[WSIS CS-Plenary] IPJ: WIPO Resumes "Development Agenda" Talks

[Robin Gross]

IP Justice Media Release  ~  20 February 2006


WIPO Resumes "Development Agenda" Talks
Developing Countries Continue Push for Balance at WIPO

IP Justice is in Geneva this week as the second year of talks resume to 
debate a "Development Agenda" at the World Intellectual Property 
Organization (WIPO), the UN Specialized Agency that over-sees the 
formulation of international intellectual property law treaties.

In October 2004, the WIPO General Assembly voted to enact a "Development 
Agenda", intended to reform the agency's practices that favor large 
intellectual property owners at the expense of the greater public 
interest.

Led by Brazil and Argentina, a coalition of fourteen developing 
countries, "the Group of Friends of Development", submitted a number of 
concrete recommendations for reform at WIPO and a re-balancing of IP 
rights in line with the global public interest.

In July 2005, IP Justice published a statement that was signed-on to by 
138 public-interest NGO's from all corners of the globe to support the 
Friends of Development (FoD) proposal for much needed reform at WIPO.

"As a United Nations organization, WIPO must re-focus its work to 
promote the global public interest," said IP Justice Executive Director 
Robin Gross.  "Awareness is growing, particularly in developing 
countries, about the harm to creativity and innovation caused by 
excessive intellectual property rights."

WIPO held three meetings during the spring and summer of 2005 intended 
to debate proposals and send recommendations to WIPO's General Assembly 
in the fall 2005.  The FoD proposal and several others should have been 
examined in 2005, however stodgy WIPO procedures and US interventions 
prevented any serious debate in 2005 on proposals to reform WIPO.

Despite the overwhelming majority of support from Member Countries to 
make substantive recommendations to the 2005 General Assembly, two 
countries were able to block any substantive recommendations from going 
forward.   WIPO works according to a consensus model, so if any single 
country refuses to agree, no progress can be made.  At the summer 2005 
Development Agenda meetings, the United States, supported only by Japan, 
refused to allow a single recommendation for reform go to the 2005 WIPO 
General Assembly.

Then at the 2005 WIPO General Assembly, Member Countries again voted to 
pursue a Development Agenda at WIPO.  The General Assembly called for 
holding two week-long meetings in 2006, to be followed by substantive 
recommendations for reform to go before the 2006 General Assembly in 
September.

The first 2006 Development Agenda meeting takes place 20-24 February, 
with subsequent discussions scheduled for 26-30 June 2006, leading up to 
the General Assembly in September 2006.

Besides the original 2004 FoD proposal, which has yet to receive serious 
attention by WIPO, a number of other countries have subsequently 
submitted proposals for debate in 2006 as well.  And the FoD also 
submitted a new proposal at the beginning of this week's meeting to 
update and elaborate on their original proposal of 2004.

In January 2006 Chile submitted an important proposal that advocates for 
greater protection of information in the public domain.  Chile's 
proposal also calls for recognition of various complementary models of 
dissemination of creativity, including the expansion of free software 
and other open licenses such as Creative Commons.  Chile's proposal also 
calls for an assessment of what the appropriate levels of IP are, given 
the particular needs of a country, including its degree of development 
and institutional capacity.  Chile's proposal recognizes the simple fact 
that "one size fits all" (X-Large) for IP rights would be harmful to the 
national interests of many developing countries who are overwhelmingly 
IP-importers.

Entirely missing the intent of the Development Agenda, the US submitted 
a new proposal on the eve of the February 2006 Development Agenda 
meeting, designed to increase intellectual property rights.  The US 
proposal would make it easier to obtain patents by providing a patent 
database to Member Countries.  And the US proposal would initiate a 
study to demonstrate the harm of counterfeiting to economic growth. 
Unfortunately nothing in the US proposal addresses the real concerns 
developing countries face regarding the inequities of existing IP rights 
regimes.

Colombia also submitted a lack-luster proposal that would allow the 
national offices of developing countries to access databases for patent 
searches.

More detailed analysis of the WIPO Development Agenda is available here:
  http://www.ipjustice.org/WIPO/WIPO_DA.shtml

IP Justice: 138 NGOs Sign Statement to Support FoD Proposal:
  http://www.ipjustice.org/WIPO/NGO_Statement.shtml


Contact: Robin D. Gross, IP Justice Executive Director
  Telephone: +1.415.553.6261   Email: robin at ipjustice.org