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

Advertisement


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.

Occupy IP: New Economy Businesses Clash With Old

It may be too much, too late for content providers finally trying to tame the internet, and a fresh approach is needed, writes Bruce Berman.




Special Reports

Non-Communicable Diseases Issue Energises Public Health Policymakers Read More >


Latest Comments
  • I deeply apprecite the initiative to combat agains... »
  • 1. Cuál es el problema principal que se plantea en... »

  • 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 >


    Biodiversity: Bountiful Source For Cosmetics, But Needs Respect, Group Says

    Published on 21 April 2010 @ 5:36 pm

    By , Intellectual Property Watch

    PARIS – The cosmetics industry is about beauty, but it is also increasingly about biodiversity as consumers show a growing awareness of environmental issues and the loss of biodiversity. As a wishful wink to the 10th meeting of the UN Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) in Nagoya, Japan in October 2010, the Union for Ethical BioTrade (UEBT) held a conference at the Palais de Tokyo in Paris on 15 April.

    The event, named “The Beauty of Sourcing with Respect,” gathered about 80 participants mainly from the cosmetics industry as the biotrade union sought to increase the sector’s awareness about biodiversity, engage companies in the ethical sourcing of biodiversity, and advertise the actions of UEBT.

    The UEBT is a non-profit association, with members from NGOs, international organisations and businesses. Companies seeking to be a UEBT member have to undergo external audits and prepare work-plans to bring their practices in line with the Ethical BioTrade standard over five years, UEBT Executive Director Rik Kutsch Lojanga told Intellectual Property Watch after the event.

    The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB), an international study led by the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP), is drawing attention to the global potential benefits of biodiversity, and seeking to “show that economics can be a powerful instrument in biodiversity,” according to their website.

    Joshua Bishop, coordinator of “TEEB for Business”, said that TEEB gathered 200 economists for the study, for which final results should be presented in October 2010. The study is divided into five clusters, he said: background information, international policymakers, local governments, business, and consumers.

    The difference between climate change and biodiversity loss has to be recognised, said Bishop, as climate change is a “global public bad” and is measured in terms of carbon dioxide equivalent, while biodiversity is a combination of public goods (local, national, global) and is much more complex to evaluate.

    For example, in tropical forests, 27 percent of resources have a direct use, 66 percent have an indirect use, and 7 percent are not being used. Direct use is reflected in market prices and values, such as food, water, raw material, genetic resources, and medicinal resources, but indirect uses are not taken into account. Indirect use includes the influence or air quality, climate regulation, the moderation of extreme events, and the regulation of water flows, Bishop said.

    Businesses should assess their biodiversity risk and opportunities, develop strategy and action plans, educate employees and owners, explore key performance indicators and targets, and disclose impact actions and outcomes. More work is needed on reporting, he said, and biodiversity risks need to be turned into business opportunities.

    Brazil’s cosmetics market is climbing steadily, according to Marcos Vaz, director sustainable development for Natura Cosmetics. Biodiversity is a source of innovation and a driver of positive social and environment impacts, he said. It is possible to make money, raise awareness and do business in a sustainable manner.

    Natura does not patent any technology that is derived from traditional knowledge. “It is not our right to patent it, so we have a policy of not using any proprietary protection on the technology that is developed,” Vaz said. The company does not patent plants or the genetic content of plants, just the processes that are developed.

    Consumers’ Awareness Growing, Expectations Too

    The UEBT recently released the 2010 edition of the ethical Biodiversity Barometer. The barometer reveals that there is a change in the consumers’ attitude that will impact all cosmetic industries. Consumers are increasingly favouring companies showing ethical practices and sustainable production, according to the barometer.

    According to Remy Oudghiri, director of Trends and Insights studies for Ipsos, a survey-based research company, which carried out a study for UEBT on 5,000 consumers in Brazil, France, Germany, the United Kingdom, and the United States, an increasing proportion of people are aware of biodiversity issues. On the other hand, he said, there is a confirmed distrust of the industry by consumers. They are not confident that companies pay serious attention to ethical sourcing of biodiversity.

    One of the ways to improve this perception might be to have the industry’s commitment to ethical sourcing verified by independent organisations, Oudghiri said. The distrust also goes towards information, as the public distrusts official information; making it necessary to invent a new way to communicate.

    Fleur Rodriguez-Gallois, head of the Programme for Sustainable Development of Raw Materials. for Kenzo Parfums, said that the luxury brand had a strong environmental commitment, and had turned for example to “ecodesign” and “ecopackaging” for its perfume boxes. Ecodesign and ecopackaging provides an approach to the design of a product or a packaging that takes into account the environmental impacts of the product or the packaging during its life cycle. In 2010, Kenzo Parfums initiated its biodiversity strategy with a focus on the source of raw materials, and covering the entire supply chain, identifying the true pressures on ecosystems, using a qualitative and quantitative approach, she said.

    Claude Fromageot, director of research and development of Yves Rocher, said that the company has an internal ban on patents concerning applications derived from traditional knowledge.

    Yves Rocher uses few patents and mainly on extraction processes and mostly only in France, Fromageot told Intellectual Property Watch after the meeting. Patents have enabled economic development in Europe, he said, and they might be a way to valorise plants from developing countries. However, the company is pondering open source options, under conditions that the licence be used in a sustainable and environmental-friendly way, he said.

    Do Patents Contradict Access and Benefit Sharing?

    Most criticism focuses on the way patents are used, not patents themselves, said Maria Julia Oliva, senior advisor on access and benefit sharing for UEBT. Patents are increasingly used in the sector and it is important for the companies to adopt patent policies in accordance with the CBD.

    There are continuous applications for patents on biodiversity-derived innovation, said Manuel Ruiz, director of the International Affairs and Biodiversity Programme for the Peruvian Society for Environmental Law. Countries have reacted to the way patents have been granted in the European Union, US and Japan in particular. In many cases, it is not the patent itself which brings discontent but how resources were acquired, he said.

    There is a need to reform the patent system to include universal disclosure requirements of origin and legal provenance, he said. Such a provision exists in Norwegian and Swiss legislations, and should be incorporated in many countries, he argued. There is also a need for reform at the intellectual property offices to ensure that they become receptive to information which may assist in patent document analysis, he added.

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

     

    Comments

    1. dead sea premier says:

      The regular users and beneficiaries of biodiversity and cosmetics industries have the opportunity to help manage and conserve natural resources.Providing jobs without harming the environment is very important.

    2. Intellectual Property Watch » Blog Archive » Panellists See Critical Moment For International Policy On Biodiversity And Trade says:

      [...] Here Latest Commentsdead sea premier on Biodiversity: Bountiful Source For Cosmetics, But Needs Respect, Group SaysThe regular users and beneficiaries of biodiversit… »Brian Lander on Obama Administration [...]

    3. Biodiversity: Bountiful Source For Cosmetics, But Needs Respect | Conservation Commons says:

      [...] Rights,IP Policies,Language,Patent Policy,Themes,Traditional and Indigenous Knowledge 2 Comments (Open | [...]


    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.