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.


    28 September 2007

    WIPO Group On DG At Impasse As Idris Defence Challenged

    By William New
    A special panel of member states of the World Intellectual Property Organization appears to have reached impasse on its mandate this week of examining reports on possible wrongdoing involving the WIPO director general. The group, formed after key members called for the WIPO head to step down, has been working in an atmosphere of accusations and counterclaims coming from all sides.

    A WIPO paper defending Director General Kamil Idris circulated on the first day of the assembly, 24 September, stated to be from the “WIPO Secretariat” on Monday generated outrage from independent UN investigatory arms that claim that assertions made in the WIPO paper are untrue and possibly defamatory (IPW, WIPO, 24 September 2007). WIPO paper available here.

    In 2006, Idris moved to correct his recorded birth date at WIPO from 1945 to 1954, more than two decades after joining the organisation and climbing the ranks. The WIPO paper took aim at a confidential report by the internal auditor that found a pattern of decades of misrepresentation of his age by the director general, which may have helped him to obtain higher positions in the organisation, according to a copy obtained of the report (IPW, WIPO, 20 February 2007).

    Participants in the Friends of the Chair group may report back to the assembly that it could not reach agreement on a report. Questions remain as to what that would mean for the disputed assembly agenda item 12 which called for a discussion of the confidential auditor’s report. A representative of the African Group, which has been defending Idris (who is originally from Sudan), said it might be limited to a discussion on procedure.

    The African Group member said the group is seeking to have the issue moved to the WIPO Audit Committee, possibly with a timeframe for addressing it and reporting back to the chair. But no agreement could be reached on this approach.

    WIPO is trying to keep the confidential report from being disseminated. For instance, it ordered a copy of the report removed from the Intellectual Property Watch website when it was posted earlier this year (IPW, WIPO, 1 March 2007). In the WIPO paper, it also criticised Fox News, a conservative US news outlet, for having left the report as a link in a news story posted to the Internet around the same time. A WIPO official made a case on 28 September in the Intellectual Property Watch Inside Views column that the report may be illegal.

    JIU, Internal Auditor Attack WIPO Defence

    The United Nations Joint Inspection Unit (JIU), which initiated the report on Idris’ age, issued a letter to member states from Chairperson Deborah Wynes, available here, on 25 September defending its actions and asserting that the WIPO paper contained “serious errors.”

    The JIU confirmed that there is a “seemingly turbulent JIU/WIPO relationship,” which it would like to change for the better. “The inspectors of the Joint Inspection Unit take their obligations to discharge their duties in a fully independent manner, with the highest standards of integrity and in the sole interest of the organisations very, very seriously,” it wrote. “No staff member or official of any organisation, including the JIU, is exempt from upholding these standards.”

    “This is even more so important at the highest level of an organisation for the tone is set at the top and is set by example,” it added.

    Several of the claims which it countered involved the dissemination of documents by the JIU. Another point countered by the JIU was that a 2005 report it did on possible mismanagement at WIPO (and which found a variety of problems) made no reference to fraud in the organisation, implying that there was none. But the inspectors note that it was stated in their report that the alleged fraud unearthed earlier in Idris’ term relating to WIPO building contracts was not reviewed in their report.

    The JIU said it regretted that the WIPO document was distributed on the assembly’s first day, and that it was not made available to the JIU in advance “to correct the serious errors contained therein or to member states so they could take an informed decision on the matter.”

    “We cannot help but conclude that the document is designed to deflect attention away from the real and substantive issues at hand by attempting to focus on procedures and process,” it said. “This is unfortunate.”

    Even more strongly worded was the response of the internal auditor who conducted the confidential report, which found among other things evidence that Idris repeatedly signed documents with the wrong age, including visa documents for travel to the United States. The response came in a private email to WIPO Legal Counsel Edward Kwakwa and cc’d to the top officials at WIPO, and obtained by Intellectual Property Watch.

    Referring to paragraphs in the WIPO paper that questioned his work, the internal auditor said, “As you are aware, the above mentioned paragraphs do not objectively reflect the facts, represent an explicit attack to my integrity, reputation and professionalism and constitute a clear case of defamation, calumniation and retaliation.”

    “In addition, those paragraphs amount to a clear attempt to undermine the credibility, independence, impartiality and authority of the Internal Audit function enshrined in the Internal Audit Charter approved by the member states of WIPO.”

    The auditor claimed he followed all official procedures, which he said is well documented. He said the WIPO paper was issued “without due regard for the legal rights of the staff member” and threatened a possible lawsuit.

    According to sources, the WIPO Staff Association this week also made a statement to the closed-door assembly that may have been vetted through Idris’ office first, but which apparently took issue with the treatment of the internal auditor, who has moved but is a WIPO staffer.

    The internal auditor’s email received a reply from Kwakwa, who said that the WIPO paper was not issued by him and was not his responsibility.

    Other Concerns Arising

    This week, some are discussing related legal cases within the UN system that might have bearing on Idris’ case, such as International Labour Organization Tribunal Case Number 2602, in which an official was dismissed for falsification of employment documents.

    Other allegations and concerns are circulating around WIPO as well. Among them are concerns about family members of Idris supporters receiving positions within the organisation, pictures of a swimming pool (suspected of being built using WIPO resources) at Idris’ chateau despite the WIPO paper’s claims that it is non-existent, and a real estate website, www.derham.ch, ostensibly showing Idris’ chateau in Genthod-Bellevue now for sale for CHF16 million. A Geneva canton website shows Idris purchased it for CHF1.9 million in 1998.

    Friends of the Chair group

    Formation of the special group on Idris drew significant debate, sources said, but was finally set up to include the chair of the assembly who is the Nigerian ambassador, the vice-chair of the assembly, and two members from each regional group: Algeria and South Africa (African), Italy and Switzerland (Group B developed countries), Poland and Slovenia (Central European and Baltic States), Kyrgyzstan and Russia (Eastern European and Central Asian), Pakistan and South Korea (Asian), Brazil and Chile (Latin America and Caribbean) and China (its own group at WIPO).

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

    Categories: English, News, United Nations, WIPO


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

    Comments

    1. WIPO GA: Current situation, and FSFE’s statement « freedom bits says:

      [...] But overall the WIPO GA continues being confrontational, with the issue of WIPO Director General Idris being at the center of the conflict. It has all the elements of a proper scandal: accusations, attempted justifications, and rebuttals by the Joint Inspection Unit of the United Nations. If you want to know more, you might be interested in this IP-Watch.org article. [...]


    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.