Industrial Designs Still On Track To Treaty At WIPO, Despite Differing Views

World Intellectual Property Organization delegates advanced work on a draft treaty text on industrial design this week but were left divided on the opportunity of holding a high-level meeting to adopt such a treaty in 2014. One of the sticking points was whether to include an article on technical assistance and capacity building in the text of the draft treaty. The committee also decided to continue work on the protection of country names in the context of trademarks.

The 25th session of the Standing Committee on the Law of Trademarks, Industrial Designs and Geographical Indications (SCT) took place from 27-31 May. Committee Chair Adil El Maliki, director general of the Moroccan Industrial Property Office, issued a draft summary by the chair [pdf] this morning, which was adopted in the afternoon after long discussion of the wording of some paragraphs.

Delegates found it difficult to agree on the wording of paragraph 9 and paragraph 10 of the summary. Paragraph 9 reflected discussions during the week on technical assistance and capacity building. Three proposals were then on the table (African Group, European Union, and South Korea) and the chair issued a “non-paper” attempting to merge those three proposals (IPW, WIPO, 30 May 2013).

After lengthy discussions on the chair’s non-paper, it was decided that the WIPO secretariat would present the next SCT session with a new version of this non-paper, which could be an article to be included in the draft treaty, or a resolution by the diplomatic conference adopting the treaty.

The wording of paragraph 9 reflected this decision taken in plenary but said “…. including a draft Article in square brackets on technical assistance and capacity building, based on the Chair’s non paper.” The text did not mention both “article” and “resolution,” although it was further explained in the summary that a footnote would appear mentioning that “some delegations preferred the subject matter of this article to be covered by a resolution,” This did not agree with some developed countries, such as the United States and Switzerland, which said that for the sake of flexibility they were prepared to “live with it” if paragraph 10 was left as it stood in the draft summary.

Paragraph 10 gave an account of the progress made by the SCT on the draft articles and draft rules and on the issue of technical assistance. The paragraph then went on to say that some delegations found enough progress had been made to recommend to the annual WIPO General Assembly the convening of a diplomatic conference in 2014, while other delegations thought more progress still had to be made on technical assistance and capacity building, and the General Assembly should make a decision on a diplomatic conference.

This paragraph did not agree with the African Group and India. The African Group said in particular that the summary did not reflect that delegates had not reached consensus on how to address technical assistance and capacity building. Also, the last section of paragraph 10 did not explicitly say that there was no agreement on a recommendation to the WIPO General Assembly concerning the convening of a diplomatic conference.

An African Group source told Intellectual Property Watch that a recommendation from the SCT to the General Assembly would prejudge the outcome of the Assembly.

India said it supported Algeria, which took the floor on behalf of the African Group, and said the last sentence of paragraph 10, instead of stating that “…the General Assembly itself had to take the decision to convene a diplomatic conference,” should include the language of the 2012 General Assembly resolution giving the mandate to the SCT to expedite work on the industrial treaty. The language of the General Assembly resolution was: “The General Assembly in 2013 will take stock of and consider the text, progress made, and decide on convening a diplomatic conference.”

The Group B developed countries did not want to change paragraph 10 on the account of flexibility shown to keep paragraph 9 as proposed by the chair.

After more discussion, El Maliki finally proposed that both paragraphs be amended. Paragraph 9 would include the word “resolution”, and the last sentence of paragraph 10 would indicate that the General Assembly will take stock and assess progress made, and decide on convening a diplomatic conference. The plenary accepted this compromise. No other changes were made to the draft summary by the chair.

El Maliki told Intellectual Property Watch that despite the difficulties on technical assistance, he was still content with the work of the session this week, in particular the work on the draft articles and the draft rules.

Geographical Indications: A Taste of Coffee

Geographical indications (GI), which are a collective intellectual property protection referring to products having a specific geographical origin from which they derive particular qualities, reputation or characteristics, have been on the agenda of the SCT for a number of sessions without any activity. The SCT again decided to keep this agenda item for the next session while no interventions were made on the subject.

At the outset of the meeting, the Dominican Republic, on behalf of the Group of Latin American and Caribbean countries (GRULAC), said the subject was important for the group.

On 29 May, the Mission of Colombia to the United Nations in Geneva organised a ceremony at WIPO to celebrate the registration of the Colombian GI café de Colombia as a GI in Switzerland, giving delegates an opportunity to taste the product.

Luis Fernando Samper, chief communications and marketing officer for the Colombian Coffee Growers Federation, told Intellectual Property Watch that the process of the recognition of the GI in Switzerland was started in 2008. It is the first time a foreign GI that is not part of a trade agreement has been recognised in Switzerland, he said.

“Switzerland is an important market for us,” he said “not so much in terms of consumption, but because many companies in Switzerland are involved in coffee trading.” The recognition of the GI will give the federation the ability to enforce it and to fight infringement, he said. The fight against infringement includes taking samples from grocery shelves and analysing them for chemical footprint, he added.

Café de Colombia is already recognised as a GI in all 27 European Union countries, Samper said. the coffee is distinctively mild because it is grown in mountain areas and is 100 percent arabica, with medium body and a medium to high acidity, he said, adding that those two characteristics together are unusual.