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 Summer Interns

IP-Watch interns talk about their Geneva experience in summer 2013. 2:42.

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.

Latest Comments
  • So simply put, we have the NABP saying that all ph... »
  • The original Brustle decision was widely criticise... »

  • 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 >

    Top Internet Experts Debate IP And Digital Content; WIPO A Balancing Mechanism, Gurry Says

    Published on 25 April 2012 @ 11:52 pm

    By for Intellectual Property Watch

    Intellectual property was identified at this week’s Global INET conference as one of the most complex issues in the public policy debate related to the internet. With creative works abundantly available to copy, share, mashup and distribute, managing IP rights, obligations and limitations has never before been so complicated and controversial.

    During the Global INET conference organised by the Internet Society from 22-24 April, the panel session “Digital Content, Intellectual Property and Innovation” provoked a lively debate about how to respect the openness of the web, promote creativity, and respect content owner rights. Francis Gurry, director general of the World Intellectual Property Organization, emphasised the balancing role that WIPO could play in the face of these politically charged and globally dividing questions.

    As one of the keynote speakers to close the conference, Gurry evoked some of the many copyright-related internet controversies that occurred in recent months, including Wikipedia’s 24-hour blackout in response to the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and Protect Intellectual Property Act (PIPA) and the attack made by the cyber rebel group Anonymous on various US federal agencies in protest of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA).

    Seeking Consensus in the Digital Era

    In his intervention, Gurry said that although such political tensions are “here to stay,” the world needs to better manage them, pointing to the importance of the intellectual property institution as a “balancing mechanism for the various interests in and around the act of creation.”

    Afterward, he told Intellectual Property Watch: “It’s a global problem, so I think it needs a global solution. No one country is going to be able to solve this because it passes obviously every border. And I think our role should be trying to, through this slow process, build a consensus on the way forward.”

    The slow process of consensus building is, by nature, at odds with the pace of the internet. Gurry said that this opposition is a challenge that all multilateral organisations are facing today.

    “If you don’t come up solutions quickly enough, the world is not going to stop,” Gurry told Intellectual Property Watch. “Markets and technology will provide the answer.”

    So far, based on the Global INET session devoted to the question earlier in the day, it doesn’t look like the markets or technology has the solution either. The “Digital Content, Intellectual Property and Innovation” panel represented a wide range of perspectives on the debate with representatives from public policy, research and industry.

    Wolfgang Kleinwaechter, professor of international communication policy and regulation at the University of Aarhus in Denmark, moderated the panel session that sought to evaluate “how to reconcile the need to preserve internet’s fundamental character and its empowerment for new forms of creativity with the legitimate desire of leading content owners to control the revenues generated by their products.” Video of the conference is available here.

    Vint Cerf, vice president, chief internet evangelist at Google, and newly inducted member of the Internet Hall of Fame http://internethalloffame.org/, co-designed the TCP/IP protocol upon which the internet was built. In his first remarks during the session, he suggested that if it hadn’t been openly shared, the internet would not have evolved as it did.

    “Some information doesn’t need to fall under the conventional copyright regime,” Cerf said. He pointed to Creative Commons, a non-profit organisation that offers solutions for managing copyrights online, as one idea that provides a “spectrum of utility in control and non-controlled access for all kinds of information.”

    Additionally, Cerf said that there are “big opportunities to explore alternative ways of either producing revenue or sharing content.”

    Novel Ways of Sharing

    Robin Gross, founder of IP Justice, said that the application of the current copyright model is not fit for the information age. “I think that we need to look at new business models that harness the properties of the internet rather than trying to fight against those properties, like the ease of copying and the ease of distribution. These are the properties of the internet and we see traditional business models really trying to fight against those when I think they should turn this around and harness those properties.”

    Leon Felipe Sanchez, professor of law at the Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, also pointed to a need to develop new models to compensate authors and copyright holders which would be better fit for the web. “The IP regulation system needs to adopt a new multi-stakeholder system in which everyone who has an interest, including users, has a say in how we shape new regulations. And maybe one way is through establishing a worldwide blanket licensing system,” Sanchez said.

    Sanchez equated such a system to an International Music Registry (IMR), which is currently being discussed at WIPO. In fact, the status of the initiative was being reviewed in a “Roundtable on the Information Interests of Music Users” also held on 24 April.

    This WIPO initiative is meant to strengthen existing copyright infrastructure by establishing a system that will “enhance existing databases and identifiers and act as a platform for their interoperability.” The IMR consultative committee recently published the “Study on the Role and Functions of the International Music Registry” to evaluate its possible role in available rights management systems, especially as related to music.

    Although the management of copyright on the internet affects many industries, music was the only industry represented on the panel. David Hughes, senior vice president of technology at the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), argued that while the music industry embraces new business models, content creator rights should be respected as much on the internet as anywhere else.

    “One of the arguments being made is that the digital distribution is cheaper and easier and faster and that maybe we need to change the business model. The fact is that in the music industry, the distribution of a physical product was not a big part of our industry and neither is the distribution of it digitally either,” Hughes said. “We need to invest in the creation of high quality content and the only way to do that is to make sure that money flows back to the creators.”

    To which, Martyn Ware, Founder of Illustrious, SonicID, Heaven 17 and The Human League, responded, “I would love to find out where those record companies are that are investing heavily in artists at the moment because it is not happening at moment.” For Ware, rather than focusing on “the theoretical world of lawyers and copyright agreements and treaties,” new systems should be encouraged to compensate the masses of artists. He also said that in a world of streaming where “we aren’t owning anything,” the current system is not adapted to the reality of the web.

    In the face of an ongoing fundamental debate on how to best manage content rights in a digital world, Leslie Daigle, chief internet technology officer at the Internet Society, stressed the importance of internet standards. “We need to come back to building blocks. We need to look at the technology in terms of creators expressed, desired rights in their intellectual property,” Daigle said.

    “If they [content creators] have to restrict access to their material by not putting themselves in an environment where it might be copied they can’t become visible,” Daigle continued. “Let’s get back to the primitives of how do we articulate what rights we want to have on our material and use that as the basis for generating new novel ways of sharing.”

    National Efforts

    As various stakeholders try to lay stakes in a ground that is far from stable, China is set to enact a comprehensive revision of its copyright law. Hong Xue, professor of law and the director of the Institute of the Internet Policy & Law at Beijing Normal University, presented some of the key changes to the law. She also recently published analysis of the revision in a paper [pdf] entitled, “A User-Unfriendly Draft: 3rd Revision of the Chinese Copyright Law.”

    She explained that in the context of China’s strategy to promote indigenous intellectual property, the country is moving toward more exclusive rights, greater enforcement and stronger protection for copyright. “There will be less freedom of use, which is quite an interesting development in China,” Xue said.

    Xue also remarked that as demonstrated by the debate on the panel, the jury is still out on whether or not this model, which proved its success in the US and Japan in a world dominated by industry, is best fit for a world dominated by the internet.

    Other panel speakers included: Rolf-Dieter Heuer, director general of CERN; Jānis Kārkliņš, assistant director general, UNESCO; and Sacha Wunsch-Vincent, senior economic officer at WIPO.

    Related IP-Watch articles here and here.

    Rachel Marusak Hermann may be reached at info@ip-watch.org.

     


    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 66.249.67.251