Panel Calls For Disclosure Of Industry Methodology Assessing Losses To Piracy

Published on 9 November 2009 @ 5:30 pm

By Catherine Saez, Intellectual Property Watch

Intellectual property rights enforcement has risen on the global trade and IP agenda, but greater transparency in the evaluation of piracy and assessments of broader social implications may be needed, according to speakers at a side event last week.

Co-organised by the International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD) and the Social Science Research Council (SSRC), the event presented the findings of recent research on piracy and IP enforcement in developing countries. The event was held during the 2-4 November World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Advisory Committee on Enforcement.

SSRC presented a research project focused on copyright piracy involving 25 researchers in seven countries and aimed at providing empirical research on piracy.

Industry research has “owned” the debate for a number of years, said Joe Karaganis, program director for media and democracy at SSRC. In the field of copyright, research is difficult and requires a global network, which is accessible by the copyright industry.

The research project seeks to bring the developing country perspective into a serious debate on developed country losses, primarily losses in the United States due to piracy outside the US.

Karaganis noted that piracy also has obvious social benefits, which explains its persistence. In developing countries, piracy is often the primary means to access media goods.

SSRC has concerns about the integrity of industry research, said Karaganis, although there are genuine and valuable research projects in the industry. There is a need for industry research to be documented, to know the inputs used by industry and its methodology, he said, as more transparency in the process would add credibility to the results. SSRC recommended that WIPO put pressure on industry to display their research methodology.

In Brazil, patents, trademarks and copyright violations might be perceived as piracy from the way they are presented in the media, said Pedro Mizukami of the Fundação GetulioVargas in Brazil, and little work is being done to differentiate them.

The foundation is collaborating on the SSRC report. One of the concerns of the foundation is that there has been increased activities on IP enforcement in recent years and an increase in the media exposure. Public discourse on IP enforcement and IP rights in general could be improved, according to Mizukami, especially in a time of intense public consultations when the public needs access to information that is up to date and offers multiple points of views.

The report found that both the public and private sector are interested with the quality of research on piracy and counterfeiting but this does not necessarily translate into actual reporting of numbers, Mizukami said.

For Oona Castro of the Instituto Overmundo in Brazil, the main concerns are the access to knowledge and culture, and a balanced public debate on these issues.

The Brazilian government needs to be firm against piracy and should be concerned about international trade policy and relations but the awareness campaign and public debate should not be contaminated by numbers, Castro said.

Judges are not equipped to deal with IP issues and most government public servants are trained mainly by industry on these issues, said Castro, who called for multiple perspectives and a balanced view.

Rodrigo Araujo, of the Ministry of External Relations of Brazil said that availability of data is important, and that Brazil sent a paper asking for WIPO to develop a new and reliable methodology to assess counterfeiting policy during the Advisory Committee on Enforcement (IPW, WIPO, 6 November 2009).

In organising this event, ICTSD said it considered Recommendation 45 of the WIPO Development Agenda, which calls for members “to approach intellectual property enforcement in the context of broader societal interests and especially development oriented concerns,” in accordance with Article 7 of the World Trade Organization Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) agreement.

Catherine Saez may be reached at csaez@ip-watch.ch.

Categories: News, Copyright Policy, Enforcement, English, Technical Cooperation/ Technology Transfer

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

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.

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.

Panel Calls For Disclosure Of Industry Methodology Assessing Losses To Piracy

Leave a Reply