[A2k] Bridges Weekly: WIPO Broadcast Treaty Talks Collapse

[Thiru Balasubramaniam]

http://www.ictsd.org/weekly/07-06-27/story2.htm

BRIDGES Weekly Main Page

Volume 11 	Number 23 	27 June 2007

	WIPO BROADCAST TREATY TALKS COLLAPSE

Ten years of discussions on an international treaty to update
broadcasters' rights in the internet age came to a standstill last
week, after members of the World Intellectual Property Organisation
(WIPO) failed to agree on what the agreement should protect.

A 'diplomatic conference' to finalise a treaty, scheduled for this
November, has been called off with no indication that it will be
revived any time soon.

WIPO's Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights (SCCR),
meeting 18-22 June, was mandated by the organisation's 2006 General
Assembly to agree "the objectives, specific scope and object of
protection" of a "signal-based approach" to a broadcast treaty, in
preparation for the diplomatic conference (BRIDGES Weekly, 4 October
2006).

In a statement, the US said members were "far apart on fundamental
issues related to the new treaty, including the nature and extent of
protection needed to address signal piracy and whether such protection
should extend to the Internet." They also noted that since discussions
began, "technology and business models have continually evolved, making
precise definitions and some complex concepts difficult to pinpoint."

The EU and Japan, backed by Senegal, Mexico, Colombia, and El Salvador,
have pushed for a more expansive approach to give broadcasters
copyright-like "related rights" over the content they transmit. The US,
Brazil, Chile, India, and South Africa, among others, sought a less
ambitious agreement on protecting broadcast signals to tackle piracy
issues. An Indian delegate described the differences as "deep fault
lines," dating back to earlier talks in the committee (BRIDGES Weekly,
24 January 2007). After intensive informal consultations, the US told
members on 21 June that it was "difficult to think of a single issue
upon which agreement has been reached."

SCCR Chair Jukka Liedes (Finland) tried to salvage the talks by
producing a draft outcome document of recommendations to the General
Assembly in September, calling for a special session of the committee
followed by a diplomatic conference in 2008. Many delegations objected,
and ultimately agreed that discussions on a broadcast treaty should
only be a regular item on the SCCR's agenda, receiving no special
consideration. The text they adopted at the end of last week specified
that a diplomatic conference should only be considered after member
states have agreed on the objective of a treaty, as well as the scope
and nature of protection that it would offer.

One of the distinguishing features of the broadcast treaty talks has
been the number of lobbyists descending on WIPO from sectors as diverse
as professional sports leagues, the music industry, and public interest
groups. Large broadcasters advocated for the rights-based approach
favoured by the EU and Japan. In contrast, other telecoms and
technology companies, such as Intel and Verizon, were concerned by the
potential threats such a treaty would pose to the internet and, for
instance, the effect of technological protection measures on future
innovation. Sports leagues feared giving broadcasters greater rights
over footage. The US sided with the second camp, joining developing
countries like Brazil and India in supporting the "signal-based
approach" to the treaty. However, a source said that the US joined
other Group B (industrialised) countries in playing down the importance
of provisions on competition, cultural diversity, and access to
knowledge that the developing nations had been seeking.

Public interest civil society groups welcomed the apparent demise of
the broadcast treaty. Earlier in the week, nine groups, including Third
World Network, Knowledge Ecology International, and library
associations, released a statement claiming the negotiations had been
an unnecessary and hazardous undertaking. "Piracy of broadcast signals
is already adequately dealt with under existing laws and treaties,"
they said, adding that granting broadcasters the exclusive rights they
were demanding would "harm both the creative communities and the
public," particularly regarding access to knowledge on the internet.

It is unclear when efforts would next be made to continue talks, given
that the agenda for the SCCR will be set at the WIPO General Assembly
in September. Chile has proposed that future attention be directed to
exceptions and limitations to copyright for education, libraries, and
disabled people, whilst India suggested that addressing access to
knowledge and education would be a better use of the committee's time
than resuscitating the broadcast treaty.

ICTSD reporting; "WIPO Broadcasting treaty talks sent back to
committee," INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY WATCH, 22 June 2007.

---------------------------------
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