[A2k] written statement by the Centre for Technology and Society at FGV - Rio at the 2007 WIPO General Assembly

[Pedro Moniz]

--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
This statement was delivered today to the WIPO Secretariat:

 *WIPO thirty-sixth (16th Ordinary) General Assemblies session*

*Geneva, 24 September to 03 October 2007*

statement by

the Centre for Technology and Society (CTS) at Funda=E7=E3o Getulio Vargas
School of Law - Rio de Janeiro

28 September 2007

delivered by Pedro Paranagu=E1


 Dear Mr. Chairman,

Dear delegates of Member States,

The Centre for Technology and Society at Funda=E7=E3o Getulio Vargas (FGV)
School of Law in Rio de Janeiro fully supports the adoption by the General
Assembly of the 45 recommendations made by the PCDA on a development agenda
for WIPO, as well as the immediate establishment of a Committee on
Development and IP (doc. A/43/13 Rev.).

This is a first and important step forward to bringing a development
dimension within WIPO.

Now it is time to take further and concrete actions in order to implement
the mentioned recommendations.

In this sense, WIPO should prepare, in consultation with Member States and
with the aid of accredited IGOs, NGOs and other UN agencies such as UNCTAD,
WHO, UNESCO, UNDP etc., and make available specific reports by the differen=
t
types of IP (e.g. copyrights, patents, trade marks etc.) identifying and
explaining what are the flexibilities contained in international IP
agreements (items 14 and 17, doc. A/43/13 Rev. Annex).

WIPO should also immediately initiate discussions on a possible Access to
Knowledge Treaty in order to foster creativity and innovation (item 19, doc=
.
A/43/13 Rev. Annex).

WIPO should, in consultation with each Member State, and with the aid of
accredited IGOs and NGOs, prepare a report on the experiences of open
collaborative projects such as the Human Genome Project, free software,
Creative Commons licenses etc. (item 36, doc. A/43/13 Rev. Annex).

WIPO should prepare reports, jointly with other UN agencies, such as UNCTAD=
,
UNEP, WHO, UNIDO, UNESCO, UNDP etc., on the costs and benefits of the IP
system, divided not only by each type of IP, such as copyrights, patents
etc., but also by each niche or industry, such as music; software;
pharmaceutical; film; book; chemical; video-game and so on (items 35, 37 an=
d
40, doc. A/43/13 Rev. Annex).

Moreover, under the IGC WIPO should accelerate the process on the protectio=
n
against misappropriation of genetic resources, traditional knowledge and
folklore (item 18, doc. A/43/13 Rev. Annex).

WIPO should not initiate any norm-setting or treaty negotiation without
previously holding public consultations and making sure Member States, and
accredited IGOs and NGOs are invited to discuss the proposed issues (items
21, 22 and 42, doc. A/43/13 Rev. Annex).

Yet, WIPO should enhance wide participation of civil society at large by th=
e
creation for example of a permanent Internet blog with topics considered
controversial by Member States, accredited IGOs and NGOs, stressing that th=
e
blog should be open to the participation of any interested party, being it
accredited or not with WIPO (item 42, doc. A/43/13 Rev. Annex).

This is not an exhaustive list, but rather some few suggestions to move
forward.

FGV's Centre for Technology and Society remains at the Member States' and
WIPO's disposal for any further clarification.

Thank you Mr. Chairman.