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
  • So this is how we mankind will become extinct? No ... »
  • 'Business methods were generally not patentable in... »

  • 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 >

    No Industrial Design Treaty At WIPO In 2014; Technical Assistance Still In The Way

    Published on 10 May 2014 @ 12:06 am

    By , Intellectual Property Watch

    A World Intellectual Property Organization Extraordinary General Assembly was convened this week to confirm the re-election of Francis Gurry as director general, but also to decide on convening a treaty negotiation this year to finish a procedural treaty on industrial designs. No consensus was found on the design treaty, leaving the decision to be deferred to the General Assembly in September.

    After long hours of informal discussions carried out over the 8-9 May Assembly (following the first morning spent on the re-election of the director general), positions remained deadlocked, forfeiting the prospect of a treaty adoption in 2014.

    Francis Gurry was re-elected on 8 May © WIPO 2014. Photo: Emmanuel Berrod.

    WIPO Director General Francis Gurry was re-elected on 8 May
    © WIPO 2014. Photo: Emmanuel Berrod.

    Agreement could not be reached on a proposed decision [pdf] by Extraordinary General Assembly Chair Päivi Kairamo, the Ambassador of Finland, issued on 8 May. The draft decision left open two options on how to address technical assistance in the treaty: include it in an article within the treaty, or attach a resolution to the treaty. Either way, it called for the final treaty negotiation (diplomatic conference) to be held by year’s end, in Geneva. The location represented a shift from an earlier plan to accept Russia’s offer to hold it in Moscow.

    Informal consultations could not bring proponents of the two technical assistance options closer. Therefore, Kairamo issued another draft decision [pdf] at the end of the afternoon on 9 May, which sent the decision on a diplomatic conference to the next WIPO General Assembly in September. The decision encourages delegations to hold informal consultations prior to the General Assembly “with a view to resolving pending issues.” This decision was adopted by the General Assembly.

    The international registration of industrial designs is currently covered by the Hague Agreement Concerning the International Registration of Industrial Designs, managed by WIPO. The new treaty, which is said to be “procedural,” is seen as a way to simplify and harmonise procedures for industrial design registrations.

    The treaty would address questions such as the filing date, the grace period for filing in case of disclosure, multiple applications, the publication of the industrial design, and renewal.

    Work on the draft treaty text [pdf] has been going forward during the last sessions of the Standing Committee on the Law of Trademarks, Industrial Designs and Geographical Indications (SCT) but it hit a stumbling block with the issue of technical assistance.

    Missed Opportunity?

    The Group B developed countries said “it is very regrettable” that no agreement could be reached on the convening of a diplomatic conference this year, and that one specific element should have prevented the agreement on the “balanced solution to move forward” that had been presented by the chair.

    “This fact deepens our regret that some are imposing a condition on the convening of a diplomatic conference preventing us from moving forward,” Japan said on behalf of Group B.

    WIPO General Assembly  © WIPO 2014. Photo: Emmanuel Berrod.

    WIPO General Assembly
    © WIPO 2014. Photo: Emmanuel Berrod.

    The European Union in its prepared statement expressed regret that the WIPO General Assembly “has once again failed to find agreement on the convening of a Diplomatic Conference to establish a Design Law Treaty, despite the clear window of opportunity and the obvious maturity of the text.”

    “It is clear that consensus remains elusive due to a single issue of concern for a limited number of delegations,” the EU delegate said. “In our future discussions we should ensure that we uphold the high level of ambition of our nearly completed work in order to preserve our common achievement.”

    Main proponents of an article in the treaty are countries of the African Group. India in past sessions of the SCT also has said it favours an article. According to some sources, the Asia Pacific Group also shares the same view. The African Group insists that technical assistance has to be part of an article, and made it a question of principle, saying that technical assistance should be treated in the same way as any obligation laid out in the treaty. They are tying the agreement on the inclusion of an article in the draft treaty text to holding a diplomatic conference.

    Most countries said they could be flexible on the issue, such as the European Union, and the Group of Latin American and Caribbean countries (GRULAC).

    But the United States said that a resolution attached to the treaty would provide a swifter solution to technical assistance and capacity building, implementable as soon as the treaty is adopted, as it can take many years for countries to sign and then ratify a treaty. They oppose an article in the treaty, but would welcome a diplomatic conference to settle the issue, according to sources.

    Date, Venue of Diplomatic Conference Uncertain

    There is no indication of a possible time in which the diplomatic conference could be convened in the decision adopted by the General Assembly, other than “as soon as practicable at a venue to be decided.”

    Russia had proposed to host the diplomatic conference to adopt the treaty, which was originally foreseen for June 2014. Given the lack of agreement at the last WIPO Extraordinary General Assembly in December 2013, Russia proposed to host the diplomatic conference in December 2014, which led to the item being added to the extraordinary General Assembly already arranged to confirm the WIPO director general’s election (IPW, WIPO, 13 December 2013).

    The 8 May proposed decision from Kairamo stated that the potential diplomatic conference would be held in Geneva.

    General Assembly Reports Adopted

    The WIPO members also adopted the draft general report [pdf] of the assembly, which contains statements made by member states during the two days.

    The Assembly also adopted the draft report [pdf] containing the chair’s proposed decision on the industrial design treaty.

    At the close of the Extraordinary General Assembly, Director General Francis Gurry renewed his thanks to the Assembly for his second nomination and said he felt sorry no positive conclusion could be reached on the design law treaty.

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

     

    Comments

    1. Crisis At WIPO Over Development Agenda; Overall Objectives In Question | Intellectual Property Watch says:

      […] Earlier this month, an extraordinary General Assembly could not agree on the convening of a diplomatic conference (final treaty negotiation) to adopt a procedural treaty on industrial designs out of disagreement over how to address technical assistance (IPW, WIPO, 10 May 2014). […]


    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 54.90.42.156