Posts Tagged ‘WIPO’

Dr Gurry re-appointed

Tuesday, May 13th, 2014

Last week, 8 May, WIPO’s General Assembly re-elected Dr Francis Gurry to a second 6 year term, beginning 1 October 2014 as Director-General of WIPO.

Congratulations, Dr Gurry!

In his acceptance speech, Dr Gurry highlighted the challenge facing WIPO:

I believe that the fundamental challenge that we face as an Organization is to achieve a shared understanding of the contribution and value of intellectual property to economic, social and cultural development. This is by no means an easy task. Many obstacles lie in the path – different competitive interests in an economy in which knowledge- and technology-intensive industries account for an increasing 30% share of global economic output; asymmetries of wealth, opportunity and knowledge; historical and contemporary trust deficits; and the reality of a multi-speed and multi-tiered world in which multilateralism, while being the highest expression of inclusiveness and legitimacy, is nevertheless the slowest solution.

It would appear this means continued development of the international agenda on specific issues.

Press Release

Acceptance Speech

Re-thinking the role of IP: Francis Gurry lecture

Thursday, August 29th, 2013

Last week, the 5th Francis Gurry Lecture at the University of Melbourne was given by Dr Francis Gurry, the Director-General of WIPO (and so the highest ranking Australian official in UN organisations), himself. The topic “Re-thinking the Role of IP’.

Dr Gurry’s central theme was that the context in which intellectual property operates has changed so much that the way in which we think about IP and its role in society needs to be reconsidered.

One of the key changes Dr Gurry identified was the economic shift from wealth derived from tangibles to wealth generation deriving from intangibles. As one indicator of this, Dr Gurry pointed out that US industries in the IP field accounted for some 35% of its GDP. Another indicator showed that in 1978 95% of the value of the Standard & Poors 500 came from tangible assets, down to 20% in 2010.

The second key change Dr Gurry identified was the economic shift from the West to the East. China is now the second largest investor in R & D in absolute terms in the world. Japan the third.

The third key change identified was the empowerment of non-state actors. One illustration of this was the Day the Internet went Dark. More than 115,000 websites closed or limited access. More than 2.4 million anti-SOPA tweets were generated. One of my favourite images (lid dip Marty Schwimmer was the impact on the US Congress:

sopa-pipa-one-day

We are seeing a little bit of that here.

Of course, the Department of Homeland Security, or the FBI, also flexed its muscles.

Among the many consequences arising from these changes:

  • much greater focus on IP and much greater intensity – Smartphone wars anyone, industrial espionage
  • much greater attention to what IP rights are granted for and focus mediating what is acceptable to the general public

Although not an example used by Dr Gurry, we have seen that here too. Dr Gurry did point out, however, an apparent paradox:

No one minds, it seems, someone making billions out of new social networking or media technology, but there is widespread social unease at someone making billions out of a new life-saving drug. Which outcome do we want to achieve in the innovation system?

Dr Gurry went on to explain that this changes in turn raised many questions for entitlement, appropriability and policy-making. Dr Gurry’s presentation in written form can be found here (pdf). Definitely repays reading. Lid dip @MsSamMcHugh

 

Update: A video of the lecture and the paper itself can now be found here.

Government responses to ACIP enforcement reviews

Friday, June 3rd, 2011

The Government has announced its responses to ACIP’s reviews of:

On a quick skim, the main recommendation to introduce a Patents Tribunal to determine “IP” disputes has been found non-viable due to the limitations on the Commonwealth’s repository of judicial powers. With WIPO’s arbitration and mediation service in mind, however, IP Australia is to work with alternative dispute resolution providers to provide a new ADR resource. In the PBR context, the Government states that it does not consider it appropriate for IP Australia, as a regulatory agency, to provide post-grant mediation services itself.

The review on PBR has received rather mixed results.

The Government has not accepted the proposal to introduce a “purchase” right.

The PBR Act will be amended to clarify that harvested material which can also be used as propagating material qualifies as propagating material for the purposes of the Act’s prohibitions.

The Government accepts that no changes to the operation of ss 14 and 15 are required.

At this stage, the Government considers that the making of “mendacious” declarations of PBR is adequately covered by the prohibitions on misleading or deceptive conduct in trade or commerce.

Lots of recommendations for more education.

No doubt, you will have your own favourite recommendation(s), but (as I am not a Kat, ip or otherwise) that is all there is time for today!

The Minister’s Getting Tougher on Imitators press release.

ACIP’s “patents” review (pdf).

ACIP’s PBR review (pdf).

Selected microblog posts for week ending 21/8/09

Sunday, August 23rd, 2009

Dr Gurry in Melbourne

Tuesday, June 23rd, 2009

Francis Gurry, the newly appointed Director General of WIPO will be speaking in Melbourne on 3 August 2009:

Intellectual Property, Innovation
and Creativity – Future Global Directions

Intellectual Property, Innovation and Creativity – Future Global Directions

Registration is free, but bookings essential.

More details here (pdf).

WIPO Copyright progress

Monday, June 1st, 2009

William Lye has a comprehensive report on the conclusion of the latest round of WIPO’s Standing Committee on Copyright – a late agreement:

  1. to address a proposed treaty on copyright exceptions for visually impaired persons and others; and
  2. for renewed focus on the rights of audio-visual performances; and
  3. to continue discussion on the need to protect (badly misunderstood) broadcasters.

William Lye’s report here; the Chairman’s draft conclusions here. The discussion of exceptions seems to be much broader than just rights of the visually impaired: full range of discussion papers and working materials here and here.

For some reason, the Australian government is opposed to the proposals for visually impaired persons: Nic Suzor wants to explain to you why you should do something to help change this here.

World IP Court by 2012?

Wednesday, April 1st, 2009

Apparently, one of the G20′s solutions to “the GFC”.

IP Watch; IPKat and Duncan Bucknell.

The G20‘s website here and, possibly more directly, the communique may turn up at the London Summit 2009 (the site is not responding at the moment). Maybe Connex is running it?

WIPO UDRP annual report

Sunday, March 22nd, 2009

WIPO’s annual report summarising developments in domain name disputes for 2008 has been published here.

The headline attracting news around the world:

a record 2,329 complaints filed

Interestingly,

the WIPO Center has received 14,663 UDRP or UDRP-based cases (gTLDs and ccTLDs), covering 26,262 separate domain names. Reflecting the truly global scope of this dispute mechanism, named parties to WIPO cases represented over 100 countries in 2008 alone. The United States of America (US), France, the United Kingdom (UK), Germany, Switzerland and Spain were the most frequent bases for complainants, while the US, the UK, China, Spain, Canada, and France were the most represented countries by named respondent party

and

almost 30% of all cases were settled without a panel decision. Of the remainder, 85% of the panel decisions favored the complainant, while 15% of the complaints were denied, leaving the names in the possession of the registration holder. Cases were handled by 285 WIPO panelists from 40 countries.

There are also short notes on what sectors were affected, and further developments in the domain name space.

PCT survey

Wednesday, January 21st, 2009

IP Australia calls on all Australian users of the PCT to complete WIPO’s online survey:

Australian users of the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) can make their views known by participating in a survey being run by the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), the body that administers the PCT. The comprehensive survey covers all aspects of the PCT from electronic filing to search and examination.

Follow the links from here.

Traditional Knowledge, Folklore, And Genetic Resources -updated

Saturday, October 18th, 2008

The Chairman has released a report outlining how WIPO’s future work on the protection of Traditional Knowledge, Folklore and Genetic Resources following the conclusion of the 13th session of the Intergovernmental Committee.

pdf link via Intellectual Property Watch.

Kaitlin Mara has an lengthy report from the fallout of the last day’s negotiations: ‘No Agreement For WIPO Committee On Traditional Knowledge And Folklore’ here. It is interesting that ‘progress’ and ‘positive outcome’ relate solely to the adoption of yet another treaty with new rights.

Meanwhile, Lebanon is claiming, amongst other things, a ‘food copyright’ no less in felafel. Beauty Marks exposes the ‘plot’ and points to some common confusions; the IPKitties claim that Egypt really has first dibs and, as it is not claiming rights, everything is OK. Now, would a several thousand year old food count as folklore, traditional knowledge or, like Champagne, a geographic indicator?

The collection of papers for the IGC, here, and brief summary.