[A2k] Huffington Post: U.S. government opposition to term "access to knowledge" in key WIPO negotiation

[Andrea Glorioso]

--
>>>>> "Judit" == Judit Rius Sanjuan <judit.rius@keionline.org> writes:

    > Here "access to knowledge" is referred to by many simply as A2K,
    > a term that is apparently terrorizing the many lobbyists for
    > publishers. I'm hoping the U.S. will come around, and agree that
    > yes, the U.N. can actually "discuss possible new initiatives" to
    > facilitate "access to knowledge." It is rather amazing that this
    > is even controversial.

If I may..  when we scratch  the surface, I  think lots of people give
different meaning to the term "access to knowledge". Although I do not
share  nor condone the reasons   why  various countries  at WIPO  (and
elsewhere) do not want to use the term, I think we  might want to make
sure that even the proponents of A2K  have a true common understanding
of what the term ought to mean, and not just one that shifts according
to  the tactical opportunities  they are faced with  -  which is a bad
thing in and by itself, but might be  counter-productive in the remote
case we are ever in a position to plan in the *real* long term.

Or does this mean I am the only one that has some doubts on the actual
meaning of A2K?

Ciao,

--
      Andrea Glorioso || http://people.digitalpolicy.it/sama/cv/
          M: +39 348 921 4379	     F: +39 051 930 31 133
       "Truth is a relationship between a theory and the world;
       beauty is a relationship between a theory and the mind."
--
[ Content of type application/pgp-signature deleted ]