[A2k] IP-Watch: Panellists Disagree About Future Of IP System, WIPO

[Thiru Balasubramaniam]

http://www.ip-watch.org/weblog/index.php?p=3D586&res=3D1024_ff&print=3D0

13/4/2007

Panellists Disagree About Future Of IP System, WIPO

By Tove Iren S. Gerhardsen
NEW YORK - Speakers at an intellectual property conference here
disagreed on the future of the IP system and what role the World
Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) will play during the next 10
years. But there seemed to be agreement on less rather than more new IP
regulation.

The 12-13 April conference at the Fordham University Law School is the
fifteenth of its kind and one that draws high-level members of the IP
community from around the world. Some sources who have attended for
years said some issues have been discussed for years and never
materialised, such as a single European patent and harmonisation of
international patent systems.

Among the predictions in a first-day session on what should and will
happen in the next 10 years of IP law there did not seem to be a lot of
optimism, or at least no clear predictions of major change to the
current system.

Fred von Lohmann, senior intellectual property counsel at the
Electronic Frontier Foundation, conjectured that at a similar
conference in 2017, there would be new constituencies and new
innovators. If they found that intellectual property was a hindrance to
innovation, this could lead industries to tell the US Congress that
norms have to change at WIPO. Lohmann said the current broadcasting
treaty talks are a good example.

Hannu Wager, counsellor at the World Trade Organization intellectual
property division, predicted that important issues over the next 10
years would be: enforcement, competition policy, least-developed
countries (e.g. time extension for implementation of the WTO Agreement
on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights), transfer of
technology as related to LDCs, accessions of new members, and dispute
settlement, noting the recent case of the US against China.

Bruce Lehman of Akin, Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld in Washington, DC, said
that the future of WIPO is =93very cloudy,=94 unless there are substantial
changes in US diplomacy.=94

James Love of the Knowledge Ecology International (KEI) said that he
thought there had been some progress at WIPO, mentioning the outcome a
February negotiation on a proposed WIPO Development Agenda, which had
surprised many including himself. He also praised the United States
involvement in WIPO discussions on a proposed broadcasting treaty, but
said that the US government had led an effort to dismantle the World
Health Organization=92s involvement with intellectual property, and the
same was true for the UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD)
and UN Development Programme (UNDP).

WIPO Deputy Director General Michael Keplinger said WIPO is guided by
its member states but said that developed and developing country
participants alike had agreed at a February conference on piracy and
counterfeiting that this was a real problem. He also predicted that the
issue of counterfeit medicines would become increasingly important.

Keplinger added, stressing that he was speaking as a WIPO official and
not as a US official to WIPO, that the diplomatic leadership of the
United States was absolutely crucial at WIPO. Keplinger joined WIPO in
autumn 2006 from the US government.

Keplinger told Intellectual Property Watch that the next 10 years would
most likely be a period of =93guided development=94 for WIPO. It would
likely look at best practices, model laws and guidelines, meaning soft
law, rather than treaty-making, he said. Keplinger said that once the
broadcasting treaty discussion finished (it is expected to be
negotiated or dropped by year=92s end), there would likely not be other
copyright treaties. Rather, WIPO would work to improve its existing
services, such as the Patent Cooperation Treaty.

As for the Development Agenda, Keplinger said that it had made WIPO
think about the work it does in this area. He said WIPO is now doing a
better job to =93communicate what we do, especially in the area of
development.=94

Another source who wished to remain anonymous asserted to Intellectual
Property Watch that WIPO=92s top leadership lacks vision for the future,
emphasising the need for maintaining and developing regional IP
systems. Another source asked why Latin America and Asia, for example,
do not have regional IP systems.

Also discussed on 12 April were the next 10 years of trademarks,
patents and copyrights. Highlights from the 13 April programme include
sessions on IP and human rights, the WIPO broadcasting treaty, trade
and the Thailand=92s use of compulsory license, and TRIPS and China with
Victoria Espinel, US Trade Representative for Intellectual Property and
Innovation at the USTR speaking.

---------------------------------
Thiru Balasubramaniam
Geneva Representative
Knowledge Ecology International (KEI)
voice +41.22.791.6727
fax +41.22.723.2988
mobile +41 76 508 0997
thiru@keionline.org