 |
Development Agenda Hits Obstacles at WIPO |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
Ever since the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) resolved to move forward with a "Development Agenda" last September, no one has been quite sure how things would shake out. Nearly all of the world's major intellectual property treaties have been negotiated at WIPO, and the agency is widely seen as promoting the ratcheting up of monopoly rights for copyright, patent, and trademark holders. The Development Agenda proposed by Argentina and Brazil seeks to stop, or at least temper, this trend. At the core of agenda is a belief that "Intellectual property protection cannot be seen as an end in itself, nor can the harmonization of intellectual property laws leading to higher protection standards in all countries, irrespective of their levels of development."
It is now clear that powerful rights-holders and their agents are going to wage a serious fight against the non-proprietary systems of knowledge-creation and dissemination advocated by many of the developing countries as a way to increase access to knowledge in the developing world. The latest chapter in the story implicates the Secretariat, the staff of the agency that is supposed to provide neutral support to all U.N. member states.
(continued)
This morning, James Love, one of the civil society leaders of the campaign for an Access to Knowledge Treaty (A2K), posted this disturbing update to the A2K listserv:
Right-owners are now in FULL MOBILIZATION on the WIPO development
agenda. The only thing I have seen like this are the campaigns relating
to the 1998-1999 WHO resolution on trade and public health and the 2001
WTO Doha Declaration on TRIPS and Public Health. Like then, the
right-owners effort is closely coordinated behind the scenes, with
enormous cooperation and pressure from the US and other developed
counties. The US has formed an inter-agency task force to attack the
DA. It would be good to have some details on the EC organization on
this. I assume the worst, but there is a new Commission, so we need to
check. Note that the US, the EC and European governments will put huge
pressure on developing country governments to abandon/isolate Brazil or
India on this, which is exactly what happened on the WTO negotiations
over paragraph 6 of the Doha Declaration, and which was a disaster.
It appears as though the WIPO secretariat is entirely committed to
defending corporate right-owners and entirely trying to undermine
consumer interests. I would love to be wrong about this, but one has to
face the evidence we have seen so far, including for example the recent
USPTO and Casablanca meetings, and the rejection of applications for ad
hoc observer status to groups like ICSTD and others, and the lack of a
real dialogue with civil society NGOs.
Love's comments are prompted by at least three developments:
- WIPO is holding a series of meetings this April on the Development Agenda, and the latest word from the Secretariat is that NGOs will not be allowed to participate as "ad hoc observers." This is a direct blow to civil society groups, most of which do not have permanent accreditation to attend WIPO events. Without permanent observer status, groups have to apply to the Secretariat each time they wish to participate in WIPO meetings. On the other hand, a quick look at the list of international NGOs with permanent accreditation indicates that rights-holder groups constitute the majority of groups with unfettered access to meetings.
The reason for the disparity is that although the content industry (e.g., Hollywood, record companies, artists' groups, music managers, broadcasters) has been deeply involved in WIPO's treaty-making process for decades, public interest groups have only recently started to participate. There are many reasons for the delayed involvement of civil society, not least of all the cost of sending delegations to Geneva.
In the last few months, civil society groups participating as ad hoc observers have played a critical role at WIPO negotiations. At the last two negotiating rounds over the "Treaty for the Protection of Broadcasting Organizations," public interest NGOs like EFF, Union for the Public Domain (for whom I have worked), IP Justice, and the Civil Society Coalition have intervened on behalf of the public domain, provided expert advice to member states, and added transparency by quickly releasing detailed notes of negotiations on the Internet.
Unless the WIPO Secretariat decides to grant ad hoc observer status for what is arguably the most important series of meetings in the U.N. agency's history, public interest NGOs will be shut out of the discussions, and industry lobbyists will outnumber civil society advocates even more than usual.
-
One of the most controversial issues on WIPO's agenda is the international harmonization of patent laws. The negotiations have split along North-South lines, and some fear that if a Development Agenda is pursued with any seriousness the wealthiest nations will move the discussion outside of WIPO.
These fears were stoked in early December when the United States hosted a meeting on this issue to coordinate its allies' position and strategy. The meeting coincided with a conference held by civil society groups to strategize around an Access to Knowledge treaty, leading some to suspect it was "an attempt staged by the U.S. to outmanoeuvre the WIPO which is increasingly perceived as being hampered by certain WIPO Member States (Brazil, Argentina) and NGOs increasingly obstructing the emerging global system of Intellectual Property protection."
-
Last week, WIPO Director General Kamil Idris staged an informal meeting with developing countries to push the patent harmonization talks forward. IP Watch reports that "several developing country officials on Friday were seething, charging privately that WIPO had overstepped its mandate for the consultations by working on substantive issues. They also alleged WIPO had used the venue as a way to sideline countries who have opposed a 'trilateral' harmonisation proposal from Europe, Japan and the United States and who have rejected efforts to de-link talks on genetic resources from the substantive patent law treaty negotiations."
As the IP industry continues to mobilize, civil society groups will surely organize support for access to the April Development Agenda meetings, and try to shine some light on WIPO and this process. Stay tuned...
|
|
 |
| |
 |
Login |
 |
 |
Don't have an account yet? You can create one. As a registered user you have some advantages like theme manager, comments configuration and post comments with your name. |
|
 |
 |
Related Links |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
Article Rating |
 |
 |
Average Score: 5 Votes: 1

|
|
 |
 |
Options |
 |
No Comments Allowed for Anonymous, please register |
|
|