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....
A group of developing countries submitted a proposal for a work program for WIPO's Standing Committee on Copyrights and Related Rights (SCCR) on 10 March 2008. The new proposal from Brazil, Chile, Nicaragua and Uruguay, calls for work on three areas: identification from members’ national IP systems of models and practices on exceptions and limitations; analysis of exceptions and limitations needed to promote and disseminate creation and innovation; and establishment of an agreement on exceptions and limitations for the public interest, as a minimum in all national legislatio
Background Information on the WIPO Development Agenda Development Agenda in 2004 Led by Brazil and Argentina (and the Group of Friends of Development), developing nations issued a strong call for reform at the World Intellectual Property Office (WIPO) and adopted a “Development Agenda” in an effort to replace WIPO’s mission of automatically increasing intellectual [...]
IP Justice Recommendations for the 2007 WIPO General Assembly on the WIPO Development Agenda In 2004, at the General Assembly of the WIPO, two member nations Brazil and Argentina submitted proposals for establishing a Development Agenda for WIPO. This proposal found wide support from most member nations to WIPO. As you all know, the proposal [...]
We call upon WIPO delegates to reject the proposed WIPO Broadcast Treaty. After more than 9 years of discussions, efforts to find a treaty formulation that deals with piracy of broadcast signals, but which does not harm copyright owners and the legitimate users of broadcasts have failed.
By Robin Gross. New leadership is needed at WIPO in key positions, like the chairmanship of WIPO’s copyright committee. The WIPO delegates themselves must hold WIPO accountable for its actions, by refusing to re-elect leaders who consistently ignore the explicit instructions of the WIPO General Assembly to pursue their own agenda. The proposed Broadcasting Treaty could not be a better example - where the WIPO General Assembly has told the WIPO Copyright Committee Chair Jukka Liedes that the proposed Broadcasting Treaty should be a “signal-based†approach, which still protects broadcasts from theft without creating a new set of exclusive rights. Yet Liedes continues to draft the proposals for the treaty with his preferred approach of creating new intellectual property rights for broadcasting companies. ....
I've written a chapter about the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) in a new report entitled "Global Information Society Watch" published by the Association for Progressive Communications (APC) and (iTeM). Besides WIPO, the report includes a number of other articles about global policy-making institutions such as ICANN, ITU, UNESCO, and UNDP. The report officially launches [...]
Statement Concerning WIPO Broadcast Treaty Provided by Information Technology, Consumer Electronics and Telecommunications Industries Representatives, Public Interest Organizations, and Creative Community Representatives: The undersigned represent a broad and diverse group, united in common concern that the WIPO Treaty on the Protection of Broadcasts and Broadcasting Organizations could harm important economic and public policy interests. Members of this group submitted a statement in connection with a forum held at the USPTO on September 5, 2006, and the issues identified in that earlier statement largely remain relevant. This Statement dated May 9, 2007 offers preliminary comments regarding the Chair’s “Non-paper on the WIPO Treaty on the Protection of Broadcasting Organizations†issued by WIPO on May 1, 2007. .....
... Intellectual property rights can foster economic and social development. The Broadcast Treaty in its current form will not help to reach these aims and does not, in our understanding, comply with the decision of the 2006 General Assembly.
The undersigned organisations represent a broad set of constituencies with a direct interest in the discussions underway regarding an international instrument relating to broadcasting. Whilst we remain unconvinced that a treaty is necessary at all – and note that no convincing evidence has been presented that new international norms are required in this area – we do believe that a focussed, signal-protection-based Instrument to prevent piracy could be valuable. ...