[Random-bits] KEI Statement on conclusion of WIPO Development Agenda negotiations

Mon Jun 18 11:30:03 2007

I'll send later a more detailed analysis of the outcome of the WIPO PCDA
discussions on the WIPO Development Agenda (some info can be found also on
the KEI Blog), but it was quite good in the end.  This was our statement.

 Jamie

http://www.keionline.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=88
KEI Statement on conclusion of WIPO Development Agenda negotiations
Friday, 15 June 2007

Statement by James Love, Director of KEI

Statement by James Love, Director of KEI

"After three years, WIPO has produced a meaningful and welcome new vision
for WIPO. The governments who participated in the negotiations agreed that
WIPO is no longer only to pursue mindless expansions of intellectual
property rights, but now is a place to discuss a broad range of topics,
including measures to protect or promote access to knowledge, the
implications and benefits of a rich and accessible public domain, and
strategies for dealing with abuses of rights, or other measures to protect
the public interest. None of this would have happened if Argentina and
Brazil had not proposed, in 2004, that WIPO adopt a development agenda.
None of this would have moved ahead without the many contributions by
civil society and academic experts, and without the support of several
philanthropic and development organizations. Once the debate began, the
participation of and leadership by developing countries grew, on all three
continents. In the beginning, the WIPO secretariat was defensive and
hostile, and so too were nearly all members of Group B, the rich country
negotiating block. But by 2007, under the leadership of a new and
effective PCDA Chair, a great deal had changed, and the outcome
represented a true consensus that WIPO would change, and that this was a
good thing. Having concluded a difficult and quite meaty negotiation over
WIPO's purpose and direction, there will be an effort to implement the new
Development Agenda. The next two to three years will be critical. One has
to prudently wonder how sustainable is the interest in this reform effort.
The institutional juggernaut behind stronger IPR is well financed and
permanent, and the opposition is often poorly resourced and episodic. But
for this June, it is appropriate to appreciate the enormous progress, and
thank all of the negotiators for bringing forth such a worthwhile outcome,
and everyone else for their important role in making this happen."

----------------
James Love, James.Love@keionline.org
http://www.keionline.org
+1.202.332.2670, US cell +1.202.361.3040, Geneva Cell +41.76.413.6584