[Ip-health] Interview With Francis Gurry

[Gopa Kumar]

--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
  'Developing IPR is not a zero-sum scenario'  Q&A: Francis Gurry,
Director-General, WIPO Joe C Mathew / New Delhi September 30, 2009, 1:08 IS=
T

The Geneva-based World Intellectual Property Organization (Wipo), a
specialised agency of the United Nations, aims at developing a balanced and
accessible international intellectual property (IP) system among its 184
member countries. While its efforts are highly appreciated in the developed
world, some of its initiatives have drawn flak from various IP stakeholders
in developing nations. Just before the ongoing annual general assembly of
Wipo began in Geneva on September 22, Delhi-based civil society groups had
asked the central government for measures to defend the domestic policy
space, as well as the public health safeguards available within the
framework of international treaties. In an e-mail response to *Joe C Mathew=
*,
WIPO Director-General *FRANCIS GURRY *addresses such fears and says he is
personally committed to have Wipo work towards narrowing the knowledge gap
in the world, and help developing and least developed countries avail the
benefits of the knowledge economy. Excerpts:

*What are the major items on the agenda for the 47th General Assembly? *
For the first time, the annual meetings of Wipo member states began with a
two-day, high-level ministerial segment. This, I believe, reflects the
importance of IP to senior policy makers. The high-level segment on
September 22 and 23 brought together over 40 ministers, mostly from
developing and least developed countries, who addressed national IP
priorities. The participation by senior policy makers from developing
countries in this high-level segment reflects growing recognition of the
importance of IP to these countries.

The Assemblies of member states are reviewing the status of activities and
discussing future work (agenda available at www.wipo.int). The 184 member
states are considering and approving the programme and budget for the
2010/11 biennium. They will take note of the work undertaken in the past
year and will provide direction for the Organisation=92s future substantive
work in the context of the various inter-governmental committees. I reporte=
d
to the member states on progress we have been able to make in implementing
the organisation=92s nine new strategic goals over the past year.

*Do you agree with the view that WIPO is primarily customer-driven, as it
generates its revenue from customers (primarily developed nations) and not
members? Could you elaborate on your views?*
No, I don=92t agree with this view. Unlike other UN organisations, Wipo is
largely self-funding, thanks to the revenues generated by a range of
services that facilitate the process of acquiring IP rights in multiple
countries. These include the Patent Cooperation Treaty and the Madrid Syste=
m
for the International Registration of Trademarks. It is true that companies
and individuals operating in the private sector are the main users of these
services, but Wipo is first and foremost an intergovernmental organisation.
And, as such, owned by its 184 member states, who are responsible for
setting the organisation=92s agenda, allocating budgets in line with
priorities, and overseeing implementation of the programme and budget. Wipo
is a non-profit, member-driven organisation that is committed to ideals of
the United Nations. Any surpluses generated by the demand for Wipo=92s fili=
ng
and registration services, subject to the scrutiny and agreement of member
states, are re-invested in programmes and activities designed to help creat=
e
a stable international IP environment and build IP capacity in developing
countries. This arrangement benefits all stakeholders.

*Do you agree to the view that objectives like balanced evolution of the
international normative framework for IP, provision for premier global IP
services, etc, are indirectly harming the interests of developing countries=
?
*
No, I do not agree with this statement. This is not a zero-sum scenario.
Balanced evolution of the international normative IP framework and provisio=
n
of global IP services complement and support efforts to promote the economi=
c
interests of developing countries. The organisation=92s nine strategic goal=
s,
which have been agreed upon by the international community, are designed to
ensure that the IP system is accessible to all those interested in
leveraging the value of their innovative and creative assets. We are workin=
g
to develop concrete, practical and workable solutions to help narrow the
knowledge gap that exists in the world today and to increase participation
in the benefits of the knowledge economy by supporting national efforts (of
both developing and least developed countries) to develop effective IP
systems. This is something to which I am personally strongly committed.

The international discussions that take place under the auspices of Wipo ar=
e
inclusive. The active engagement of developing countries in these
international negotiations is a reflection of the recognition of the
importance of IP to these countries. Such participation in these
negotiations also means that these countries are in a position to influence
the outcomes of these international discussions. India, for instance, is an
active participant in the normative IP discussions that take place at Wipo.
It is only through an inclusive debate that we can arrive at consensus
decisions that address the concerns of all member states.

Moreover, Wipo continues to invest significant resources in supporting
national efforts to develop and strengthen IP capacity in the interests of
economic development. In the current financial period, almost one-fifth
(some 117 million Swiss francs) of the organisation=92s budget has been
allocated to this activity. A similar amount is earmarked for the 2010/11
biennium.

*How far is it true that a =91global patent system=92 will undermine the
sovereign rights of individual member nations to determine patentability of
applications?*
It=92s not clear what you mean by a =93global patent system=94. The only
international system as such that exists today is the Patent Cooperation
Treaty (PCT). But, the PCT is not a patent granting system; it is an
international filing system for patent applications. As such, it does not
touch the sovereign rights of states because under this system, it is the
national patenting authorities themselves that determine the patentability
of inventions. It is these same national authorities which decide whether t=
o
grant a patent or not.

The basic rule is that countries are sovereign. Each country crafts its
patent system in a way that best fits with its national priorities for
technological and economic development. Thus, a =93global patent granting
system=94 could only be established if and when sovereign states agreed to =
set
up such a system and there is no such proposal on the table anywhere, to my
knowledge.

*In what stages are the plans for developing patent prosecution highway
projects? Is it going to be a major topic of discussion in the General
Assembly?*
No, during the meetings of Wipo Assemblies, the only context in which
discussions may refer to the Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH) is that of th=
e
PCT Assembly, when member states will be invited to note the report of the
second session of the PCT Working Group which featured discussions on the
PCT Roadmap (document PCT/WG/2/3 =93The Future of the PCT=94), with referen=
ce
also to ongoing PPH (pilot) projects. In this context, I would like to draw
your attention to the latest development, which I very much welcome.
Representatives of the three Trilateral Offices (European Patent Office,
Japan Patent Office and United States Patent and Trademark Office),
attending the Global Symposium of Intellectual Property Authorities, hosted
by Wipo on September 17 and 18, have signalled their agreement in principle
to integrating PCT work products (PCT international preliminary reports on
patentability) into their ongoing PPH projects, and to start pilot projects
in early 2010.

As PPH projects are all bilateral projects between various national offices=
,
it would be more appropriate for you to address the first part of your
question to those offices which have entered into bilateral PPH agreements.

*Could you elaborate on the role of IP in mitigating climate change?*
Technology will play an important role in mitigating and adapting to climat=
e
change. Policies that stimulate the creation and diffusion of technology,
especially policies that encourage and protect innovation and technology
transfer, including improving access to patent information, are directly
relevant to an effective response to the challenges of climate change.
Private sector investments in innovation are possible in large part because
a functioning patent system enables successful innovators to earn an
economic return. The patent system also facilitates the transfer of
technology, insofar as patent applications and patents themselves are
published and publicly available, and insofar as the system transforms
inventions into tradable assets (through licencing contracts and other
agreements).

Wipo is committed to building a broader understanding of the important
contribution that intellectual property can make in generating and
disseminating technological solutions to address the multi-faceted
challenges that climate change presents.

http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/developing-ipr-is-notzero-sum-s=
cenario/371721/