Mark Schultz has an
interesting piece on what is happening at WIPO.
What Mark does not go into is how WIPO actually works. The fact is that we have nothing to fear from WIPO itself. WIPO's mandate is clearly to promote strong and consistent IP protection throughout the world.
But WIPO is run by the member states. All the power is with the member states. So if the member states wanted to change WIPO's mission to planting cactus plants in the Arctic, they could do it.
But WIPO is also a consensus-driven organization. This is a difficult concept for many of us to understand. Essentially, the organization only takes actions that everyone agrees on. "Everyone" includes such diverse delegations as Iran, Cuba, the Vatican, and the U.S. So, as you can imagine, this is a recipe for inaction, not action.
But that's a good thing, and it will probably be the saving grace in this "development agenda" farce. Because, essentially, what the anti-corporatists and anti-capitalists are trying to do is to redefine WIPO's core mission, and to turn WIPO into the World ANTI-Intellectual Property Organization. In fact, one speaker yesterday actually did propose changing the name. The idea was to replace "intellectual property" with "innovation", and the word "innovation" is general enough to include things unrelated to IP.
Ultimately, it seems to me at this juncture that either the "development agenda" proposal will wither over time (or be replaced with some new concern), OR its proponents will insist on action, at which time it will fall to some member state to "block" it.
If anyone, any single member state, blocks the proposal, it is over. Period.
So, in a sense, this entire debate at WIPO is a benign distraction. Did its proponents think they would really succeed? Not likely.
More likely, this entire debate is the result of two forces: developing world frustration, mobilized and guided by the IP sceptic movement. And while this movement will fail to alleviate Third World frustration, it WILL result in more funding for the IP sceptic organizations, which is ultimately their goal.
And the solution to Third World frustration? An end to Western hypocrisy on agriculture subsidies, which deprives developing countries of their normal path to development. But that's an altogether different topic for another time.
What Mark does not go into is how WIPO actually works. The fact is that we have nothing to fear from WIPO itself. WIPO's mandate is clearly to promote strong and consistent IP protection throughout the world.
But WIPO is run by the member states. All the power is with the member states. So if the member states wanted to change WIPO's mission to planting cactus plants in the Arctic, they could do it.
But WIPO is also a consensus-driven organization. This is a difficult concept for many of us to understand. Essentially, the organization only takes actions that everyone agrees on. "Everyone" includes such diverse delegations as Iran, Cuba, the Vatican, and the U.S. So, as you can imagine, this is a recipe for inaction, not action.
But that's a good thing, and it will probably be the saving grace in this "development agenda" farce. Because, essentially, what the anti-corporatists and anti-capitalists are trying to do is to redefine WIPO's core mission, and to turn WIPO into the World ANTI-Intellectual Property Organization. In fact, one speaker yesterday actually did propose changing the name. The idea was to replace "intellectual property" with "innovation", and the word "innovation" is general enough to include things unrelated to IP.
Ultimately, it seems to me at this juncture that either the "development agenda" proposal will wither over time (or be replaced with some new concern), OR its proponents will insist on action, at which time it will fall to some member state to "block" it.
If anyone, any single member state, blocks the proposal, it is over. Period.
So, in a sense, this entire debate at WIPO is a benign distraction. Did its proponents think they would really succeed? Not likely.
More likely, this entire debate is the result of two forces: developing world frustration, mobilized and guided by the IP sceptic movement. And while this movement will fail to alleviate Third World frustration, it WILL result in more funding for the IP sceptic organizations, which is ultimately their goal.
And the solution to Third World frustration? An end to Western hypocrisy on agriculture subsidies, which deprives developing countries of their normal path to development. But that's an altogether different topic for another time.