Industry committee  The explanation we were given is that they had gone to the international agreement, the trade-related intellectual property agreement, and tried to incorporate some of the elements from that into the Canadian law. In our view, they actually didn't do that entirely correctly. Bu

Industry committee  I think that's right. The TRIPS agreement is signed by more than 120 countries. The wording is intended to be general, reflective of common-law countries, civil-law countries, many varying systems of business law, etc. There's no suggestion that everyone has to change their l

Industry committee  Correct.

Industry committee  That's correct. We are proposing changes to the current act, changing the word “means” to “describes”, and changing the word “wares” to “goods”. I think they're minor modifications and more reflective of current terminology. We believe that's sufficient for the changes, yes.

Industry committee  No, I'm not familiar with that particular case. I'd be happy to look at it. But I would say again that—

Industry committee  I would say that in general, in the prescription pharmaceutical industry, you're dealing with entities that are highly regulated. All manufacturers, wholesalers, distributors, and retail pharmacies are licensed. They need establishment licences, and they are inspected by Health C

Industry committee  That's what we're hoping, yes, that they would agree that the type of amendment we're proposing is a reasonable one that would not in any way change the intent of the bill.

Industry committee  Correct. Our legal analysis shows that, first of all, there have been dozens and dozens of cases in the trade dress area in pharmaceuticals. Consistently the courts have said that for trademarks relating to the physical appearance of a pharmaceutical dosage form, the tablet, they

Industry committee  On the definition of “distinctive”, the phrase that we are suggesting be taken out of Bill C-8 is the phrase “inherently capable of distinguishing”. Why we think that introduces uncertainty is simply that under the current law it's been made clear that you have to demonstrate tha

Industry committee  I think it's that a pharmaceutical application for a pharmaceutical trade dress would now argue that my particular medication, the look of it, the little triangular blue pill, may not yet have become “distinctive”, but it is inherently capable of being distinctive, and therefore

Industry committee  Just before I answer that, I can also say that we use one of Mr. Lipkus' other sons as a lawyer who advises our industry sometimes. They are very good lawyers.

Industry committee  Bill C-8 does not include in-transit goods as part of the “in scope” activities the Canadian Border Services Agency would be looking at. We think this is appropriate; we're not in favour of expanding those powers beyond the scope of the current bill. Pharmaceuticals trade around

Industry committee  Yes. Thank you very much. I agree with your point that similar size, shape, and colour of generic medicines—similar trade dress—is important for patients, particularly seniors, who often are taking many medications. If they are switched from one manufacturer to another, it's muc

Industry committee  Thank you, Mr. Chair and honourable members of the committee. On behalf of the Canadian Generic Pharmaceutical Association, let me say that we appreciate the opportunity for Canada's generic pharmaceutical industry to contribute to your study. The bill is largely focused on the

Industry committee  Yes, we would be pleased to do that. We'll follow up and send the recommendations.