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.

Quantitative Analysis Of Contributions To NETMundial Meeting

A quantitative analysis of the 187 submissions to the April NETmundial conference on the future of internet governance shows broad support for improving security, ensuring respect for privacy, ensuring freedom of expression, and globalizing the IANA function, analyst Richard Hill writes.


Latest Comments
  • Why should anyone care what James Anaya thinks? In... »
  • If this goes ahead, as the EU will "speak" for all... »

  • 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 >

    New Proposals At WIPO Show Global Debate On Limitations And Exceptions To Copyright

    Published on 17 July 2012 @ 1:42 pm

    By , Intellectual Property Watch

    New proposals for a text put forward today at the World Intellectual Property Organization copyright committee show the state of the global debate over limitations and exceptions to copyright for education and research.

    As indicated at yesterday’s opening of the eight-day meeting (IPW, WIPO, 16 July 2012), several proposals came forward today intended to provide the basis for a text that eventually would end up as treaty language on limitations and exceptions for educational and research institutions.

    The 24th session of the WIPO Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights (SCCR) is meeting from 16-25 July.

    The WIPO secretariat this morning circulated a draft compilation of proposals to date [pdf] on limitations and exceptions for educational and research institutions. This includes an existing proposal by the African Group, SCCR/22/12, and other proposals tabled today.

    A proposal by Ecuador, Peru and Uruguay was circulated this morning as document SCCR/24/6, and is available here [pdf].

    A separate but complementary proposal by Brazil was also circulated, as document SCCR/24/7, available here [pdf].

    Key issues being addressed in the proposals and at the meeting are the application of the internationally recognised “three-step test” for copyright, and technological protection measures used to control use of copyrighted works.

    “[C]onsidering the importance of ensuring that the international system of copyright and related rights is developed in balance with fundamental human rights such as access to education, it should be pointed out that the international framework does not prevent that relationship from being considered when interpreting the rights and flexibilities contained in the system, in particular, with regard to the so-called “three-step test,” the Ecuadoran proposal says.

    The European Union yesterday said that it is the norm in international instruments for the three-step test to apply to all limitations and exceptions. It appears in Art. 13 of the World Trade Organization Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS), Art. 10 of the WIPO Copyright Treaty, Art. 16 of the WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty (WPPT), and Art. 9.2 of the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works. The EU makes all limitations and exceptions subject to the three-step test under its Information Society Directive, 2001/29/EC, the delegate said. Others, such as the African Group and non-governmental groups focussed on access to knowledge, argue this point.

    On technological protection measures, a developing country official told Intellectual Property Watch: “TPMs can prevent people who are beneficiaries of limitations and exceptions from accessing the content. They have to ask permission to circumvent” the measures.

    Changes have already been suggested to the secretariat draft compilation by member states.

    Ecuador asked in plenary that the proposal title on page 17 of the compilation be changed from “Interpretation of the three-step text [sic]” to: “Scope of three-step rule.”

    For instance, Egypt on behalf of the African Group asked to add two clusters. One on computer programmes based on Article 16 of its existing proposal SCCR/22/12, and the other a new one on limitations on remedies for infringement.

    The text of the African remedies proposal is available here [pdf].

    The European Union suggested to include national experiences in the document as well. It also asked for more clarification on the meaning of the cluster titles, and said some topics go beyond the scope of work on this topic, such as contracts, withdrawn works, and translations.

    Pakistan offered more new clusters. One would say: “Strengthening of existing flexibilities and introduction of new flexibilities in the copyright system to ensure access to textbooks and educational materials at affordable prices.”

    The other would be “Access to publicly funded scientific research.”

    The African Group supported this and asked that the title of the entire compilation document be changed to include reference to “people with disabilities,” and the deletion of libraries and archives from the definition, as they are addressed in a separate text before the committee. The United States suggested a discussion on the document title should be held in a regional coordinators meeting to avoid long plenary discussions over wording.

    The African Group also proposed a new chapter for the draft compilation document on limitations and exceptions for persons with disabilities, to include Arts. 5 through 9 of their proposal SCCR/22/12.

    Nigeria also asked for additions to the compilation text.

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

     

    Comments

    1. john e miller says:

      Article from the above Proposal by Ecuador et al:

      INTERPRETATION OF THE THREE-STEP TEXT
      ARTICLE 2
      When applying either Article 9.2 Berne, 13 TRIPS, 10 WCT, or similar provision in any
      other multilateral treaty, nothing prevent contracting parties to interpret the three-step test in a manner that respects the legitimate interests, induding of third parties,
      denying from educational and research needs, and other human rights and fundamental freedoms; and other public interests, such as the need to achieve scientific progress and cultural, educational, social, or economic development,
      protection of competition and secondary markets.

      From Paragraph 6 of the 2008 Max Planck Inbst. / Munich Declaration:

      The Three-Step Test should be interpreted in a manner that respects the legitimate interests of third parties, including

      - interests deriving from human rights and fundamental freedoms;

      - interests in competition, notably on secondary markets; and

      - other public interests, notably in scientific progress and cultural, social, or economic development.

    2. john e miller says:

      From the above mentioned document SCCR 24/6 (e):

      “Likewise, considering the importance of ensuring that the international system of copyright and related rights is developed in balance with fundamental human rights such as access to education, it should be pointed out that the international framework does not prevent that relationship from being considered when interpreting the rights and flexibilities contained in the system, in particular, with regard to the so-called ‘three-step test’.”

      From the WTO document Overview: the TRIPS Agreement —

      “Article 13 requires Members to confine limitations or exceptions to exclusive rights to certain special cases which do not conflict with a
      normal exploitation of the work and do not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the right holder. This is a horizontal provision that applies to all limitations and exceptions permitted under the provisions
      of the Berne Convention and the Appendix thereto as incorporated into the TRIPS Agreement.

      The application of these limitations is permitted
      also under the TRIPS Agreement, but the provision makes it clear that they must be applied in a manner that does not prejudice the legitimate
      interests of the right holder.”


    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 54.198.224.121