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.

The Politicization Of The US Patent System

The Washington Post story, How patent reform’s fraught politics have left USPTO still without a boss (July 30), is a vivid account of how patent reform has divided the US economy, preempting a possible replacement for David Kappos who stepped down 18 months ago. The division is even bigger than portrayed. Universities have lined up en masse to oppose reform, while main street businesses that merely use technology argue for reform. Reminiscent of the partisan divide that has paralyzed US politics, this struggle crosses party lines and extends well beyond the usual inter-industry debates. Framed in terms of combating patent trolls through technical legal fixes, there lurks a broader economic concern – to what extent ordinary retailers, bank, restaurants, local banks, motels, realtors, and travel agents should bear the burden of defending against patents as a cost of doing business.


Latest Comments
  • “We want everybody to agree on the science telling... »
  • So this is how we mankind will become extinct? No ... »

  • 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 >

    Texts On Broadcasting, Copyright Education Exceptions, Metamorphise At WIPO

    Published on 18 July 2012 @ 8:40 pm

    By , Intellectual Property Watch

    Members of the World Intellectual Property Organization copyright committee today received a large compilation text of proposals on limitations and exceptions for education and research, and promptly set about totally reworking it. They also reopened negotiations on a broadcasters’ rights treaty based on a new comparative table of proposals which they quickly deemed in need of redrafting.

    On broadcasting, the United States sought to clarify the scope of the committee’s mandate related to the internet in response to concerns expressed by some delegations [corrected].

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

    This morning, delegates discussed the new document on education and research, and in the afternoon they discussed broadcasting. This evening, simultaneous informal meetings were being held among regional coordinators plus a few countries on the education and research issue, as well as a proposed treaty for print-disabled and other visually impaired people.

    Tomorrow morning, the education issue is expected to be on the floor again, as it was for the first two-and-a-half days. It will be followed in the afternoon by the first appearance on the floor of the print-disabled treaty.

    On Saturday morning, an informal meeting will be held on the broadcasting treaty, and it is expected to come to floor again on Monday.

    The goal of the committee is to bring each text – including also a possible treaty on limitations and exceptions for libraries and archives – as close to completion as possible by meeting’s end.

    The print-disabled and broadcasting treaties, in particular, are being eyed for possible recommendations to the annual WIPO General Assembly in October to call a diplomatic conference (a high-level treaty negotiation) in 2013.

    Both of these draft treaties were addressed at the last SCCR in December 2011 (IPW, WIPO, 5 December 2011).

    Compilation on Education/Research

    The compilation text circulated today by the secretariat, available here, searchable version here [both pdf, note: last 2 pages of comments missing for technical reasons], likely will be changed by tomorrow. The committee chair asked for a small group to work to “rationalise” the document, and restructure it.

    Members appear to be seeking substantive reductions and other changes before detailed discussions can move forward. There are suggestions to rearrange text under fewer and more specific headlines, reduce duplication, or remove items that may be beyond the scope of the subject.

    Many countries called for the separation of the section at the end containing comments and views, from the rest of the text which is taking the shape of provisions of a legal instrument. Group B developed countries prefer to keep the commentary in the same text, they said, citing the previously negotiated parallel text on libraries and archives as an example.

    Prof. Ruth Okediji, a US law professor who is on the Nigerian delegation, told the plenary that education in developing countries is not the same as in developed countries, as it happens “in a diversity of fora.” Therefore, the exceptions should be broad enough to allow access for educational purposes.

    Broadcasting

    On broadcasting, today a new comparative table document, available here [pdf], was delivered by the secretariat today.

    It sets out the existing proposals from Japan (SCCR/24/3), South Africa and Mexico together (SCCR/24/5), and an earlier South Africa and Mexico (SCCR/23/6), along with past comments from various delegations.

    A number of countries asked that there be one single text from which to work, indicating that proponents should work it out and come back.

    There was a return of an earlier debate about whether a broadcasting treaty should include transmissions over the internet. Countries have previously stated that the treaty should cover traditional broadcasting. Today, the United States said that in this day and age the treaty would not be worth negotiating if it did not protect against internet piracy [paragraph corrected].

    “In our view, a treaty that does not provide protection against signal theft using new forms of technology would not be worth concluding in the 21st century,” Shira Perlmutter, the new US Patent and Trademark Office international director, told the plenary. Any treaty should be technologically neutral, she said.

    This question is different asking which entities are covered by the treaty, she said. “The latter is an issue of subject matter protection while the former is an issue of scope of rights. Those delegates that are not yet ready to go beyond protection for traditional broadcasters may nevertheless find it important to protect their traditional broadcasters against unscrupulous actors who stream their signal over the internet.”

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

     


    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 54.211.1.204