Login
You are not logged in.
Login | Subscribe

RSS feed 

What is RSS?

RSS (Really Simple Syndication) is an XML format of a web site or a weblog designed to allow the distribution and the sharing of information. An RSS feed or web feed provides headlines, brief descriptions and links to the full original content in a standard format.

More information is available on Wikipedia.

What is the benefit of using RSS feeds?

RSS is an easy way for you to be alerted when new content is posted on your chosen web sites, such as the Intellectual Property Watch website. Instead of visiting the IP-Watch website again and again to browse for new stories, the RSS feed automatically tells you when something new is posted.

What do I need to use RSS?

To start using RSS, you need a news reader or aggregator that displays RSS feeds from web sites or weblogs you selected. There are many different news readers, available as applications to be installed on your computer or as web services. Some web browsers such as Firefox and Safari can display RSS feeds too.

You can find a list on RSS Compendium.

Once you have set up your news reader, you simply subscribe to the RSS feeds you want.

How do I subscribe to the IP-Watch RSS feed?

Copy the URL of the IP-Watch RSS feed as provided in the left margin to your clipboard. Then follow the instructions on your particular news reader for adding / subscribing to RSS feeds.

Email alerts 

You can subscribe for free to receive automatic email notifications whenever new content is available on the Intellectual Property Watch website. Moreover, you can configure the alerts to fit your needs and interests by defining the frequency, the type of content and even the language.

Subscribe/free trial 

Intellectual Property Watch subscribers receive exclusive access to stories published on the website under password protection, plus the Intellectual Property Watch monthly edition, a 16-page selection of the most important stories and features, including the People column and News Briefs section not available anywhere else. These columns contain the latest on personnel changes in the international IP community, and items on IP policy news and reports from around the world. The Intellectual Property Watch Monthly Reporter is available online and in print, mailed to your door.


Global IP Policy in 2010:
What You Need To Know
IP-Watch Year Ahead Series

Advertise Here

Latest Comments
  • @Sam: These laws apply here in Canada...that is fo... »
  • Great move on open innovation and effort to help t... »
  • Inside Views

    Contribute your views! Submit an Inside Views idea on any relevant topic to info [at] ip-watch [dot] ch, or leave a comment within any piece such as below.

    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.

    Copyright Law Reform in Brazil: Anteprojeto or Anti-project?

    A balancing of the rights of authors and consumers, the re-introduction of a private copying exception, a remixing permission and a new regulatory agency for copyright issues are among the core points the Brazilian Ministry of Culture has planned for the new copyright law. But at the Third Conference on Copyright and the Public Interest in São Paulo a month ago, the Ministry emphasised that the bits and pieces shown to the audience were not from an actual law draft (”anteprojeto”) but only a preliminary proposal for formulating such a draft. The bill still has not been published to date. The delay in releasing the bill for public consultation now threatens the work of more than two years on the reform.


    Take Two: China’s Proposed Regulations For Patent-Involving National Standards

    The Standards Administration of China patent policy proposal fails to strike the desired balance and undervalues the intellectual property included in a standard. If implemented as worded, it will discourage the contribution of innovative technologies for use in national standards and the participation of patent holders, writes George Willingmyre.


    30 June 2006

    WIPO Development Agenda Talks End With No Agreement For Now

    By William New and Tove Iren S. Gerhardsen

    After two week-long meetings and intensive consultations during the year, talks on bolstering the development perspective of the World Intellectual Property Organization ended today with no agreement, sending proposals back to the UN body’s annual meeting of member states in September. But a continuation of the debate in some form is likely next year, sources said.

    The WIPO Provisional Committee on Proposals Related to a WIPO Development Agenda (PCDA) was established by the 2005 General Assembly with the mission of reviewing proposals and making recommendations. But negotiators could not agree on recommendations after meeting from 20-24 February and 26-30 June.

    Key development agenda proponents acted to prevent the talks from losing the ambitious scope originally intended in the proposal, they said.

    “There was no agreement, but also no loss of substance of the development agenda,” a Brazilian official said, adding that there is an agreement that process should proceed. Brazil is a leading proponent of the development agenda.

    “The development agenda idea is definitely not dead,” an official from a European Union member said. “Both sides are committed to including development in WIPO.”

    But how the talks will proceed is a critical question to be answered, as larger economies have sought to keep it contained to a single group and specific issues such as technical assistance, rather than a full reform of the organisation.

    Proponents attempted during the week to steer the discussion toward their draft meeting outcome document put forward at the start of the meeting. But PCDA Chairman Rigoberto Gauto Vielman, the Paraguayan Ambassador to the WTO, said in an interview that informal consultations he held showed some countries, the Group B developed countries in particular, could not accept the proponents’ proposal as a basis for discussion.

    Some delegations complained that this decision was reached in informal sessions, which are open only to delegations, not non-governmental observers who sit in on the plenary sessions. All WIPO sessions are closed to media.

    But key developed countries and WIPO secretariat officials characterized the outcome as a lost opportunity brought about by a small group of countries against the larger wishes of the meeting. They said there was support among a majority of WIPO members to accept the chair’s proposal for discussion. Lois Boland of the US Patent and Trademark Office, the lead of the US delegation, issued a press release expressing “disappointment” with the impasse and committing to continuing the effort to improve WIPO’s development work.

    Gauto Vielman said after the meeting that there was no agreement on which proposals to send to the General Assembly. Instead, reports of the two meetings drafted by the WIPO secretariat, and all of the proposals, will be sent to the assembly. Members will be able to comment on the report in July and a special meeting will be held to approve it immediately prior to the 25 September assembly.

    Chair’s Proposal Garners Support, But Ignites Impasse

    On 29 June, Gauto Vielman put forward a draft of proposals on which he saw emerging consensus reflecting the discussion of the first three days of the meeting. But Brazil and Argentina, apparently supported by the other Friends of Development, flatly rejected the chair’s proposal as not sufficiently reflective of their proposals. As there was no agreement to use the chair’s proposal as the basis for negotiations, it died with the committee, Gauto Vielman said.

    But the chair’s proposal rose from the ashes at the last minute as the Kyrgyz Republic stepped up and presented the chair’s proposal under its own name. “This is the legitimate right of a member of WIPO,” a Kyrgyz official told Intellectual Property Watch, adding that “it was necessary to do so.”

    Supporters of continuing discussions on the basis of the chair’s proposal included Group B, Central and Eastern European countries, Arab states, some African countries and others, according to participants.

    On the question of what this outcome meant for the future of the proposed development agenda, the Brazilian official said that the proponent countries “do not accept downsizing of the agenda without a real negotiation.”

    The official said the chair’s proposal did not reflect convergence but was rather a “process of vetoing,” and “a negative filter” removing unwanted elements. He said if the chair’s proposal had gone through, it would have been a fast-track process with no negotiation but only a “yes-or-no vote.”

    Brazil and Argentina first proposed reform of WIPO in late 2004 with the intent to make it more development-oriented in all its work, and were joined by 13 other Friends of Development. Since then, their proposals have expanded and other nations have added their own. In the February meeting, 111 proposals were lumped together in thematic groupings or clusters.

    This week, negotiators went through cluster-by-cluster, signalling those they could support. The chair’s proposal had a high percentage of proposals from Group B countries, according to an analysis by some NGOs attending the meeting.

    The official from the Kyrgyz Republic, which held the meeting vice-chair, said his government had “great concern” after the chair’s proposal met with resistance. “An overwhelming majority of member states supported the proposal,” he said.

    But the Brazilian official said that it was actually better that the proposal was forwarded by a country and not by the chair as it would now be on the same level as the other proposals, such as the one from the Friends of Development group.

    The Friends of Development include Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, Iran, Kenya, Peru, Sierra Leone, South Africa, Tanzania, Uruguay and Venezuela.

    Categories: Development, English, News, WIPO


    Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 Unported  Print This Post Print This Post

    Comments

    1. Lakhal says:

      there are only some Arab states that stated their support to the chair’s proposal. the article should be corrected accordingly


    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.