[A2k] WIPO Assembly: Decision postponed on WIPO Broadcasting Treaty

[Sangeeta]

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--
--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]


Please post this to the list

Sangeeta

SUNS #5886 Tuesday 4 October 2005

south-north development monitor SUNS [Email Edition]



Development: Decision postponed on WIPO Broadcasting treaty



Geneva, 3 Oct (Sangeeta Shashikant) -- Member states of the World

Intellectual Property Organization agreed Monday (during closed-door

informal meetings) to postpone the decision on the holding of a diplomatic

conference on the protection of broadcasting organizations to the 2006

General Assembly (GA).



This follows after a week-long debate and intensive discussions on whether

the GA this year should launch the diplomatic conference in early 2006, to

finalize and adopt the treaty on the protection of Broadcasting

Organizations.



The WIPO General Assembly heard divided views last Wednesday when the Agenda

item was discussed, between Members that wished to hold a diplomatic

conference on the protection of broadcasting organizations in 2006 and those

that felt that discussions on the treaty had not yet matured sufficiently to

warrant a diplomatic conference .



It has finally been agreed by Member states that "Two additional meetings of

the Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights (SCCR) will be

scheduled to accelerate discussions on the Second Revised Consolidated text

(SCCR/12/2 Rev. 2) and the Working Paper (SCCR/12/5 Prov.)."



India had suggested that the words "and other proposals" be added at the end

of the line but this was rejected by some developed countries.



It was also agreed that "These meetings shall aim to agree and finalize a

Basic Proposal for a treaty on the protection of the rights of broadcasting

organizations in order to enable the 2006 WIPO General Assembly to recommend

the convening of a Diplomatic Conference in December 2006 or at an

appropriate date in 2007".



The draft decision reportedly agreed to in the informal meetings is expected

to be adopted later by the WIPO GA.



On the other two issues pertaining to the Development Agenda and the Draft

Substantive Patent Law Treaty (SPLT), there is as yet no agreement and

closed-door informal consultations are expected to continue Monday

afternoon. These consultations follow similar meetings that began on Friday

evening and continued until Saturday evening.



With regard to the Development Agenda, the Chair circulated a text Monday

morning which is to be the basis of discussions Monday afternoon during the

informal meetings. The Chair's proposal essentially states that the

consideration of DA proposals submitted by member states will take place in

"two meetings of an ad hoc [transitory] Committee on Development consisting

of all Member states and a report prepared by 31 August 2006 on development.

It further states that without prejudice to the provision of technical

assistance, there will be no separate sessions of the Permanent Committee on

Cooperation for Development Related to Intellectual Property (PCIPD) while

these issues are being considered by the ad hoc [transitory] Committee. The

GA will include this issue in its session in September 2006 to consider the

report of the ad hoc [transitory] Committee. It also adds that "To

facilitate discussions in the Committee, which is essentially a member

driven initiative, the International Bureau of WIPO will provide requisite

assistance and support to this ad hoc [transitory] Committee."



The Chair's text is essentially a combination of the various texts that have

been put forward by the different delegations during the informal

consultations on Saturday.



The Group B (comprising developed countries) and the European Community (EC)

are not in favour of renewing the IIM process (set up at the last General

Assembly to discuss the Development Agenda) and want to shift discussions to

the PCIPD which traditionally deals with technical assistance. The EC has

made a turnaround in its position since the last IIM session that was held

in July, where it was in favour of renewing the IIM process to take the

development agenda initiative further and to even discuss a limited set of

issues. At that session, it was primarily the US and Japan that were in

favour of shifting the discussions to the PCIPD and terminating the IIM

process.



Most of the developing countries are in favour of renewing the

Intergovernmental Inter-sessional Meetings (IIMs) to discuss the proposals

that have been submitted and form recommendations on how to integrate the

development dimension in WIPO's activities, for consideration of the 2006

General Assembly.



The Indian delegation in an attempt to bridge the differences suggested the

setting up of an ad hoc task force on development. In a clarification note

that was circulated and referred to, India stated that the PCIPD was set up

in 1999 by the merger of two bodies i. e. the Permanent Committee on

Copyrights (PCC) and the Permanent Committee on Industrial Property (PCIP).

No specific mandate was given to the PCIPD in its first session held from 31

May to 4 June 1999 or the subsequent meetings held in 2001, 2002 and April

2005. It was clear that the PCIPD was meeting on an average of once in two

years.



The note also stated that the IIM when set up by the General Assembly in

2004, was to hold its meeting in conjunction with the meeting of the PCIPD

for various unstated reasons including the facilitation of participation

from developing countries, as some of them are sponsored by WIPO.



It also states that many developing countries feel that the work of the IIM

is not complete and that many important issues including the Plan of Action

for incorporating the Development Agenda in norm-setting activities for WIPO

is still to be finalized. On the other hand, Group B countries and a few

others find that the IIM has fulfilled its mandate by transmitting its

report to the GA of 2005. A solution is needed to be found which addresses

both concerns including having an arrangement which allows for more

structured discussion wherein the critically important issues of development

are addressed and there is resolution of various development issues

alongside better fiscal discipline in the arrangements for holding the

Dialogue for Development.



In light of this, India proposed that the consideration of proposals

submitted by Member States for the Establishment of a Development Agenda for

WIPO continue during the period of October 2005 to September 2006 and that

the consideration will be held in an ad-hoc Task Force on Development

consisting of all Member states and a report to be prepared by 31 August

2006 to be considered by the 2006 GA. The role and mandate of the PCIPD will

be included in this Committee and that no separate sessions of the PCIPD

will be held while these issues are being considered by the Ad-hoc Task

Force.



The clarification note states that in case the PCIPD meetings have to be

held in 2005 and 2006, they can be alongside the Task Force on Intellectual

Property and Development.



The proposal by India received wide support from developing countries.



Group B presented a proposal on the DA which essentially is about replacing

the PCIPD with a "Permanent Committee on Development (PCD)", which will meet

in two one-week sessions and the PCIPD will cease to exist. "The IIM process

will be continued in the PCD to accelerate and complete the discussions on

the proposals relating to a WIPO Development Agenda that have emerged from

the IIM process and report with any recommendations to the General Assembly

in 2006".



Group B also proposed that the PCD encompass all issues relating to IP and

development. It also states that the discussions "shall not be limited to

issues relating to technical assistance and training" and "without prejudice

to the work in other WIPO bodies".



This proposal was essentially a reiteration of Group B's position all along

that PCIPD can be given a more specific mandate and the name could be

changed, to address concerns that had been raised frequently - that is, the

PCIPD is a forum to discuss technical assistance matters. This proposal was

not well received by many countries which were not satisfied with a

permanent body that essentially dealt with technical assistance issues

discussing the Development Agenda issues, which covers all aspects and

activities of WIPO.



Another proposal that was put forward by Group B on Saturday afternoon to

address the concerns of developing countries was to replace the PCIPD with a

"Committee on Intellectual Property and Development"(CIPD). It proposed that

the CIPD would meet in "two one-week sessions annually". Essentially, it

follows the earlier Group B proposal but expands it further by expressly

indicating that CIPD's activities shall include ( a) Development issues (IIM

process), ( b) Cooperation and ( c) Technical Assistance and Training.



It further states that the General Assembly shall assess annually the

progress in discussing the development issues mentioned in ( a) and decide

whether the work on this item has been completed.



Many developing country delegations were not happy with the words

"annually", which seemed to indicate that it was a permanent body. Some were

suspicious of the inclusion of a paragraph at the end of the proposal which

states that the "CIPD will have a dedicated International Bureau and

secretariat staff, within existing resources, servicing it so that the

discussions are focused through an agenda and the conclusions are properly

recorded", as they felt that it was a way to manipulate discussions on the

Development Agenda.



Pertaining to the matter of the establishment of a new work plan for the

Standing Committee on the Law of Patents (SCP) in respect of the Draft SPLT,

there appears to be more convergence, but discussions on this matter have

yet to be finalized.



The latest Chairman's text proposes that an informal open forum would be

held for 3 days in Geneva in the first quarter of 2006 on all issues related

to the work of the SCP. The various topics will be discussed with

contributions from speakers reflecting a balance of geographical

representation and perspectives, and technical expertise. Member states may

submit proposals for topics and speakers for the forum until November 15,

2005.



It also proposes that a two-day informal open-ended working group of the SCP

will be held in Geneva soon after the forum to agree on a work program of

the topics, taking into account the discussions of the open forum.



It further suggests that a session of the SCP will be held for a duration of

5 days and it will commence work on the program agreed at the working group.

Thereafter, the GA of September 2006 will consider the progress made with a

view to determining a work plan for the following year.



This text is expected to be the basis of discussions during the informal

consultations on this matter later Monday afternoon.



The General Assembly has to finalize its work Monday to enable the

preparation of the draft GA report Tuesday and the final adoption of the

report to take place on Wednesday. +



--
[ image001.gif of type image/gif deleted ]
--