[Ecommerce] [Fwd: [Ip-health] US paper counters Development Agenda in WIPO]

[Manon Ress]

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [Ip-health] US paper counters Development Agenda in WIPO
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 11:57:43 +0800
From: Martin Khor <mkkp@pd.jaring.my>
To: ip health listserver <ip-health@lists.essential.org>

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

US draft paper counters Development Agenda in WIPO


The US has informally circulated a draft paper containing its views and
proposals for
the meeting in WIPO (World Intellectual Property Organisation) on a
Development Agenda
scheduled for 11-13 April.

The paper, titled "Establishment of a Partnership Program in WIPO"
states that WIPO
already has a "robust development agenda" in all its work, and it
clearly ignores and
sidesteps the demands of the proponents of a "development agenda" in WIPO.

Those demands, as elaborated in the Development Agenda proposal by
Brazil and
Argentina and 12 other countries include an amendment to the WIPO
Convention (1967),
a reorientation of the content of present proposals in treaties now
being negotiated at
WIPO, the establishment of new pro-development treaties and a change in
WIPO's
technical assistance activities.

In contrast to this reform programme, the US paper merely proposes the
creation of a
"WIPO Partnership Program", an Internet-based database to bring together
"donors and
recipients of IP development assistance."

The meeting in WIPO on 11-13 April is shaping up to be a battle between
those countries
that want to see a change in WIPO so that its work will be more
development-oriented,
and those that want to maintain the status quo.

Below is a report By Sangeeta Shashikant on the US paper and the context
of the Development
Agenda initiative in WIPO.   It was published in the SUNS (South-North
Developmenht
Monitor) on 24 March and is reproduced here with permission.

With best wishes
Martin Khor
TWN

________________________




US draft paper counters Development Agenda in WIPO

By Sangeeta Shashikant, Geneva, 23 March 2005


A draft proposal by the United States titled
"Establishment of a Partnership Program in WIPO" for a forthcoming World
Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) meeting on the Development
Agenda in
April is circulating among some delegations in Geneva.

Stating that WIPO already has a "robust development agenda" in all its
work, the draft
paper by the US clearly ignores and sidesteps the demands of the
proponents of a
"development agenda" in WIPO.

Those demands, as elaborated in the Development Agenda proposal by
Brazil and
Argentina (WO/GA/31/11, dated 27 August 2004) and later co-sponsored with 12
other developing countries, include an amendment to the WIPO Convention
(1967),
a reorientation of the content of present proposals in treaties now
being negotiated at
WIPO, the establishment of new pro-development treaties and a change in
WIPO's
technical assistance activities.

In contrast to this reform programme, the US paper proposes that WIPO
continue to
"promote intellectual property around the world" as its way of fostering
development.
Its only new suggestion is the creation of a "WIPO Partnership Program", an
Internet-based database to bring together "donors and recipients of IP
development
assistance."

The proposed database would have sections on partners, countries or
regions, and
success stories.  A WIPO partnership office would evaluate requests for
assistance
and seek partners to fund and execute the projects.

The draft paper is expected to form the basis of the US position at the
forthcoming
WIPO inter-sessional inter-governmental meeting on the Development Agenda on
11-13 April. The meeting had been mandated by the WIPO General Assembly last
October, in which the issue of a WIPO development agenda had figured
prominently.

Argentina and Brazil had then presented a formal proposal for the
establishment of
a Development Agenda for WIPO, in which development would be established
in all
the work and bodies of the organization.   Co-sponsored by 14 countries,
it was also
supported from the floor by the Asian and African Groups and many individual
developing countries.

The US draft paper states that "WIPO already has a robust 'development
agenda' in
all of its work for a long time, delivering high-quality development
activities to
Member States on a demand-driven basis." In the past decade, WIPO's
budget has
tripled, greatly expanding WIPO's role in IP (intellectual property)
development
assistance. "WIPO has played and must continue to play, an important role in
fostering development through the promotion of intellectual property
around the
world."

The paper puts forward the view that WIPO is already fulfilling its
function as a UN
agency, thus implying that reform is unnecessary.  It says that WIPO's
contribution,
as a specialized agency of the UN, "to development is made through promoting
creative intellectual activity and technology transfer, has a very
important, albeit
somewhat limited, role to play in fostering economic development and
cultural
diversity".

WIPO's role as a UN agency and in achieving the UN's development goals
is defined
narrowly by the paper, which states that WIPO is not a core development
agency like
the United Nations,  UNCTAD or the UNDP.  The 1974 Agreement (between WIPO
and the UN), "while encouraging coordination and cooperation with the UN
and its
organs and agencies (in Article 2), also seeks to avoid overlapping or
conflicting
relationships with other UN bodies that would result in waste or inefficient
expenditure of UN resources," says the paper.

"WIPO's contribution to overall the UN development goals is best
achieved not by
diluting WIPO's role within the UN system but, rather, by strengthening
WIPO's
intellectual property expertise and its IP-related development assistance."

The US proposal thus advocates that WIPO should concentrate only on
promoting
intellectual property and should leave development concerns to other UN
agencies.

This is clearly a counter to the Development Agenda proposal of Brazil,
Argentina
and others that made the case that  "as a member of the UN system, it is
incumbent
upon WIPO to be fully guided by the broad development goals that the UN
has set for
itself, in particular in the Millennium Development Goals.

"Development concerns should be fully incorporated into all WIPO
activities. WIPO's
role, therefore, is not to be limited to the promotion of intellectual
property protection.
WIPO is accordingly already mandated to take into account the broader
development-related commitments and resolutions of the UN system as a
whole."

The Brazil-Argentina proposal asks that the WIPO Convention (1967) be
amended
to ensure that the "development dimension" is unequivocally determined
to constitute
an essential element of the Organization's work program. It called on
WIPO to act
immediately to incorporate a "Development Agenda" in its work programme.

In contrast to the systemic reforms called for by the developing
countries, the US
paper proposes the creation of a "WIPO Partnership Program". This
Internet-based
tool will "bring together all stakeholders to match specific needs with
available
resources and to amplify the developmental impact of intellectual property
development assistance" says the proposal.

The proposed partnership program would have two features: a "WIPO
Partnership
Database" and a "WIPO Partnership Office".

The database would bring together donors and recipients of IP development
assistance, and have three sections:  a "Partners Section" (that would
include IGOs,
NGOs, IP offices, private sector groups, universities, charities and
others wishing to
assist developing countries on IP issues); a section on "Country/Region"
(where
developing countries and their institutions would state their specific
needs for IP
assistance requests); and a "Success Section" that lists successful
partnership matches.

The partnership office would evaluate requests for assistance and seek
partners to
fund and execute projects.  WIPO's international Bureau would maintain
the website
and database as well as the Partnership Office.

According to several developing-country officials as well as experts on
IP and
development, the US draft paper does not address the concerns raised by the
proponents of the WIPO development agenda.

Nor does it address the concerns raised in the "Geneva Declaration on
the Future of
the World Intellectual Property Organization" issued last September by
over 500
eminent persons such as scientists, economists, legal experts, consumer
advocates,
and health activists (including two Nobel Laureates), and in the NGO
statement
endorsed by 25 organizations in support of the Development Agenda
initiative.

The US draft proposal is viewed as an attempt to set aside the
Development Agenda
initiative in charting a new course for WIPO and incorporating economic,
social and
cultural development within its mission, instead of its present
single-minded pursuit
of stronger forms of intellectual property rights without consideration
of the negative
effects.

A major concern in the developing countries' Development Agenda
initiative is the
norm-setting activities taking place in various WIPO technical
committees, which
require developing countries to take on IP standards and obligations
that are far
beyond what is required under the TRIPS Agreement, at a time when they
are still
struggling with implementation of their TRIPS obligations.

The developing countries want from WIPO and its many technical committees
outcomes that preserve public interest flexibilities and the policy
space of Member
states to apply IP standards according to their development needs and in
a way that
enables development.

The Development Agenda proposal also recognizes that access to
information and
knowledge are essential elements in fostering innovation and creativity
in the
information age.  It thus takes issue with the addition of new layers of
IP protection
(as is taking place in WIPO), particularly to the digital environment as
this obstructs
the free flow of information and hampers efforts to set up new
arrangements for
promoting innovation and creativity.

The Development Agenda proposal is also critical that existing IP
agreements and
treaties have failed to promote a real transfer of technology to
developing countries
and calls for corrective measures, including clear provisions on
technology transfer
to be included in treaties currently under negotiation in WIPO.

The Development Agenda also called for WIPO's  technical assistance
programme to
ensure that national IP laws are tailored to meet each country's level
of development
and that developing countries are trained to the use of the
flexibilities (oriented to
public objectives) in existing IP agreements.

According to experts on IP and development, WIPO would need to be
reformed in
two ways, if it is to incorporate the "development dimension" into its
activities. The
first aspect includes reviewing existing activities and treaties that
have been
negotiated or that are on the negotiating table in WIPO to ensure that
these treaties do
not restrict or prevent developing countries from having access to tools
such as
information and technology that they need to develop.

The review should include the WIPO Copyright Treaty (WCT) and the proposed
Substantive Patent Law Treaty and the Treaty on the Protection of
Broadcasting
Organizations, which are now being negotiated.

The other aspect of a Development Agenda, according to the experts,
would be a
"positive agenda" for development, which could include the creation of
new treaties,
for example, on access to knowledge, on access to technology and on minimum
limitations and exceptions in relation to copyright and patent protection.

Several developing-country officials, as well as  independent experts
and NGOs
involved in IP issues, are of the view that the forthcoming April
meeting provides
developing countries with a vital opportunity to advance their
development agenda.

However, as the US draft proposal shows, it will be an uphill battle to
convince the
major developed countries of the need for even a little change, let
alone a systemic
reform in WIPO.
--


_______________________________________________
Ip-health mailing list
Ip-health@lists.essential.org
http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/ip-health



--
Manon Anne Ress
manon.ress@cptech.org,
www.cptech.org

Consumer Project on Technology in Washington, DC PO Box 19367,
Washington, DC 20036, USA Tel.:  +1.202.387.8030, fax: +1.202.234.5176

Consumer Project on Technology in Geneva, 1 Route des  Morillons, CP
2100, 1211 Geneva 2, Switzerland. Tel: +41 22 791 6727

Consumer Project on Technology in London, 24 Highbury Crescent, London,
N5 1RX, UK. Tel:+44(0)207 226 6663 ex 252. Mob:+44(0)790 386 4642. Fax:
+44(0)207 354 0607