SUBSCRIBE TODAY!
Subscribing entitles a reader to complete stories on all topics released as they happen, special features, confidential documents and access to the complete, searchable story archive online back to 2004.
IP-Watch Briefs

Inside Views

Contribute your views! Submit an Inside Views idea to info [at] ip-watch [dot] ch.

We welcome your participation in article and blog comment threads, and other discussion forums, where we encourage you to analyse and react to the content available on the Intellectual Property Watch website.

By participating in discussions or reader forums, or by submitting opinion pieces or comments to articles, blogs, reviews or multimedia features, you are consenting to these rules.

1. You agree that you are fully responsible for the content that you post. You will not knowingly post content that violates the copyright, trademark, patent or other intellectual property right of any third party or which you know is under a confidentiality obligation preventing its publication and that you will request removal of the same should you discover that you have violated this provision. Likewise, you may not post content that is libelous, defamatory, obscene, abusive, that violates a third party's right to privacy, that otherwise violates any applicable local, state, national or international law, that amounts to spamming or that is otherwise inappropriate. You may not post content that degrades others on the basis of gender, race, class, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual preference, disability or other classification. Epithets and other language intended to intimidate or to incite violence are also prohibited. Furthermore, you may not impersonate others.

2. You understand and agree that Intellectual Property Watch is not responsible for any content posted by you or third parties. You further understand that IP Watch does not monitor the content posted. Nevertheless, IP Watch may monitor the any user-generated content as it chooses and reserves the right to remove, edit or otherwise alter content that it deems inappropriate for any reason whatever without consent nor notice. We further reserve the right, in our sole discretion, to remove a user's privilege to post content on our site. IP Watch is not in any manner endorsing the content of the discussion forums and cannot and will not vouch for its reliability or otherwise accept liability for it.

3. By submitting any contribution to IP Watch, you warrant that your contribution is your own original work and that you have the right to make it available to IP Watch for all purposes and you agree to indemnify IP Watch, its directors, employees and agents against all damages, legal fees and others expenses that may be incurred by IP Watch as a result of your breach of warranty or of these terms.

4. You further agree not to publish any personal information about yourself or anyone else (for example telephone number or home address). If you add a comment to a blog, be aware that your email address will be apparent.

5. IP Watch will not be liable for any loss including but not limited to the following (whether such losses are foreseen, known or otherwise): loss of data, loss of revenue or anticipated profit, loss of business, loss of opportunity, loss of goodwill or injury to reputation, losses suffered by third parties, any indirect, consequential or exemplary damages.

6. You understand and agree that the discussion forums are to be used only for non-commercial purposes. You may not solicit funds, promote commercial entities or otherwise engage in commercial activity in our discussion forums.

7. You acknowledge and agree that you use and/or rely on any information obtained through the discussion forums at your own risk.

8. For any content that you post, you hereby grant to IP Watch the royalty-free, irrevocable, perpetual, exclusive and fully sub-licensable license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform and display such content in whole or in part, world-wide and to incorporate it in other works, in any form, media or technology now known or later developed.

9. These terms and your posts and contributions shall be governed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of Switzerland (without giving effect to conflict of laws principles thereof) and any dispute exclusively settled by the Courts of the Canton of Geneva.

Call For Transparency In The Trans-Pacific Partnership Negotiation

In this post, three US law professors explain a recent call by over 30 legal scholars for the US Trade Representative to increase transparency for the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement intellectual property chapter, and their response to Ambassador Kirk’s response that he is “strongly offended” by the suggestion that the negotiation is not adequately transparent already.





Latest Comments
  • Congratulations upon re-election;-WHO chief.Priori... »
  • Great article. Ms. Chan may want to read our book ... »

  • For IPW Subscribers
    A guide to Geneva-based public health and intellectual property organisations. Read More >

    Monthly Reporter

    The Intellectual Property Watch Monthly Reporter, published from 2004 to January 2011, is a 16-page monthly selection of the most important, updated stories and features, plus the People and News Briefs columns.

    The Intellectual Property Watch Monthly Reporter is available in an online archive on the IP-Watch website, available for IP-Watch Subscribers.

    Access the Monthly Reporter Archive >


    WIPO Members To Seek Agreement On Development Agenda

    Published on 24 June 2006 @ 7:03 pm

    By , Intellectual Property Watch

    As they head into the final scheduled meeting of the year on a proposed development-oriented reform of the World Intellectual Property Organization, member governments are looking for agreement on how to proceed – this week and in the future.

    Officials interviewed on 23 June revealed that deep divisions remain heading into the 26-30 June meeting of the Provisional Committee on Proposals Related to a WIPO Development Agenda (PCDA). But all sides sought to put forward a positive attitude that a compromise could be found on differences in the week to come.

    PCDA Chairman Rigoberto Gauto Vielman of Paraguay met with key delegations for several hours on 23 June. Afterward, he told Intellectual Property Watch that the meeting was intended to hear views and discuss how to proceed this week, but that another meeting would be needed before the PCDA begins on 26 June.

    Also on 23 June, the 15 Friends of Development proposed a draft outcome for the PCDA which is intended to facilitate the conversion of proposals into a draft recommendation by bringing about a “drafting exercise” for an outcome. It narrows the 111 proposals in the committee to 21. The proposal envisions a recommendation for a “high-level declaration on intellectual property and development” and would institute measures to ensure WIPO activities are developing country friendly.

    The new paper attempts to remove repetition and make the issue of grappling with numerous proposals easier, a proponent said. It is a “serious and honest effort” to bring in most points made in proposals from the African Group, Arab countries and the Group B developed countries, along with the Friends of Development proposals, the source said.

    The new paper appeared to elicit scepticism from some other delegations in early reactions. The outcome of the development agenda process is seen as having potentially high stakes for all sides, as it could shift the balance of power in WIPO more toward developing countries. Developed countries own the vast majority of the world’s intellectual property and are the home of the majority of WIPO users, who account for most of its revenue. They are not eager for change at WIPO. Most developing countries, on the other hand, have equal rights in the UN organisation, perceive a disequilibrium in WIPO’s work programme and are seeking to change it.

    A key split, which carries over from the first PCDA in February (IPW, WIPO, 24 February 2006), appears to be how to address the numerous proposals (said to total 111) before the committee this week. A second difference appears to be on whether the development agenda should be infused throughout WIPO activities or addressed in a contained fashion through a single committee. And there also are differences on the wide-ranging proposals themselves.

    The committee was tasked by the October 2005 WIPO General Assembly (the annual gathering of member states) with addressing a series of proposals and reporting back to the 2006 General Assembly in September. The idea for a development agenda originated with Brazil and Argentina in 2004, and is supported by 13 other Friends of Development.

    The United States, generally joined by the rest of the Group B developed countries, has taken a strong stand against substantive change at WIPO. The US delegation, to be led by Lois Boland of the US Patent and Trademark Office, is expected to exhibit openness to continuing a dialogue into the future on concerns raised by developing countries, sources said. But it is not planning to agree to proposals for significant change across a variety of committees and activities at WIPO, as proposed by the Friends of Development, they said.

    In addition to the Friends of Development idea for handling proposals, there are others. Chairman Gauto Vielman said on 23 June that his February proposal for grouping the proposals in three “baskets” is still on the table. He would divide the proposals into those on which there likely could be quick agreement, those that might see agreement, and those that would be longer term – none would be completely dropped, he said.

    The United States, meanwhile, mindful of the mandate to complete consideration of all proposals this year, has suggested that members should go through the list of 111 and drop any that do not have a possibility of consensus.

    Categories: News, Development, English, WIPO

     


    Leave a Reply

    We welcome your participation in article and blog comment threads, and other discussion forums, where we encourage you to analyse and react to the content available on the Intellectual Property Watch website. By participating in discussions or reader forums, or by submitting opinion pieces or comments to articles, blogs, reviews or multimedia features, you are consenting to these rules.

    We welcome your participation in article and blog comment threads, and other discussion forums, where we encourage you to analyse and react to the content available on the Intellectual Property Watch website.

    By participating in discussions or reader forums, or by submitting opinion pieces or comments to articles, blogs, reviews or multimedia features, you are consenting to these rules.

    1. You agree that you are fully responsible for the content that you post. You will not knowingly post content that violates the copyright, trademark, patent or other intellectual property right of any third party or which you know is under a confidentiality obligation preventing its publication and that you will request removal of the same should you discover that you have violated this provision. Likewise, you may not post content that is libelous, defamatory, obscene, abusive, that violates a third party's right to privacy, that otherwise violates any applicable local, state, national or international law, that amounts to spamming or that is otherwise inappropriate. You may not post content that degrades others on the basis of gender, race, class, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual preference, disability or other classification. Epithets and other language intended to intimidate or to incite violence are also prohibited. Furthermore, you may not impersonate others.

    2. You understand and agree that Intellectual Property Watch is not responsible for any content posted by you or third parties. You further understand that IP Watch does not monitor the content posted. Nevertheless, IP Watch may monitor the any user-generated content as it chooses and reserves the right to remove, edit or otherwise alter content that it deems inappropriate for any reason whatever without consent nor notice. We further reserve the right, in our sole discretion, to remove a user's privilege to post content on our site. IP Watch is not in any manner endorsing the content of the discussion forums and cannot and will not vouch for its reliability or otherwise accept liability for it.

    3. By submitting any contribution to IP Watch, you warrant that your contribution is your own original work and that you have the right to make it available to IP Watch for all purposes and you agree to indemnify IP Watch, its directors, employees and agents against all damages, legal fees and others expenses that may be incurred by IP Watch as a result of your breach of warranty or of these terms.

    4. You further agree not to publish any personal information about yourself or anyone else (for example telephone number or home address). If you add a comment to a blog, be aware that your email address will be apparent.

    5. IP Watch will not be liable for any loss including but not limited to the following (whether such losses are foreseen, known or otherwise): loss of data, loss of revenue or anticipated profit, loss of business, loss of opportunity, loss of goodwill or injury to reputation, losses suffered by third parties, any indirect, consequential or exemplary damages.

    6. You understand and agree that the discussion forums are to be used only for non-commercial purposes. You may not solicit funds, promote commercial entities or otherwise engage in commercial activity in our discussion forums.

    7. You acknowledge and agree that you use and/or rely on any information obtained through the discussion forums at your own risk.

    8. For any content that you post, you hereby grant to IP Watch the royalty-free, irrevocable, perpetual, exclusive and fully sub-licensable license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform and display such content in whole or in part, world-wide and to incorporate it in other works, in any form, media or technology now known or later developed.

    9. These terms and your posts and contributions shall be governed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of Switzerland (without giving effect to conflict of laws principles thereof) and any dispute exclusively settled by the Courts of the Canton of Geneva.