[Ecommerce] Statement by CI at PCIPD WIPO

[Michelle Childs]

Below is the statement I gave on behalf of Consumers International today
(16/4/05) at the PCIPD.
Michelle



The need to create a culture of consumer protection

Statement of Consumers International to WIPO PCIPD

March 14-15, 2005


I would like to offer my congratulations on your election as Chair, and
your colleague=92s election as vice chair. I would also like to thank the
Secretariat and the member states for the flexibility they have show
with regarding to /ad hoc/ accreditation for civil society
non-government organizations.


About CI


Consumers International (CI) represents 250 consumer groups in 115
countries, and strives to promote a fairer society through defending the
rights of all consumers, especially the poor, marginalized and
disadvantaged. We are among the hundreds of groups and leading experts
who have endorsed the Geneva Declaration on the Future of WIPO.


Views on Technical Assistance


We are reviewing the report of the Secretariat (PCIPD/4/2) on activities
regarding technical assistance. We support in particular the statements
in paragraphs 47, 48 and 49, concerning the need to seek a balance
between consumers and the owners of copyrighted works, and we look
forward to working with the Secretariat and member states to elaborate
on the mechanisms that are needed to achieve that balance, particularly
where needed to promote access to knowledge. To that end, we look
forward to the response to the request by Chile that the Standing
Committee on Copyright and Related Rights examine the issue of
limitations and exceptions to copyright, in the context of expanding
access to knowledge.


In general, however, we are concerned that WIPO=92s technical assistance
program does not have the appropriate balance to protect consumer interests=
.


There is a tendency to represent stronger and more IP rights as wholly
beneficial for developing countries, as if money flows from foreign
consumers to domestic right owners, even when the opposite is often the
case. There is virtually no discussion of the problems of high prices
and the barriers the poor face in obtaining access to knowledge.


In its most recent report on PCT patent filings, WIPO reports that 6.3
percent of PCT patent filings are from developing countries, and 93.7
percent from developed economies. Ownership of patents is even more
highly concentrated and unequal than global income, as measured by GDP.


Given the vast disparities over the ownership and control of
intellectual property assets, it is appropriate to ask whose interests
are being served by ever-higher levels of intellectual property protection.


It is our view that WIPO needs to develop a culture of consumer
protection. This is an important and deep topic that includes every
aspect of WIPO=92s technical assistance program. To start, WIPO should
heed the calls to assist its members to implement Paragraph 4 of the
Doha Declaration on TRIPS and Public Health. This topic is complex. It
goes far beyond the implementation of paragraph 6 of the declaration. It
most importantly calls upon countries to implement national patent laws
to promote access to medicine for all.


It is also necessary to solve the problem concerning pharmaceutical test
data, mention in paragraph 43 of the Secretariat document. It cannot be
the case that after the world announces it supports compulsory licensing
of patents, it then claims that test data be an exclusive rights regime
that is subject to no exceptions, like a super patent.


WIPO should also consider novel methods for the collective management of
patent rights, such as patent pools for essential medicines, or the US
proposals for a medical innovation prize fund system of remuneration.


There are also many other areas where WIPO should address overreaching
in terms of intellectual property rights. In particular, we call upon
the member states to schedule agenda items in relevant standing
committees on the implementation of Article 40 of the TRIPS, concerning
the control of anti-competitive practices in contractual licenses. WTO
scholars say that developing countries have not had the forsight or
capacity to develop appropriate per se rules to regulate conduct that
restrains competition may have adverse effects on trade and may impede
the transfer and dissemination of technology.


We also question the appropriateness of promoting costly technological
protection measures in developing countries, given the many problems
these measures present to consumers as well as students, teachers,
librarians and archivists.


The Geneva Declaration on the Future of WIPO called for the creation of
a body to systematically address the protection of consumer rights. The
establishment of such a Consumer Protection Committee can help balance
the extensive advice and lobbying WIPO currently receives from industry
right-owner bodies.


--

Michelle Childs, Head of European Affairs.
 michelle.childs@cptech.org. www.cptech.org
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

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 Washington, DC PO Box 19367,
Washington, DC 20036, USA Tel.:  +1.202.387.8030, fax: +1.202.234.5176