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.

Advertisement


Inside Views

Submit ideas 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.

How Listing Ukraine As A Priority Foreign Country In Special 301 Violates WTO Agreements

Prof. Sean Flynn asks whether US sanctions of Ukraine under the US Special 301 program violates World Trade Organization rules. He also asks whether the operation of watch lists threatening sanctions for intellectual property matters could be challenged under the WTO even prior to any sanction going into effect.





Latest Comments
  • As it happens, I own and create "intellectual prop... »
  • So long term planning of the UN Development Decade... »

  • For IPW Subscribers
    A directory of IP delegates in Geneva. Read more>

    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 Agree On Budget As DG Election Picks Up; Idris Gets Personal

    Published on 1 April 2008 @ 12:30 am

    Intellectual Property Watch

    By William New
    The member governments of the World Intellectual Property Organization on Monday reached agreement on the delayed organisation budget for 2008-2009, as election campaigns for the next WIPO director general went into full swing.

    The budget was approved after agreement on a five percent reduction in fees charged by WIPO to process patent applications, and acknowledgement of limitations on end-of-term personnel and structural changes at the director level by the outgoing WIPO director general, according to participants.

    The half-day 31 March “extraordinary session” of the General Assembly was a resumption of the annual WIPO assembly, which ended in disagreement over the budget last October (IPW, WIPO, 4 October 2007). The disagreement also was related to debate over the fate of the WIPO director general, who will step down one year early, in October 2008.

    An informal meeting will be held on Tuesday to discuss procedures for the May meeting of the 83-member WIPO Coordination Committee to choose a candidate from the 15 hopefuls. The informal meeting, open to all members, will be convened by the chair of the Coordination Committee, Hilde Skorpen, deputy permanent representative of Norway to the UN. There has been some question of how many rounds of voting will take place in the May meeting, which starts with all the candidates and ends with one, sources said.

    A key meeting will be held on 14 April for member states to meet the candidates, in what one official called a “beauty contest,” though another official preferred not to use that term.

    Approval of the budget CHF626 million over two years should free up funds for programme activities beyond staffing, WIPO sources said. Without approval, programmatic work would have been “severely hampered,” WIPO warned in meeting documents. Staff costs amount to some 70 percent of the WIPO budget, an official said. The full proposed program and budget for the 2008/09 biennium is available here.

    Idris Speaks Out

    Director General Kamil Idris, in a rare exchange with members of the press, hailed the outcome. “WIPO’s back on track,” he said, adding that it is “very good for the organisation.”

    “The adoption of the budget today is a sign of good will,” he said, suggesting that the lack of full funding was beginning to wear internally.

    Idris said that he is “very faithful” to the organisation, and repeated his view that intellectual property is a driver of development and wealth creation. The programmatic agenda WIPO has followed under his decade “was not a personal agenda,” he said. “It was for everybody.” He highlighted the Development Agenda, genetic resources, traditional knowledge and folklore, and the Worldwide Academy for training.

    Idris said he supports the five percent reduction, despite the impact on the WIPO budget, as it would open markets in developing countries by creating new incentives for inventors. “It’s not a North-South issue,” he said. Idris also mentioned a need for a treaty related to copyright and the Internet but said member states were not in agreement with each other.

    Idris struck a personal note by saying that when he is treated unfairly, he rises above the issue. He said he must be treated fairly. He also mentioned that he will not throw his support behind any particular candidate to be the next director general. And as to what he will do next after leaving next October, Idris said he is leaving “all options open.”

    Patent Fees Reduced

    On patent fees, discussion focussed on an amendment to the schedule of fees of the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT), under which a patent filer can get recognition for a patent application in all member countries after filing in one. The proposal to cut fees by five percent was seen as a compromise, as developed countries such as the United States (which account for the majority of fees paid) had sought a 15 percent reduction to reflect WIPO’s rising revenues, and other nations had resisted cuts to WIPO’s revenues despite a sizeable surplus, suggesting that the excess might be used to help smaller economies. The reduction will bring the fee for a patent filing from CHF1,400 to CHF1,330, according to WIPO.

    The patent fee amendment will cut the international filing fee for least developed countries from the current discount of 75 percent down to 90 percent for countries with per capita national incomes under US$3,000, and extends it to Antigua and Barbuda, Bahrain, Barbados, Libya, Oman, Seychelles, Singapore, Trinidad and Tobago and the United Arab Emirates.

    The change will be effective from 1 July. Some debate broke out over the starting date of the reductions, according to sources, as some smaller economies sought to have it become effective as quickly as possible while others proposed 1 January. The 1 July was a compromise, allowing WIPO to make the necessary changes as soon as possible.

    The reduction will equate to a CHF18 million reduction in revenues for WIPO over the 18 months, according to sources.

    The US ambassador said in his plenary meeting statement that the US agreed to the budget after Idris informed senior staff that he would leave significant restructuring and promotions to WIPO’s senior management team, which has decided to defer such actions to the incoming director general. This could mean a significant delay in filling the 13 vacant director-level posts in WIPO, sources said. Some developed countries feared Idris would fill the posts before departing, making it potentially troublesome for the next director general, they said.

    The US statement said a similar arrangement was made before Idris took office in 1997. But the African Group argued in its statement presented by the Algerian ambassador that similar requirements must then be made of all other departing UN agency heads in Geneva in order to ensure equal treatment.

    The United States also said the budget is transitional and will need to be revised at the next General Assemblies in six months to reflect agreed recommendations related to the WIPO Development Agenda, the PCT fee reduction, and decisions relating to staffing.

    The General Assembly Chairman was Ambassador Martin Uhomoibhi, the permanent representative of Nigeria to the UN in Geneva.

    The resumed meeting served as a showcase for campaigners to be the next WIPO director general. Materials touting candidates’ credentials were distributed outside the room of the General Assembly, and candidates were on hand to chat and discuss the finer points of WIPO policy and management.

    Intellectual Property Watch has posted interviews with the DG candidates at www.ip-watch.org.

    Group B+ Stuck on Patent Issues

    Separately, an official from the economies with the majority of the world’s intellectual property, referred to as Group B+, said the group has made little substantive progress on narrowing differences with regards to patent harmonisation despite consultations with the group chair. There may be an effort in Europe to focus on users of the patent system, but no Group B+ meeting is foreseen, the official said. The WIPO patent committee meets for the first time in two year this summer.

    William New may be reached at wnew@ip-watch.ch.

     

    Comments

    1. Gamal Karrar says:

      Dr. Kamil Idris, Ex. WIPO DG, treated unfairely as I see. The reason behind replacing him with new director is not because he gave wrong information regarding his birth date. Dr. Idris raised WIPO Agenda for everybody, for us in developing countries and for poors. He supported African Union project on Pan African Intellectual Property Organization (PAIPO) to protect innovations and increase human welfare for all African.
      I wish all the best for him and for WIPO.

      Gamal Karrar


    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.

     

     
    Your IP address is 54.224.79.93