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.

To What Extent Can Global IP Rules Be Responsive To Public Interest Demands? The Case Of The Treaty For The Visually Impaired

To what extent can global intellectual property rules address in an effective manner the needs of the most vulnerable members of society? This is the key question with which member states of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) are faced as they prepare to meet next week for a diplomatic conference, in Marrakesh, that should result in the adoption of a treaty to facilitate access to copyrighted works by visually impaired persons and persons with print disabilities.


Interview With Tanja Rajić: The Impact Of EU Enlargement On Trademark Practice In Croatia

Ten years after applying for membership, Croatia is finally joining the European Union on 1 July 2013. Tanja Rajić, senior associate at PETOSEVIC, explains how six years of accession negotiations and the adoption of the acquis communautaire have affected intellectual property protection in Croatia and prepared it for becoming a member state.





Latest Comments
  • We've taken a detailed look at the Myriad decision... »
  • “INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY BLUEPRINT 2014-2020”by Jeon... »

  • 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 >


    WHO Set On Reform Path With Concerns; Pandemic Plan Agreed, Counterfeits Not

    Published on 24 May 2011 @ 8:42 pm

    By , Intellectual Property Watch

    After ten days of discussions, country delegates closed the annual World Health Assembly today with the adoption of a set of decisions, one of which is a drastic programme of reforms intended to restore the World Health Organization’s central place in public health governance.

    WHO Director General Margaret Chan said in her closing speech today: “The most important message for me was your clear consensus on the need for reform and your clear desire to see these reforms reinforce WHO’s position as the foremost authority on international health.” She characterised decisions taken by delegates as “historical agreements.”

    Chan also emphasised the importance of the WHA as “having a tremendous impact on the health of this world.”

    The World Health Assembly (WHA) met from 16-24 May and addressed diverse health-related issues, such as the future financing of the organisation, pandemic influenza preparedness, falsified medicines, HIV/AIDS, communicable and noncommunicable diseases, and reforms of the organisation.

    All WHA documents are here.

    Chan obsequiously said today that she would follow all instructions delivered by the WHA, such as undertaking a number of managerial and administrative reforms, including a “streamlined, more realistic budget that works as an accountability tool.”

    “You want reforms that make it easier to measure the impact of investments. You want greater transparency and alignment of work at all levels of the organisation,” she said.

    “Many welcomed the proposed independent evaluation of WHO, and several suggested that work on the strengthening of health systems would be a good focus for evaluating WHO capacities and gaps,” she added. The independent evaluation will be “fast, light, focussed on all levels of the organisation, and designed to shape the reform agenda.”

    However, Chan warned that good will would not be enough to reach the targets set by the WHA. “If you give us an average of 25 resolutions at each Health Assembly, yet give us insufficient funds, how can you hold WHO accountable for implementing your decisions and recommendations?,” she asked, calling for more predictable and flexible financing.

    Reforms Start With Budget Cuts

    Part of the reform package is a substantive budget cut. The 2012/2013 budget, approved by the WHA shows a 17 percent decrease compared to the budget submitted by the organisation to the Executive Board in January.

    According to a WHO official, budget cuts likely will not affect programmes related to intellectual property rights, innovation and public health (IPW, WHO, 23 May 2011), although the organisation will have to part with 300 people at headquarters by December 2011. WHO has been working on these issues for several years, and is guided by the landmark 2008 Global Strategy and Plan of Action (IPW, WHO, 29 May 2008).

    In the new budget, 24 percent comes from member state dues, and 76 percent from voluntary contributions, half of which is from governments, a WHO official said. The other half of the voluntary contributions are from other UN agencies, foundations, and the private sector, which include in-kind contributions, like drugs, he said.

    Most of the voluntary contributions are earmarked for specific projects, which was a worry for some countries and civil society, who showed concerns over a possible growing influence of industry on WHO strategy and activities.

    Bill Gates, chairman of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, made an front-stage appearance at the WHA on 17 May, advocating the “Decade of Vaccines,” and preaching availability through low prices and intellectual property rights (IPW, WHO, 17 May 2011).

    The reform programme also includes the establishment of a multi-stakeholder platform, which provoked concerns among WHO observers who fear it may open a door for industry influence in the organisation. It was also eyed cautiously by member states.

    Chan said today: “Some delegates are reluctant to introduce a new mechanism, with clear financial implications, that could dilute the intergovernmental nature of WHO, which is clearly one of our strengths.” She said she “will work closely with the Executive Board to flesh out, in more detail, a coherent package of reforms. This will be a fully consultative process, fully engaging member states.”

    In her opening speech, Chan said that the programme of reforms had the “potential to change WHO for the better,” and said she “will lead this programme of reforms myself” (IPW, WHO, 20 May 2011).

    Given that her mandate will end in June 2012, some have said that Chan was positioning herself for a second term. She would be fully supported by the United States, Kathleen Sebelius, the US Secretary of Health and Human Services, told a press briefing on 17 May (IPW, WHO, 17 May 2011).

    Work on Falsified Medicines Extended

    The WHA also approved a recommendation to give an additional year to the working group on “substandard/spurious/falsely-labelled/falsified/counterfeit” medical products (SSFFC) to deliver a set of recommendations to fight falsified medicines to the WHA (IPW, WHO, 23 May 2011).

    The main area of discontent is the issue of intellectual property rights, as some countries found that the current WHO taskforce to fight falsified medicines had strayed too far into a role of enforcing intellectual property rights, such as patents or trademark, instead of focusing solely on public health issues.

    The working group is extended with its initial mandate, and member states asked for a clear schedule of meetings up to the next WHA.

    The WHO International Medical Products Anti-Counterfeiting Taskforce (IMPACT), which involves law enforcement agency Interpol, was again in the centre of debates, with countries, such as India asking that the WHO suspends its relations with IMPACT until the outcome of the working group is finalised and its recommendations endorsed by the WHA.

    Most countries asked for WHO to help countries to strengthen health systems and drug regulatory authorities, and emphasised the need for affordable medicines in developing countries, as one of the ways to fight falsified medicines. Countries are expected to discuss further the issue of IMPACT during the next meetings of the working group.

    World Closer to Readiness for Next Pandemic

    Member states also approved a framework intended to help the world address the next influenza pandemic in a more efficient and fair manner (IPW, WHO, 23 May 2011).

    The Open-Ended Working Group on Pandemic Influenza Preparedness on the sharing of influenza viruses and access to vaccines and other benefits, produced in April, after four years of discussion, a “Pandemic Influenza Preparedness Framework” (IPW, WHO, 18 April 2011). The framework includes benefit sharing for developing countries in exchange for the expedited sharing of influenza viruses.

    In particular, it includes standard material transfer agreements (SMTAs), which are contractual legal instruments between the countries sharing the virus, and the recipients, whether they are entities inside the WHO surveillance network, or outside of this network, such as companies. For the latter, benefit-sharing options are mandatory, to be chosen by the recipients from a list provided in the SMTA. Companies also will financially contribute through an annual partnership contribution to WHO.

    Some countries, such as Brazil, called for companies to provide non-exclusive licences at affordable royalties, or royalty-free to developing countries. Countries also mentioned technology transfer as essential to building up vaccine capacities in developing countries.

    Civil society said the monetary contribution decided on in the framework was not in proportion with profits that pharmaceutical companies derive from getting access to virus samples, and said the framework should have mandatorily limited intellectual property rights, as benefits.

    Industry Warns Against Lack of Production Capacity for Flu Vaccine

    International Federation of Pharmaceutical Manufacturers & Associations (IFPMA) said today in a press release [pdf] that it had followed with particular interest decisions made by member governments on pandemic influenza preparedness and fake medical products.

    However, they said, “areas remain for improvement especially in terms of sustaining the appropriate production capacity which may still be insufficient for global populations.”

    WHO Board Warned Against Private Funding

    The 129th session of the WHO Executive Board will take place tomorrow (IPW, WHO, 23 May 2011).

    In a letter today [pdf], a group of non-governmental organisations expressed concern regarding the management of conflicts of interest and the role of private bodies in the financing and the governance of WHO.

    Of particular concern, they said, is that a private foundation has pledged to finance part of the WHO overall design of the reform programme.

    “It is entirely inappropriate that the blueprint for reform of a UN institution is funded by a private entity,” they said, asking that “a clear separation between WHO and the interests of private actors” is maintained.

    They request that the Executive Board rejects private financing and “ensure that this reform is either funded from existing core contributions from member states or from additional member state contributions.”

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

     

    Comments

    1. WHO Board Lays Out Steps To Reform | Intellectual Property Watch says:

      [...] broad plan for substantive reform, but delegates asked that the process be member-state driven (IPW, WHO, 24 May 2011). The World Health Forum, intended to gather different stakeholders such as civil society and [...]

    2. WHO’s Chan Pitches UN Agency’s “Staying Power,” Unique Role | Intellectual Property Watch says:

      [...] The WHO Executive Board is meeting in a special session from 1-3 November to address organisational reform, as called for by the annual World Health Assembly in May (IPW, WHO, 24 May 2011). [...]

    3. WHO Board Backs Reform Plan For UN Agency | Intellectual Property Watch says:

      [...] WHO Set On Reform Path With Concerns; Pandemic Plan Agreed, Counterfeits Not [...]

    4. WHO Advisory Group On Pandemic Flu To Meet Next Week | Intellectual Property Watch says:

      [...] the pandemic influenza preparedness (PIP) framework launched at the May 2011 World Health Assembly (IPW, WHO, 24 May 2011). As of last week, the 18 members of the advisory group were still being finalised, according to [...]


    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 50.16.108.167