<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Wealthy Nations Move Ahead With Patent Harmonisation</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.ip-watch.org/weblog/2005/02/12/wealthy-nations-move-ahead-with-patent-harmonisation/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.ip-watch.org/weblog/2005/02/12/wealthy-nations-move-ahead-with-patent-harmonisation/</link>
	<description>Original news and analysis on international IP policy</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 12 Mar 2010 17:05:12 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: James Love</title>
		<link>http://www.ip-watch.org/weblog/2005/02/12/wealthy-nations-move-ahead-with-patent-harmonisation/comment-page-1/#comment-203</link>
		<dc:creator>James Love</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 12 Feb 2005 18:31:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ip-watch.org/weblog/?p=18#comment-203</guid>
		<description>I think the effort by the wealthly countries to push ahead on harmonization should include some policy on transparency, both of the objectives of the exercise, as well as the substantive proposals.  The "a2k" consuitation that CPTech as been involved in is a private non-government led exercise, but it also  includes among other things a publicly archived and open listserve for policy proposals and debates.  I hope some of the member governments in the patent harmonization effort will offer public access to the specific policy proposals, and some mechanism for evaluating their impact on consumer interests.  I am also interested in knowing more how decisions were made on which private sector bodies were included in the harmonization effort, which were excluded.  I think governments have some responsibility to be transparent about these things as well.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think the effort by the wealthly countries to push ahead on harmonization should include some policy on transparency, both of the objectives of the exercise, as well as the substantive proposals.  The &#8220;a2k&#8221; consuitation that CPTech as been involved in is a private non-government led exercise, but it also  includes among other things a publicly archived and open listserve for policy proposals and debates.  I hope some of the member governments in the patent harmonization effort will offer public access to the specific policy proposals, and some mechanism for evaluating their impact on consumer interests.  I am also interested in knowing more how decisions were made on which private sector bodies were included in the harmonization effort, which were excluded.  I think governments have some responsibility to be transparent about these things as well.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
