Digital Rights + Internet Governance + Innovation Policy

Draft Program Outline for the Third Meeting of the IGF in Hyderabad in Dec. 2008

Draft Program Outline for the Third Meeting of the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) Hyderabad, 3-6 December 2008 Introduction This paper aims to provide an input into the open round of consultations on 13 May 2008 to discuss programme and agenda for the third meeting of the IGF in Hyderabad. It gives a first draft programme [...]

IP Justice White Paper on the Proposed Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA)

In 2007 a select handful of the wealthiest countries began a treaty-making process to create a new global standard for intellectual property rights enforcement, the proposed Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA). ACTA is spearheaded by the United States, the European Commission, Japan, and Switzerland -- those countries with the largest intellectual property industries. Other countries invited to participate in ACTA’s negotiation process are Canada, Australia, Korea, Mexico and New Zealand. Noticeably absent from ACTA’s negotiations are leaders from developing countries who hold national policy priorities that differ from the international intellectual property industry....

ACTA’s Misguided Effort to Increase Govt Spying and Ratchet-Up IPR Enforcement at Public Expense

IP Justice Comments to the U.S.T.R. on the proposed Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA). IP Justice firmly believes that ACTA’s costs to the public far outweigh any public benefit it might provide. The financial expense to tax-payers to fund ACTA would be enormous and steal scarce resources away from programs that deal with genuine public needs like providing education and eliminating hunger. ACTA would burden the judicial system and divert badly needed law enforcement and customs resources away from public security and towards private profit. Unfortunately the zeal to “beef-up” enforcement measures on which ACTA rides often leads to the violation of privacy rights, bypassing due process protections, and cutting-off the free flow of information. ACTA proposes to set new international norms to lock countries into pre-determined policy choices when flexibility is needed.

Public-Interest Principles for the Networked Communications Environment

Why is Free Expression Important in an Information Society? The UK-based "Freedom of Expression Project" posted "Public Interest Principles for the Networked Communications Environment". The draft document provides useful analysis on the importance of freedom of expression, open standards, interoperability, respect for privacy, and balanced copyright law as key policy goals for a healthy and robust information society. The project aims to complete an agreed set of principles by December 2008....

8-10 Sept. 2008: Yale’s A2K-3 Conference in Geneva (3rd Access to Knowledge Conference)

The Information Society Project (ISP) at Yale Law School will host the third Access to Knowledge Conference (A2K3) September 8-10, 2008, in Geneva, Switzerland. It will be held at the Geneva International Conference Centre and will bring together hundreds of decision-makers and experts on global knowledge to discuss the urgent need for policy reforms.

Sign the Petition to EU Parliament to Use Open Standards and Promote Interoperability

If you are a European citizen, sign the petition to "Open Parliament" and encourage the use of open standards and interoperable systems in the European ICT sector. The Open Parliament Petition states that citizens should not have to use the software of a single company in order to communicate with their elected officials or participate in the legislate process. All companies should be given the chance to compete freely for contacts to supply ICT services to the European Parliament. Read and sign the full-petition here....

Text Adopted by WIPO Copyright Committee on Exceptions and Limitations

Brazil, Chile, Nicaragua and Uruguay presented a proposal which elaborated further the proposal by the delegation of Chile (SCCR/13/5). Many of the delegations who took the floor supported the proposal, in whole or in part. Other delegations expressed support or opposition to specific elements of document SCCR/13/5, which are reflected in their interventions in the report of the meeting....

Go to Top