Well, I'm here at WIPO's "International
Seminar on Intellectual Property and Development May 2-3, 2005. Actually,
I'm writing this entry sitting in the main chamber at WIPO in Geneva. It's
about 30 minutes before the start of the first session, and the room is
mostly empty. The staff is busily putting out placques for the various
IGOs (inter-governmental organizations), country delegations, and NGOs
(non-governmental organizations). IPI is here as an NGO.
This particular event is open to whomever. It does not require accreditation with WIPO. So we'll see who turns up.
The event is designed to facilitate discussion of the role of IP to international development, so as to inform the discussions WIPO is having on the proposed "development agenda" submitted by Brazil and Argentina, and supported by 12 other countries.
It's highly contentious and controversial. Essentially, the development agenda is designed to (in my opinion) inhibit WIPO's mission of encouraging strong and consistent global IP protection. This represents, essentially, an attempted hijacking of WIPO.
While 90% of WIPO's budget is paid by companies in the IP business, it is controlled by the member states. So it CAN be hijacked. And, though it is a "consensus-driven" organization and thus averse to actual votes, the end of this process later this year could result in a highly-confrontational vote, with an outcome that is unsure at this point.
More later from WIPO.
This particular event is open to whomever. It does not require accreditation with WIPO. So we'll see who turns up.
The event is designed to facilitate discussion of the role of IP to international development, so as to inform the discussions WIPO is having on the proposed "development agenda" submitted by Brazil and Argentina, and supported by 12 other countries.
It's highly contentious and controversial. Essentially, the development agenda is designed to (in my opinion) inhibit WIPO's mission of encouraging strong and consistent global IP protection. This represents, essentially, an attempted hijacking of WIPO.
While 90% of WIPO's budget is paid by companies in the IP business, it is controlled by the member states. So it CAN be hijacked. And, though it is a "consensus-driven" organization and thus averse to actual votes, the end of this process later this year could result in a highly-confrontational vote, with an outcome that is unsure at this point.
More later from WIPO.