Development Agenda
The discussions about the Development Agenda will continue next year. The [Provisory Committee on
Proposals Related to a WIPO Development Agenda (PCDA) was extended for one more year.
There will be two more PCDA sessions, of 5 days each, so the 111 proposals made up until now, during the last 2 years, can be discussed in a “structured and profound” way.
The first session will attend 40 proposals contained on the Attachment A of the document elaborated by the president of the general Assembly about the Development Agenda. These 40 items are proposals contained on the document that Quirguistan curiously presented in the last minute of the second session of the PCDA, last June. Actually that document was a proposal made by the President of PCDA after consulting a few countries – excluding any one from the Friends of Development group – but that, in the end, was presented as being a Quirguistan proposal. Those 40 items are the ones which were basically agreed by the US and the European Union. The PCDA second session will discuss the others 71 items, contained on Attachment B, about which there is still a need for deeper explanation and discussing – those are the proposals not agreed by the majority of developed countries yet. So, gathering the two attachments, we have the 111 items proposed in the last two years.
The main concerning topic for the Friends of Development group, as well as for countries like India and Chile, is the 5th item and its (a), (b) and (c) letters of the President’s proposal. Such item states that the Provisory Committee about the Development Agenda (PCDA) must (a) taper the proposals to avoid repetition or duplication; (b) separate proposals that can be put in practice from the proposals which are declarations of general principles and objectives, and (c) identify proposals that are related to WIPO’s activities, and the ones that are not. And why such preoccupation? This item can rise many discussion and controversy, what can extend discussions about how to take the Development Agenda ahead, rather than discussing its content itself. However, as discussed with one of Brazil’s diplomats, such discussion about “shape” would appear again sooner or later. So, it is better to have it envisaged than to use the sessions to discuss the convenience of having or not this discussion about shape. The President of the General Assembly, in consultancy with the State Members, will produce initial documents about the mentioned topics.
The Provisory Committee on Proposals Related to a WIPO Development Agenda (PCDA) will propose to the 2007 General Assembly recommendations related to decision-taking about the agreed proposals of those two sessions mentioned above. In concern of the other proposals that still have not reached a general agreement, but where progress can be achieved, the PCDA will indicate actions to be taken in the sequence of the 2007 General Assembly in 2007.
To reach that agreement, more than three suggestions, or different “proposal-documents” coming from groups with different interests, were offered in order to get to the General Assembly President's current text. The first document to become public, in the middle of the week, was the Nigerian proposal, which suggested the renovation of the PCDA mandate and the accomplishment of 3 sessions in 2007. This document also envisaged the items (a), (b), (c) mentioned above, that actually are inheritance from the “Quirguistan Proposal”. Following, on last Friday, Group B, of the developed countries, presented a proposal eliminating the paragraph about renovating of the PCDA mandate, in a clear attempt to finish for good with all the discussion about the Development Agenda next year. On the sequence, a Brazilian proposal took place in the name of the Group of Friends of Development, but it has not become public. The last proposal was the one adopted as already said, which means the PCDA mandate has been renovated and that there will be two sessions in 2007.
Summing up, despite the discussions about “shape”, that can mess things up a bit, the subject about the Development Agenda is alive and on discussion.
Broadcasting Treaty
From November 19th to December 7th of 2007, a Diplomatic Conference will be taking place in order to approve the WIPO Treaty on the Protection of Broadcasting Organizations.
However, such Diplomatic Conference will only happen if the resulting deal of the next two sessions of the
Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights (SCCR) occur; if not, the Diplomatic Conference will not take place, and therefore there won't be a Broadcasting Treaty. In case there is no deal, the following discussions will be based on the Revised Draft Basic Proposal (
doc. SCCR/15/2).
It is important to mention that, according to the document prepared by the General Assembly President, such Diplomatic Conference will serve to “negotiate and conclude the WIPO Treaty on the Protection of Broadcasting Organizations, including the cable transmission organizations. The treaty’s scope will be limited to the protection of broadcasting and cable transmission organizations, in the traditional sense”. In other words, webcasting, also referred as Internet transmissions, was removed of the Treaty’s scope. The Revised Draft Basic Proposal (
doc. SCCR/15/2 ) will be the base document for the discussions, being affirmative that all the State Members will be able to write proposals at the Diplomatic Conference.
There will be two special sessions ruled by the Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights (SCCR) to clarify the following issues: the first will be in January, 2007, and the second in June, 2007. Such sessions “shall be focused on the agreement and its finalization, always having in mind the protection of the ‘signal’, its objectives, specific scope and object of the protection”. Therefore, the Treaty should focus the protection against ‘signal’ theft and should not protect the transmitted ‘content’. If those two sessions don’t result in accord, then there shall not be a Diplomatic Conference and, consequently, there won’t be a Treaty. There also, not having a Diplomatic Conference, the discussions will be taken back based on the Revised Draft Basic Proposal (
doc. SCCR/15/2 ). The positive factor in that proposal is that the paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 were included by Brazil a few meetings ago. Such paragraphs foresee cultural diversity and public domain protection, and against anti-competitive practices; clear defenses against the North-American hegemony.
Moreover, the WIPO Secretariat will organize, in partnership and on demand of its Member States, consultations and informal meetings about the Diplomatic Conference.
Summing up, Brazil had very little or nothing to do in this General Assembly related to the Broadcasting Treaty. The same USA, who face
strong pressure from its technological industry (i.e. AT&T, Intel, Dell, Verizon etc..), that wants to keep transmitting content (can be read as: pieces of work mostly protected by copyright laws) with no additional barriers, amongst other motivations, has blocked the happening of a Diplomatic Conference that would adopt a Treaty including protection for internet transmissions (webcasting), emphasizing that that protection should be against ‘signal theft’ and not against the ‘signal’s content’.
Committees on Patents
It was decided that the delegations have until December, 2006, to submit their proposals to the work program of the
Standing Committee on the Law of Patents (SCP), including proposals on ways of proceeding on discussions.
The General Assembly President will promote informal consultations during the first semester of 2007 to discuss the proposals and recommend a SCP work plan to the General Assembly of 2007. The President will decide on the consultations configuration, which shall be inclusive, and if it’s desirable to have informal consultations in a meeting with all Member States.
As a consequence, the General Assembly of 2007 will take into consideration the results of those consultations, aiming at establishing a work plan for the Patent Committee of 2008 and 2009.
Summing up, the discussions about patents continue in a slow pace, which is a extremely positive factor, since not even the European Union, neither the USA, have a consensus on how the national patents system shall be “harmonized” or improved, even more whilst talking about an eventual international system. It is important to give time to time, other than taking into consideration the different degrees of development of each country, as well as the existence of flexibilities and differential treatment.
Final Commentaries
What is at stake are hundreds of billions of dollars by the use of medical patent rights, electronic products, fertilizers, manure, software, database rights, motion pictures and music copyrights, rights over genetically modified seeds, etc., in counterpart to the right to access to medication and health, technological dissemination, access to information, culture, education and knowledge in general, besides the recognition and reward for the use of genetic resources, traditional knowledge and folklore.
The ending for the General Assembly was quite reasonable. There is a huge range of interests, many times even opposites, getting involved. In order to reach a consensus, even more with the existence of 183 Member States, it is not an easy task. The result was, just as possible, reasonably balanced.
