulations, the Civil Chamber of the Superior Court of Bogotá revoked the preliminary injunction based on non-compliance with the requirements for granting preliminary injunctions contained in a national regulation, Colombia’s General Code of Procedure (“CGP”), as the SIC did not assess the proportionality and necessity of the preliminary injunction, requirements that are not, at least formally, contained in the Andean regulation.

Ericsson filed a complaint with the General Secretariat of the Andean Community, a necessary and preliminary step to sue the Republic of Colombia for non-compliance with the Andean regulation. Colombia responded in a timely manner, pointing out that the national regulation was merely an indispensable complement.

The General Secretariat considered that precautionary measures in patent matters are fully regulated by the Andean regulation, which rules out the application of requirements that are not contained therein.

Although the rulings of the General Secretariat of the CAN are not binding, the document issued does constitute a solid basis for asserting that Colombia in this case, and the CAN in general, are a good jurisdiction for SEP litigation. According to public information, the case that gave rise to this dispute has already been resolved through alternative dispute resolution methods, but others will surely arise in which this precedent will play a leading role.

library

MUNDO ASIPI Magazine Vol. 6 https://asipi.org/biblioteca/es/download/vol-6enero-2025/

Technology transfer in ASIPI member countries: https://asipi.org/biblioteca/es/download/transferencia-detecnologia-en-los-paises-miembros-de-asipi/

During the first half of 2025, ASIPI with the collaboration of its members, has carried out the following publications that can be consulted in our library

Interactive Map of IP Programs in Latin America & USA: https://asipi.org/biblioteca/es/roluniversidades/

Interactive Trademark Map: https://asipi.org/biblioteca/es/ manual-interactivo-de-marcas/

so it was in

EL SALVADOR

San Salvador was the meeting point for a new edition of the ASIPI Seminar, held from June 8 to 10, 2025. In a setting that combined human warmth, cultural richness, and striking geography, the ASIPI community led a dynamic agenda including thematic panels, institutional meetings, social activities, and professional exchange.

In a world shaped by innovation and rapid change, the Seminar offered a space to reflect on the current challenges of Intellectual Property in the region, identify opportunities, and continue building a common agenda among colleagues, institutions, and generations.

This gathering reaffirms ASIPI’s commitment to developing increasingly integrated, innovative IP that serves sustainable growth in Latin America.

PRE-SEMINAR DAYS

Thursday, June 5

ASIPI and the Dr. José Matías Delgado University reflect on IP in the digital era

As part of the ASIPI Seminar in El Salvador, the conference “Content Creation and Intellectual Property: Legal Impact in the Digital Era” was held at Dr. José Matías Delgado University. This valuable activity was promoted by the Working Group “The Role of Universities in the Development of IP,” led by Fabrizio Módica and Antonio Martínez. Representing ASIPI were

Maestra Cristina Umaña, who delivered the keynote speech, and Lic. Carlos Castillo, who moderated the academic discussion panel. ASIPI’s national delegate in El Salvador, José Roberto Romero, was also present. We thank UJMD for opening its doors and enabling this enriching space for dialogue on IP and innovation in academic contexts.

PRE-SEMINAR DAYS

Friday, June 6

ASIPI participates in the Seminar of the AIPPI Central America and Caribbean Regional Group

Within the framework of the seminar “IP Challenges for Innovation in the Region,” organized by the AIPPI Central America and Caribbean Regional Group, ASIPI President Luis Henriquez took part in the opening ceremony alongside regional and international IP authorities. The event brought together leading experts and authorities from the

region to discuss current IP challenges, including the impact of new legislation, frontier innovation, and collaboration between public and private actors. We celebrate these spaces of exchange and cooperation among associations that share the mission of strengthening IP in Latin America and the Caribbean.

PRE-SEMINAR DAYS

Friday, June 6

Entrepreneur Training: ASIPI EMPRENDE y ASIPI PRO BONO

A new edition of the entrepreneur training session was held on Friday morning in San Salvador, organized jointly by the ASIPI EMPRENDE and ASIPI PRO BONO programs, in collaboration with Sandbox El Salvador, the country’s first innovation hub. The event welcomed around 60 entrepreneurs, who received one-on-one advisory sessions. In this context, IP was presented as a strategic pillar for the growth and competitiveness of new businesses. Opening remarks were given by Raquel Toñanez, followed by Andrea Possinhas of ASIPI EMPRENDE and Enrique Moeller of ASIPI PRO BONO. Pilar Troncoso delivered a keynote presentation, and Morena Zavaleta led a panel discussion. We thank Sandbox for their collaboration, entrepreneurs Marujatz and Isabel Barrientos for sharing their experiences, and ASIPI’s volunteer professionals for their support. ASIPI reaffirms its commitment to economic and social development in the region by bringing IP knowledge closer to those building the future through innovation and entrepreneurship.

PRE-SEMINAR DAYS

Friday, June 6

ASIPI and ESEN strengthen academic collaboration in El Salvador

On Friday, June 6, the talk “Artificial Intelligence and Intellectual Property: Challenges and Opportunities in an Interconnected World” was held in collaboration with the Escuela Superior de Economía y Negocios (ESEN). The event, held in the university auditorium, featured prominent panelists Juan Felipe Acosta, Danilo Rodríguez Villamil, and Joaquín

Rodríguez, moderated by ASIPI’s national delegate in El Salvador, José Roberto Romero. On this occasion, ASIPI and ESEN formalized an institutional cooperation agreement signed by ASIPI President Luis Henriquez and ESEN’s General Director to promote IP training, research, and outreach in the region.

PRE-SEMINAR DAYS

Saturday, June 7

Former Presidents’ Breakfast

PRE-SEMINAR DAYS

Saturday, June 7

Executive Committee Meeting with the Buenos Aires Host Committee

PRE-SEMINAR DAYS

Saturday, June 7

Executive Committee Lunch with Former Presidents

PRE-SEMINAR DAYS

Saturday, June 7

ASIPI ACADEMIA Meeting

During the ASIPI ACADEMIA meeting, led by Matías Noetinger, a review was conducted of the courses delivered in the first half of 2025, and plans were discussed for the second semester. A key highlight was the initiative to make all courses from the previous calendar year available on ASIPI’s website for all members. Appreciation was extended to those who led the various programs implemented in recent months. The meeting concluded with a discussion of new proposals aimed at boosting participation in upcoming courses.

PRE-SEMINAR DAYS

Saturday, June 7

Executive Committee Meeting with National Delegates

During the National Delegates Meeting, ASIPI President Luis Henriquez thanked attendees for their commitment to the association and emphasized the strategic value of this space for strengthening regional efforts. The importance of visits to countries such as Costa Rica, the Dominican Republic, and El Salvador was highlighted, where ASIPI has strengthened ties with key institutions and signed cooperation agreements. Delegates from Argentina, Bolivia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Ecuador, El Salvador, Honduras, Mexico, Panama, Peru, Uruguay, and Venezuela presented reports and updates, sharing local developments, regulatory challenges, and specific proposals to continue positioning intellectual property as a development tool in their respective countries. Internal matters such as the election process for delegates for the 2025–2027 period and the use of the reporting module were also addressed. This meeting format, established in ASIPI La Antigua and reinforced at each subsequent event, continues to prove its value as a key connection point between the ASIPI Executive Committee’s regional vision and the local realities of national delegates.

PRE-SEMINAR DAYS

Saturday, June 7

Executive Committee Meeting with National Delegates

PRE-SEMINAR DAYS

Saturday, June 7

Wine Tasting and Pairing

PRE-SEMINAR DAYS

Sunday, June 8

ASIPI Administrative Council

The Administrative Council meeting brought together the Executive Committee, National Delegates, and leaders of Committees, Programs, and Working Groups. It was a key moment to review institutional progress, exchange ideas, and plan for the Association’s future challenges. Luis Henriquez presented the President’s Report, highlighting ASIPI’s sustained growth, the strengthening of collaborative work with key regional stakeholders, and the impact of recent institutional visits. Emphasis was also placed on the

value of programs promoting education, social responsibility, and coordination with universities, authorities, and international organizations. Secretary Martín Pittaluga presented on operational and administrative matters central to the Association’s daily management, while Treasurer Ricardo Fischer reported on ASIPI’s sound financial standing. The contributions of initiative leaders were recognized, and proposals were shared to broaden participation in future activities.

PRE-SEMINAR DAYS

Sunday, June 8

ASIPI Administrative Council

PRE-SEMINAR DAYS

Sunday, June 8

Administrative Council Lunch with Committees, Special Commissions, Programs, and Working Groups

PRE-SEMINAR DAYS

Sunday, June 8

Meetings of ASIPI Committees, Commissions, Programs, and Working Groups

Meetings were held for ASIPI’s Committees, Special Commissions, Programs, and Working Groups. These in-person sessions allowed team members to share progress, exchange experiences, and strengthen internal collaboration. Special

PRE-SEMINAR DAYS

Sunday, June 8

Meetings of ASIPI Committees, Commissions, Programs, and Working Groups

focus was placed on accomplishments from the first half of the year and the definition of action plans for the second half of 2025, with the goal of advancing ongoing projects and achieving the 2023–2025 objectives.

PRE-SEMINAR

DAYS

Sunday, June 8

Meetings of ASIPI Committees, Commissions, Programs, and Working Groups

PRE-SEMINAR DAYS

Sunday, June 8

Meetings of ASIPI Committees, Commissions, Programs, and Working Groups

PRE-SEMINAR DAYS

Sunday, June 8

First-Time Attendees Meeting

A warm welcome meeting was held for those attending an ASIPI in-person event for the first time. ASIPI President Luis Henriquez, along with Mentorship Program Coordinator Jaqueline Moreau and Program Secretary Augusto Perera, offered opening remarks highlighting the importance of actively integrating into the ASIPI community. Each first-time attendee

was introduced to their mentor, an experienced ASIPI member who will guide them through their first steps within the Association. The meeting concluded with an informal networking session designed to foster new connections in a welcoming environment.

Welcome to the ASIPI family!

PRE-SEMINAR DAYS

Sunday, June 8

ASIPI JOVEN Meeting

ASIPI JOVEN, the group comprising ASIPI members under 35, gathered for a specially designed session to enhance their professional development skills. The meeting featured four guest speakers, experts in legal marketing and business development in Latin America. Titled “Rainmakers in the Making: From Contacts to Cli-

ents,” the interactive workshop provided concrete tools to maximize the impact of networking before, during, and after professional events. Through a participatory dynamic, they shared strategies for building authentic relationships, crafting effective pitches, and transforming connections into business opportunities.

PRE-SEMINAR DAYS

Sunday, June 8

Opening Cocktail

PRE-SEMINAR DAYS

Sunday, June 8

Opening Cocktail

Monday JUNE, 9

Opening Ceremony

The official opening of the ASIPI Seminar in El Salvador began with welcome remarks by ASIPI Secretary Martín Pittaluga and Host Committee Co-Chairs Edna López and José Roberto Romero. Dr. Camilo Trigueros, Executive Director of El Salvador’s National Registry Center, emphasized the key role of intellectual property in regional development. One of the most

moving moments was the tribute to Dr. Roberto Romero Pineda, honoring his professional legacy and valuable contribution to ASIPI. The audience gave him a standing ovation. ASIPI President Luis Henriquez closed the ceremony by welcoming attendees and presenting a video that highlighted the Association’s key achievements during the first half of 2025.

Monday JUNE, 9

Opening Ceremony

Monday JUNE, 9

ASIPI Running-Walking Tour

Yesterday, the ASIPI FIT Running-Walking Tour was held, organized by program coordinator Juan Bertón Moreno. Participants walked or jogged 1.5, 3, or 6 kilometers while enjoying the beautiful city landscapes. All proceeds were donated to the Fe y Alegría foundation as part of ASIPI’s ongoing social action program.

Monday JUNE, 9

Yes, We Can!

Latin American Innovation Success Stories

The first panel of the Seminar provided an inspiring look at the innovation journey in Latin America. Moderated by Matías Noetinger (ASIPI – Argentina), it featured Guillermo Carey (Carey, Chile) and José Luis Giammattei (Applaudo, El Salvador), who shared concrete insights from their experiences. Giammattei, founder of Applaudo, emphasized that intellectual property protection is no longer op-

tional: “If we want to be investable, we need to safeguard what we are creating.” Carey offered a deep reflection: “People are the ones who innovate—we are all engines of change. To innovate, you must reinvent yourself.” He warned, “In the world ahead, we must be able to learn and adapt; we need to reconnect with the questions more than the answers.”

Monday JUNE, 9

Public Policies: Catalysts for Innovation in Latin America

Moderated by Lilly Acevedo (MINIÑO – Dominican Republic), this panel discussed the strategic role of the public sector in creating innovation ecosystems. Panelists included Guillermo Anlló (UNESCO – Costa Rica), Víctor Martínez (Municipal Council, City of Guatemala – Guatemala), and Camilo Trigueros (National Registry Center – El Salvador). Anlló stressed that “innovation is a behavior,” and that differentiated, articulated, and coherent policies are needed across science, technology, and innovation. Martínez shared Guatemala’s five pillars of economic recovery, highlighting the importance of legal certainty. Trigueros emphasized the need for a tri-sectoral approach involving public, private, and academic collaboration within functional legal frameworks and localized programs like the Technology and Innovation Support Centers (TISCs).

Monday JUNE, 9

ASIPI Signs Agreement with the National Registry Center of El Salvador

ASIPI authorities signed a new agreement with Dr. Camilo Trigueros, Executive Director of El Salvador’s National Registry Center, establishing a framework for mutual cooperation in areas of shared interest. The agreement includes the exchange, promotion, and support of academic, scientific, technical, and research activities, the dissemination of intellectual property, and initiatives in entrepreneurship, innovation, education, and economic development in the region through the ASIPI PRO BONO Program.

Monday JUNE, 9

ASIPI Signs Agreement with the Directorate General of Customs of El Salvador

ASIPI also signed an agreement with José Benjamín Mayorga Osorio, Director General of Customs, aimed at fostering cooperation in all areas of mutual interest. The agreement covers academic, scientific, and technical exchanges; the promotion of intellectual property education; and joint efforts to prevent the smuggling of goods that infringe IP rights. It further supports entrepreneurship, innovation, and education initiatives aligned with the goals of both organizations.

Monday JUNE, 9

Training Human Capital for the Innovation Economy

This panel, moderated by Blanca Mejía (Bufete Mejía & Asociados – Honduras), addressed the challenges of preparing people for a knowledge-based economy. Lorena Rojas Vega (WIPO – Switzerland) and Marc Sedam (New York University – USA) agreed that the true engine of innovation is people, not structures. Sedam noted that entrepreneurship isn’t taught—it’s lived: “What matters

is not what professionals know, but how they think.” He also pointed out that countries with strong economies have invested in robust startup ecosystems. Rojas Vega emphasized the need to link academia with industry and strengthen operational capacities: “It’s not enough to push public policies—we must empower those who implement them.”

Monday JUNE, 9

Open Innovation and Emerging Technologies: New Paradigms in IP

Moderated by Ximena Souza (Osterling Abogados – Peru), this panel featured Diego Chijane (Cikato – Uruguay) and Enrique Shadah (Expert Collective Cooperative – USA). They addressed the challenges posed by emerging technologies to traditional IP frameworks and the need to rethink protection models. Chijane highlighted that

“companies can no longer move forward alone” and that open innovation enables more effective synergies. The discussion also explored how technologies like AI, medicine, and biotechnology are transforming regulatory frameworks and creating opportunities for new forms of collaboration and internationalization.

Monday JUNE, 9

“Sustainable Fashion” Contest Awards Ceremony

The awards ceremony for the “Sustainable Fashion” contest, organized by ASIPI’s Fashion Law Committee, was held. Committee Chair Eleonora Carrillo thanked the contributors and jury members and noted the high quality of the 30 articles submitted. An honorable mention for fourth place went to Rubén Calderón (Venezuela). Third place was awarded to Madeline Pamela de León Aquino (El Salvador), who was present in person; second place went to Magda Alejandra Jones (Colombia), and first place to Wilson Armando Forero (Colombia). Those unable to attend participated virtually to express their gratitude. Committee Secretary Annalucia Fasson Llosa also gave brief remarks. ASIPI President Luis Henriquez concluded by celebrating the participation of new talents and expressing his excitement to see so many young people contributing valuable ideas to the future of intellectual property.

Monday JUNE, 9

Law Firm Cocktail Reception

Monday JUNE, 9

Law Firm Cocktail Reception

TUESDAY June, 10

Yoga Class

Yesterday began with a yoga session organized by ASIPI FIT Coordinator Juan Berton Moreno. ASIPI members who attended took the opportunity to relax and unwind after several days of intense academic, social, and professional activity.

TUESDAY June, 10

Strategic Partnerships for Knowledge and Technology Transfer

This panel focused on how collaborations between universities, research centers, and private companies can accelerate knowledge and technology transfer. Moderated by Laura Valverde (Facio & Cañas, Costa Rica), the session featured Enrique Shadah (Expert Collective Cooperative, USA) and Victoria Sundblad (Universidad Austral, Argentina). Panelists analyzed successful intersectoral partnership models, strategies for structuring sustainable collaborations, and tools

for measuring impact. Drawing on her background in biomedical sciences, Sundblad provided valuable insight into how academic and research environments can effectively integrate with the productive sector to generate innovation with real impact. The panel underscored the importance of clear management methodologies and the need to build trust among stakeholders to achieve effective technology transfers.

TUESDAY June, 10

Due Diligence in Entrepreneurship

Moderated by Estuardo Jáuregui (Jáuregui & Asociados, Guatemala), this panel explored the importance of applying rigorous due diligence processes to entrepreneurship, especially in early stages. Ana Luisa Martínez-Mont (IDC, Guatemala) and Mariana Nóchez (BLP, El Salvador) shared key cases and insights. They emphasized that due diligence should go beyond financial and legal aspects to include intangible elements such as organizational culture, alignment of visions among founding partners,

and clarity in corporate governance structures. MartínezMont urged entrepreneurs to define their goals early and structure their legal frameworks accordingly. Nóchez compared due diligence to an insurance policy: it ensures everything is in order and minimizes future risks. The panel reinforced the idea that enthusiasm is no substitute for careful evaluation—knowing your partners, documenting agreements, and building a solid foundation is as vital as the business idea itself.

TUESDAY June, 10

Risk Appetite and Venture Capital for Innovation

Moderated by Danilo Rodríguez (Espino Nieto & Asociados, El Salvador), this panel offered a clear and practical overview of the funding sources available for innovative ventures in Latin America. Panelists included José Roberto Rodríguez (CoreNest Accelerator, El Salvador), Allan Jarry (Jarry IP, Chile), and Juan David Martínez (OlarteMoure, Colombia), who shared realworld experiences and startup case studies from the region. They discussed key financing methods—seed capital, angel investment, growth rounds, crowdfunding, among others—

and how risk appetite evolves at different project stages. Panelists outlined the typical startup journey, from inception to consolidation, and explained what elements are essential to building viable and sustainable financial models. One highlight was El Salvador’s experience positioning itself as an emerging innovation hub, with concrete initiatives to support entrepreneurs and attract venture capital. The panel’s message was clear: understanding the rules of the funding game is as crucial as having a great idea.

TUESDAY

June, 10

Technology Transfer: Key Strategies for Regional Development in ASIPI Member Countries

Moderated by Giselle Reuben (ASIPI Board Member, Costa Rica), this panel explored the challenges, progress, and opportunities related to technology transfer in ASIPI member countries. JeanCarlo Costa (Peru) and Fabrizio Modica (Paraguay), representing the Working Group “The Role of Universities in IP Development,” presented findings from the study “Technology Transfer in ASIPI Member Countries.” They discussed critical factors for effective

technology transfer in Latin America, including the need for clear legal frameworks, suitable public policies, tax incentives, and stronger innovation ecosystems. Success stories and lessons learned were shared, with a call to strengthen strategic partnerships among universities, governments, and the private sector. The full study is available at: https://asipi.org/biblioteca/es/download/ transferencia-detecnologia-en-los-paises-miembros-de-asipi/

TUESDAY June, 10

ASIPI and Fe y Alegría: A Transformative Alliance

During an emotional ceremony, ASIPI presented donations to children from Fe y Alegría El Salvador. The event was led by Margarita Romero, Chair of ASIPI’s Social Action Committee, and attended by Fe y Alegría representatives, including Ms. Dilcia Linares, Deputy Director of the training and development centers, who thanked ASIPI for its support. Ariana Rebeca

Ayala Cerón, one of the children, also expressed her gratitude on behalf of all beneficiaries. ASIPI President Luis Henriquez closed by highlighting that this collaboration goes beyond donations: “This alliance with Fe y Alegría is about supporting educational processes and creating real opportunities for the youth of our region.”

After TUESDAY June, 10

After TUESDAY June, 10

After TUESDAY June, 10

Comité Anfitrión

Acknowledgements

Comité Anfitrión Host Committee

José Roberto Romero Presidente

Edna López Presidente

Logistics Committee Academic Committee President President Coordinator

Comité Logístico Comité Académico

Zavaleta Coordinadora

Morena
Edy Portal Gabriela Sánchez Torres Marcela Canjura Elena Puente
Elsy Elena Durán Campos Alejandra Beneke Paola Lambert Marcela Mancía

Acknowledgements

José Roberto Romero Presidente Edna López Presidente

Comité Logístico

Comité Académico

Logistics Committee Academic Committee

Rodriguez Villamil Coordinador

Coordinator

Danilo
Sofía Aguirre Gilberto Fajardo
Carlos E. Castillo García Giancarlo de la Gasca
Luis Ernesto Guandique Chavez

Acknowledgements

INSTITUTIONAL SPONSORS

ACADEMIC PARTNER

MEDIA

SUPPORT ENTITIES

SPACE RESERVED

LIMITATIONS REGARDING PATENTABLE SUBJECT MATTER IN THE PHARMACEUTICAL AND BIOTECHNOLOGICAL FIELDS IN ARGENTINA

In May 2012 the Ministry of Health, the Ministry of Industry and the National Institute of Industrial Property (INPI) of Argentina issued the Joint Ministerial Resolution No. 118/2012, 546/2012 y 107/2012 (the Joint Ministerial Resolution) dealing with inventions in the pharmaceutical field. Also, in September 2015, INPI issued Resolution 283/2015 directed to biotechnological inventions.

Both Resolutions impose severe restrictions with respect to what can be considered patentable subject matter in the pharmaceutical and biotechnological fields and should be repealed for the reasons mentioned below.

I. The restrictions contained in the Resolutions are arbitrary, illegal and unconstitutional

The Joint Ministerial Resolution and Resolution 283/2015 contain restrictions regarding patentable subject matter that can only be established by Law according to our legal system. In other words, neither the Ministries of Health, Industry and/or the Argentine PTO have legal power to legislate in this matter. Additionally, both Resolutions contradict the Argentine Constitution, the TRIPs Agreement and

the Patent Law itself which do not arbitrarily restrict the patentable subject matter in such a harsh way but seek to generously recognize the product of the ingenuity of inventors. Hence, both Resolutions are illegal and unconstitutional.

Furthermore, the text of the Joint Ministerial Resolution contains a significant number of non-patentability legal presumptions and suppositions which the Resolution itself does not admit being refuted. In those few cases where the Joint Ministerial Resolution does contemplate the possibility of refuting the non-patentability presumption, in general the PTO does not consider the evidence and/ or the arguments put forward even when they overwhelmingly go in the direction of granting the patent application.

II. Unique situation

This very unfriendly patentability environment for applicants in the pharmaceutical and biotechnological domains is quite unique. A similar scenario cannot be found in any other country of the relevance of Argentina.

It is not uncommon to come across inventions that have been

successfully patented and protected in 20, 30 or more countries or jurisdictions around the world but that are rejected in Argentina based on the criteria contained in the Resolutions.

This clearly shows that the Resolutions do not have any universally accepted scientific, technical or legal sound grounding. In other words, they have been implemented for local political reasons seeking to generate a favorable ad-hoc environment for non-innovative entities which free ride their competitors in what constitutes a flagrant violation of our Constitution, the TRIPs Agreement and the Patent Law itself.

III. Double standard of the entities supporting the Resolutions

Further eloquent evidence of the last issue raised, is that many of the local Argentine companies that vigorously support the restrictions put in place in our country by the Resolutions, especially by the Joint Ministerial Resolution, seek protection for their inventions abroad. In other words, they play by the rules abroad but seek to have no competition in the local market by favoring a system that does not grant protection for genuine and valuable IP.

IV. Non-tariff barriers to commerce

Finally, analyzed from the standpoint of commerce and competition, both Resolutions seem to act as non-tariff barriers to commerce, imposing unlawful restrictions by means of low-level regulations.

Viewing this matter from this perspective seems to be relevant and timely at a time when the world´s trade system is being redefined.

V. Conclusion

For all the above-mentioned reasons we believe the National Government should repeal the Joint Ministerial Resolution and

Resolution 283/2015 so that Argentina´s patent system can once again function virtuously.

To achieve this objective, during January 2025, AAAPI requested to the Ministry of Deregulation and State Transformation (Ministerio de Desregulación y Transformación del Estado) the repeal of both Resolutions. The submissions were made through the website https:// www.argentina.gob.ar/desregulacion/reporta-la-burocracia within the framework of the open consultation mechanism that invites any citizen to report regulations that are an obstacle to trade and free competition.

Also, and for the first time in its history, on January 25, 2025, AAAPI sent a note to the United States Trade Representative on occasion of the open consultation this office carries out every year prior to drafting the “USTR Special 301 Review Report” where an exhaustive evaluation of the state of protection of IP is conducted worldwide.

Both initiatives have been successful.

The topic has been raised by the Ministry of Deregulation and State Transformation and there are proposals being analyzed at the Ministry level seeking to return to the more liberal patent system in line with accepted world standards that was in place in Argentina prior to the issuance of the cited Resolutions.

On the other hand, after the submissions made by multiple local and international organizations including that lodged by AAAPI, the “USTR Special 301 Review Report” issued last April by the Unites States Trade Representative once again includes this topic within the list of matters Argentina should correct.

From AAAPI we will continue working to make our position known to local and international authorities with the objective of strengthening the IP protection system in Argentina.

UPCOMING EVENTS

ABPI

IPO

AIPPI

MARQUES

IPIC

FICPI

AIPLA

45th ABPI International Congress

2025 IPO Annual Meeting

AIPPI World Congress 2025

39th MARQUES Annual Conference

IPIC 2025 Annual Conference

FICPI 2025 World Congress & EXCO

AIPLA 2025 Annual Meeting

WIPO WIPO – Standing Committee on the Law of Patents (37th Session)

INTA

APAA

ASIPI

INTA – 2025 Leadership Meeting

APAA 21st General Assembly and 77th & 78th Council Meetings

XXIII ASIPI Congress 2025

UPCOMING EVENTS 2025

August 17–19

September 7–9

September 13–16

September 16–19

October 8–10

São Paulo, Brazil

San Diego, CA, USA

https://abpi.org.br/en/abpi-home/

https://ipo.org/index.php/am2025/

Yokohama, Japan aippi.org

The Hague, Netherlands marques.org

Saskatoon, Canada

https://conference.ipic.ca/en/

October 13–17 Naples, Italy ficpi.org

October 30

November 1

November 3–7

November 18–21

November 6–10

November 30

December 3

Washington, DC, USA aipla.org

Format: Hybrid (In-person in Geneva)

Hollywood, Florida, USA inta.org

Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia apaa2025.com

Buenos Aires, Argentina

YOUNG ZONE

DEEPFAKES IN THE MUSIC INDUSTRY

Generative Artificial Intelligence and the Rise of Deepfakes

The consolidation of Artificial Intelligence (AI) has brought significant changes to life as we know it. Since its inception as a set of integrated technologies designed to simulate the human mind and perform tasks typically carried out by it—analyzing data, applying logic, and making predictions—AI has evolved and strengthened to the point of being able to create new content in text, audio, image, or audiovisual formats.

This particular type of AI is known as Generative Artificial Intelligence (GAI), which involves a model fed with vast amounts of carefully labeled and classified data, trained to perform tasks through automated processes, including validation and adjustment. It can generate content that is, in principle, new and original, in line with parameters defined by an operator.

It’s important to note that GAI models are often trained with content protected by copyright or related rights. This creates an initial point of tension between these rights and the AI in question. Much of the content used to train GAI is implemented without authorization from its rightful holders, making this an issue of significant concern.

The Ethical Dilemma of Deepfakes

A tool with such power and reach, capable of being fed enormous amounts of preexisting content and trained in highly specific ways, may indeed be used to create content that is, in principle, original. However, it can also be misused in unethical ways to produce content that is not only immoral but potentially illegal.

Among the most controversial uses of GAI is the rise of so-called deepfakes—synthetic multimedia content that replicates a person’s image or voice so convincingly that it appears entirely real. While often used for fraudulent or immoral purposes, deepfakes have had especially detrimental effects in the music industry.

What Is a Musical Deepfake?

A musical deepfake is a generative AI technique that uses deep learning algorithms to create or manipulate audio recordings in ways that convincingly imitate the voice, musical style, or performance of a specific artist.

Although voice imitation is typically the most distinctive and striking aspect of a musical deepfake, it is not limited to voice. It can also involve the mimicry of specific vocal styles, melodies and phrasing, harmonies and backing vocals, production and arrangements, and even interpretative and emotional styles.

What Rights Are Affected by Musical Deepfakes?

The generation of such content inevitably challenges the integrity of the rights ecosystem surrounding musical creations, potentially affecting each of the various rightsholders involved in such works.

Before delving into the rights infringed by deepfakes as end products of GAI models, it is important to consider the preexisting copyrighted materials used to train the models. Although still a legal gray area, there is ongoing debate about whether the use of such protected content constitutes a copyright infringement. At the very least, it involves a reproduction of the work when incorporated as training data for new content generation.

In many cases, the newly generated data closely resembles the original content used in training, raising concerns of unauthorized use

and derivative works. Beyond this, musical deepfakes may violate the following rights:

1. Personality Rights

These include rights inherently tied to a person’s physical and moral identity—especially voice and image. Musical deepfakes often replicate these attributes indiscriminately and without consent. Such unauthorized use can also infringe on the artist’s right to honor and reputation if the deepfake content compromises their dignity or public perception.

2. Copyright

Deepfakes may infringe copyrights when they involve unauthorized reproduction or distribution of protected content without compensating rightful holders. Moreover, generating new works based on existing copyrighted material without permission constitutes the creation of unauthorized derivative works—except where the original content is in the public domain.

This pertains not only to economic rights but also to moral rights, such as the right to authorship, integrity of the work, and control over how it is exploited.

3. Related Rights

Just as training GAI models with copyrighted works may infringe author rights, using phonograms could infringe the rights of phonogram producers. Imitating an artist’s performance to replicate their voice and create new works could violate the artist’s rights over the use of their interpretations.

Creating a new song by imitating an artist’s voice from existing recordings may be seen as an unauthorized derivative of the original phonogram, infringing the producer’s rights.

Additionally, broadcasting a musical deepfake that incorporates an artist’s voice, image, or protected sound recording without proper licensing may constitute unauthorized public communication, violating both performers’ and producers’ rights.

Conclusion

As outlined above, training GAI models with protected content without authorization has led to the creation and dissemination of materials that mimic artists’ voices, images, or styles, potentially violating personality, copyright, and related rights in the music industry.

The rise of musical deepfakes—and their ability to replicate the artistic essence of performers—underscores the urgency of clear legal frameworks and effective licensing mechanisms. Failing to address this undermines artists’ and rightsholders’ legitimate interests and erodes trust in the digital ecosystem.

Obtaining appropriate licenses is both a legal and ethical imperative.

a la cartE

The Use of Consent Letters and Coexistence Agreements to Achieve Trademark Registration

If you were not able to join us live in any of our webinars, you were not yet able to listen to our podcasts or you want to know what topics were addressed in our round tables, now you have the opportunity to access this content and stay up to date on various intellectual property and related topics, at the moment that you want.

Webinars

February 20

RECORDING LING

https://us02web.zoom.us/rec/share/ri9Iqr3eXQ12Qu2ZcmSYZ24NgV CAUUaG9B22GKy_Gub9uPPZkjJ4Zb2tuxWMMHvU.kmBapDebKprgfZ3?startTime=1740063421000

Código de acceso: 10qjr!2S

PARTICIPANTS

Erick Hernández, Miguel Muñoz, Mariana Lima Di Pietro, Magdalena Barros, Daniel De Prado (M)

Course Cycle Launch. Period 2025. Keynote Talk: The Art of Discovering and Protecting the Local

Awaken Your Purpose: Turn Your Passion into Impact

Useful Tools for Conflict Resolution in Intellectual Property and Domain Names in Latin America

Industrial Designs, Trade Dress and Unfair Competition: Do They Complement or Oppose Each Other?

February 27

March 6

March 13

March 20

https://us02web.zoom.us/rec/share/5OBjE7augl_MjlNLcLjwQSIAu FyKeT60DeJKCd1f4Z37Qc6BAQ47sZlbSC-4uGU8.9WQ32TkrnQGQ_ dSV?startTime=1740668422000

https://us02web.zoom.us/rec/share/gV91MnY9H4RPnkIIyAez4LM_ Ats2BgETj-UMJ52AbtHpafisaGLFxBuxuLB84yEj.hELo5GiAKzP0Dgh7?startTi me=1741273512000

Código de acceso: 4V%B7L?Z

https://us02web.zoom.us/rec/share/OEbL8CQdtwxzkT341tFklST19yQQcx7O5g1v jxockhqUszUoMSjf3hkDv_TQiPrP.XhOct9cvQfm2DZvt?startTi me=1741877906000

Código de acceso: f9qkd^e9

https://us02web.zoom.us/rec/share/kk_krwt-FPUBwDCArsnMzVt_qWtvV0r0ST0_ qGHwUZFQxfysRfg20kGvl9pkcrPy.5xYSluwCJC0_omlZ?startTi me=1742484847000

Código de acceso: lK=R73#D

Marina Muscolo, Matías Noetinger (M)

Can AI Training Be Promoted Without Undermining Copyright?

March 27

https://us02web.zoom.us/rec/share/irvXK-biBFfIpMQW_h71gkiOmJ0Z24JSeJZVRh SVDvbsuVKmw3FkHnzXly2Ebifn.r96Lwo46hcf1ee5r?startTime=1743087709000

Código de acceso: @Z9P80!m

Gabriel Leonardos, Laura Hernández, Diego Fernández (M)

Leandro Toscano, Luis Arancibia, María Cecilia Romoleroux (M)
Manuel Guerrero, Luis Diez Canseco, María José Lamus (M)
Matías Noetinger, Jorge Chávarro, Luis Henriquez

A la cartE

Play, Pause, Protect: Musical Entrepreneurship and Intellectual Property

How Far Can It Go? Trademarks and Copyright in Audiovisual Works and Video Games. Latest Trends

The Sound of Protection: IP Challenges in the Music Industry

Green Trademarks and Sustainability: Positioning Strategies in the EU and Latin America

Webinars

April 3

April 10

April 24

https://us02web.zoom.us/rec/share/k3TySwsWojEtFSRpyjVdnuzpip8Yt9YzcLIpJE XRe8T39Q-b7jzQ1eU88whB8PAv.RPYdtKtTVLD2tjCk?startTime=1743706801000

Código de acceso: ?5&!dXWZ

https://us02web.zoom.us/rec/share/4CySxJ6rK7aGVK_U3K8GUFaSljdNgemw8lE3 JDRfCOh5QFCanRIC2ocXiKLEnpFn.Zfp2c1LVBqtfJB45?startTi me=1744297117000

Código de acceso: 7UB@s2Wu

https://us02web.zoom.us/rec/share/YAx7h3PTB1Q2r7lnY6WqW_yy596gmz46XV8Yd5UVSspdlMyjxnkwUiIYy0K_Vcq.Q9t04XVHoJmx6wjJ?startTi me=1745503211000

Código de acceso: #7jP+4#T

April 29

AI Regulation: Between Innovation and Responsibility

May 8

https://us02web.zoom.us/rec/share/9S_jAZqHj9Ya-dwY1_F29CAv92EHv9EtsYDyTG2oHbfzDSscKvqEnUiazh7aR84.uMO6svczjw8P3Wt5?startTi me=1745938806000

Código de acceso: .h4Yr1^e

https://us02web.zoom.us/rec/share/zZ15141rHv53S5XYRqC6ZNnWH18wBfJXuw zJCbq7jG6tfG_Kg4u-uxzXYQQj54fO.upIae2kxLYjsoXbs?startTime=1746716243000

Código de acceso: 1X%SkUL%

PARTICIPANTS

José Roberto Herrera, Douglas Vannoni, Zvi Rosen, Megan Carpenter (M)

Luiza Bruscato, Ana Varsi, Mariano Riccheri (M), Julie Mejía, Eva Toledo, María de los Angeles Lobeyda (M), Altea Asensi, Sophia Bonne, Pilar Montero, Patricia Revuelta (M)

Oscar Salazar, Oscar Montezuma, Marycarmen González (M)

Use of AI in Hollywood

The Future of Legal Talent: Disruptive Strategies to Attract and Retain Them

Trademark License Agreements and Arbitration Clauses

Upcycling, Sustainability and Trademarks: A Review of the Andean Regime (Winner of the 2025 Sustainable Fashion Contest)

May 27

https://us02web.zoom.us/rec/share/lg_XY15K9wKIMtrmXo2P83g4s4Lv3 0Eui4YCRKsX2K0rgLgWRq8bFTB0-MTn6xw_.MOImLsVgIx11rY4v?startTi me=1748357997000

Código de acceso: A4?8!ta^

May 29

https://us02web.zoom.us/rec/share/NOJVvq9L-E87iSSzpe3swwPECPmn 9Syzz7U4m5zo4CkgqF-tC7o923PVz42CDSbm.1It5uy0fugEzVRwm?startTi me=1748530679000

Código de acceso: F7ZZA@$2

June 19

https://us02web.zoom.us/rec/share/XscH0WDe4um1I73N3ugSkJA1TPo1 AQAU69TbIQJaoyoqc1nqTH5aG8ngk4wodR-Y.z-SBbD2xUFn4sXG1?startTi me=1750345183000

Código de acceso: n1U=g.C1

June 24

Julio Castro, Rubén Calderón, Paula Bauer (M)
Rodolfo Rivarola, Leando Barbas (M)
Bernardita Dittus, Estuardo Jaúregui, Renzo Scavia, Carmen Paz Alvarez (M)
Rodrigo Velasco, Jose Pablo Soto, Yael Meyer, Santiago Cancino, Diego Palacios (M)
Mabel Klimt, Veda Cruz, Erick Hernández, Andrés Rodríguez (M)

Inspiring Women – Special Episode for International Women’s Day

The Miske Denomination of Origin in Ecuador – Part I

Let’s Talk About the Series ‘Playlist’ and Its Relationship with the Music Industry

The Role of Artificial Intelligence in the Present and Future of the Fashion Industry

Moral Rights and Comparative Legal Systems

Podcasts

March 8

April 25

May 2

May 9

May 23

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bCJV5Hj_E-w

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2iqnBLQ7-5Q

PARTICIPANTS

Irene De Sola, María del Pilar Troncoso, María Belén Cañas (M), Christian Thomae (M)

Diego Mora, Carmen Robayo, Ricardo Gordó

Rafael Ortin, Soledad Alvarez (M) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0DdDpeN7-WU

Gina Bibby, Susana Fernández, Eleonora Carrillo (M) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uZWnUV13Mh0

Gandara,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TGdA7hruxiE

Llobell
Gabriela
María Belen Rivera, María Soledad Alvarez (M)

Stories

AN ORDER IN KEY

At the table, in front of mine, a man arrived with a folder of papers; still standing, he takes a wallet out of his back pocket and opens it, a wad of fifty thousand peso bills, I deduce the value by the color, appears in his hands and he begins to count them; count and count, twice; He doubts the amount and counts again until he is satisfied, he returns the bills to the wallet and it to the back pocket, then he sits and waits, his gaze loses intensity, as if he does not see or does not want to see and he waits motionless. Suddenly a cell phone rings, the man answers, says two or three incomprehensible words and begins to spell, I suppose, a code: d, dwarf; e of earth; c from church; i of intelligent; d of doubt; e of earth; d of doctor. The person on the other end of the cell phone does not understand and the man repeats: d, dwarf; e, from earth and continues to the end of the word which I take for an order. Whoever is on the other end of the cell phone does not understand and then, desperate, the man grabs the briefcase, feels the back pocket where the wallet is and disappears as he appeared.

DID YOU KNOW...?

Barbie wasn’t always blonde

The world’s most famous doll debuted in 1959 with black hair, inspired by a German doll named Bild Lilli. Mattel acquired Lilli’s rights in 1964 after a legal dispute, securing Barbie’s global trademark dominance in the toy industry.

In 2023, Nike lost a legal battle against designer Warren Lotas

The case focused on customized sneakers resembling the Nike Dunk. Although Nike claimed trademark infringement, the court ruled the artistic modifications had “transformative use,” challenging the boundaries between design, art, and trademark law.

Taylor Swift trademarked the phrase “This Sick Beat.”

During the 1989 album era, Swift protected several of her lyric phrases as trademarks, including “Party Like It’s 1989” and “Nice to Meet You, Where You Been?”—a bold move showing how music and branding go hand in hand.

In 2022, Hermès sued digital artist Mason Rothschild over “MetaBirkins.”

The NFT versions of the iconic Birkin bags were deemed infringing by a U.S. court. The case set an important precedent for brand protection in virtual spaces and the metaverse.

Turn static files into dynamic content formats.

Create a flipbook
Issuu converts static files into: digital portfolios, online yearbooks, online catalogs, digital photo albums and more. Sign up and create your flipbook.