I thought maybe a basic discussion of the
situation at WIPO might be in order. Not a comprehensive discussion, to
be sure, but a basic overview.
What is the "Development Agenda" at WIPO?
The "Development Agenda" discussion is a discussion of a proposal that was made at WIPO's General Assembly in September, 2004, and which could possibly be adopted at WIPO's General Assembly in September, 2005.
In 2004, WIPO agreed to a series of meetings to see if such an Agenda could be formulated on a consensus-basis. If so, in theory, out of this series of meetings a concrete proposal would be forwarded on for action at the 2005 General Assembly.
A series of three meetings were scheduled, as well as a seminar. The meetings were scheduled for April, June, and July of 2005, and the seminar for May, 2005. (at the time of this writing, two meetings and the seminar have been held, and the July meeting is in progress).
The "Development Agenda" began as a single proposal, but now it has grown to a series of proposals. They are, up to this point, only proposals for a development agenda. The question on the table is whether WIPO should have a development agenda, and if so, what it should look like. So to the degree that there is a Development Agenda, it is a proposed development agenda.
But saying that WIPO does not have a development agenda is NOT to say that WIPO is not concerned about development. Quite the contrary. In fact, WIPO has a Permanent Committee on IP and Development (PCIPD) at WIPO. Yes, you read that right--WIPO already has a venue set aside for discussions on the relationship between IP policies and development. But WIPO views strong IP protection as a tool for development, and so works with countries to implement strong IP protection to aid them in their development efforts.
You might expect WIPO to have a pro-IP perspective, seeing how it was set up by the UN precisely to promote IP protection and international consistency of IP law. After all, WIPO's mandate is "maintenance and further development of the respect for intellectual property throughout the world."
But in recent years there has been a distinct movement to undercut IP protection. It is this movement, and it is these people, who are the forces promoting the Development Agenda.
As of this writing, there have been a number of proposals. There have been very aggressive proposals submitted by Brazil and Argentina, along with several other countries in a coalition called the "Friends of Development."
There were also a number of pro-IP proposals submitted by the US, Mexico, the UK, and others designed to present constructive alternatives rather than just opposition.
One would expect that some specific, concrete proposals will be approved by consensus at the (current) July meeting, which would be forwarded on to the General Assembly for consideration in September.
Why is there a Development Agenda?
Well, you'll get different answers to this question, depending on whom you ask. If you ask the proponents of the proposal, or if you ask those whom I have taken to calling the "IP skeptic community" (Free Culture, Access to Knowledge, CopyLeft, etc.), they will tell you that influential corporations have managed to gain an absurd amount of IP protection through their lobbying of western governments, and now those western governments are forcing these absurdly restrictive IP standards on the developing world through international agreements and international standard-setting bodies such as WIPO.
They will further assert that these absurdly restrictive IP policies are cutting off the access to the knowledge of the developed world that developing nations need in order to develop.
On the other side, the answer is that those who are pushing the Development Agenda are either 1) sincere but sincerely wrong, or 2) purposely sidetracking WIPO to lash out at western economies.
My view is actually much darker than this: Namely, that anti-capitalist and anti-corporate organizations have taken advantage of resentment in the developing world and have manipulated countries like Brazil and Argentina into pushing the Development Agenda in order to accomplish THEIR anti-corporate and anti-capitalist goals. Perhaps I'm a bit too cynical here, but there is no question that they have a common enemy and they are working in coordination.
I should point out that some seasoned WIPO observers are even more cynical than I am. They believe that the proponents of the Development Agenda don't even seriously want the Agenda to go forward, or never really expected it to succeed. Instead, frustrated by their failure to achieve their ends at the WTO and in other trade negotiations on agriculture subsidies and other issues, their only intention is to tie up and frustrate WIPO as a way to lash out at developed countries.
What is the "Development Agenda" at WIPO?
The "Development Agenda" discussion is a discussion of a proposal that was made at WIPO's General Assembly in September, 2004, and which could possibly be adopted at WIPO's General Assembly in September, 2005.
In 2004, WIPO agreed to a series of meetings to see if such an Agenda could be formulated on a consensus-basis. If so, in theory, out of this series of meetings a concrete proposal would be forwarded on for action at the 2005 General Assembly.
A series of three meetings were scheduled, as well as a seminar. The meetings were scheduled for April, June, and July of 2005, and the seminar for May, 2005. (at the time of this writing, two meetings and the seminar have been held, and the July meeting is in progress).
The "Development Agenda" began as a single proposal, but now it has grown to a series of proposals. They are, up to this point, only proposals for a development agenda. The question on the table is whether WIPO should have a development agenda, and if so, what it should look like. So to the degree that there is a Development Agenda, it is a proposed development agenda.
But saying that WIPO does not have a development agenda is NOT to say that WIPO is not concerned about development. Quite the contrary. In fact, WIPO has a Permanent Committee on IP and Development (PCIPD) at WIPO. Yes, you read that right--WIPO already has a venue set aside for discussions on the relationship between IP policies and development. But WIPO views strong IP protection as a tool for development, and so works with countries to implement strong IP protection to aid them in their development efforts.
You might expect WIPO to have a pro-IP perspective, seeing how it was set up by the UN precisely to promote IP protection and international consistency of IP law. After all, WIPO's mandate is "maintenance and further development of the respect for intellectual property throughout the world."
But in recent years there has been a distinct movement to undercut IP protection. It is this movement, and it is these people, who are the forces promoting the Development Agenda.
As of this writing, there have been a number of proposals. There have been very aggressive proposals submitted by Brazil and Argentina, along with several other countries in a coalition called the "Friends of Development."
There were also a number of pro-IP proposals submitted by the US, Mexico, the UK, and others designed to present constructive alternatives rather than just opposition.
One would expect that some specific, concrete proposals will be approved by consensus at the (current) July meeting, which would be forwarded on to the General Assembly for consideration in September.
Why is there a Development Agenda?
Well, you'll get different answers to this question, depending on whom you ask. If you ask the proponents of the proposal, or if you ask those whom I have taken to calling the "IP skeptic community" (Free Culture, Access to Knowledge, CopyLeft, etc.), they will tell you that influential corporations have managed to gain an absurd amount of IP protection through their lobbying of western governments, and now those western governments are forcing these absurdly restrictive IP standards on the developing world through international agreements and international standard-setting bodies such as WIPO.
They will further assert that these absurdly restrictive IP policies are cutting off the access to the knowledge of the developed world that developing nations need in order to develop.
On the other side, the answer is that those who are pushing the Development Agenda are either 1) sincere but sincerely wrong, or 2) purposely sidetracking WIPO to lash out at western economies.
My view is actually much darker than this: Namely, that anti-capitalist and anti-corporate organizations have taken advantage of resentment in the developing world and have manipulated countries like Brazil and Argentina into pushing the Development Agenda in order to accomplish THEIR anti-corporate and anti-capitalist goals. Perhaps I'm a bit too cynical here, but there is no question that they have a common enemy and they are working in coordination.
I should point out that some seasoned WIPO observers are even more cynical than I am. They believe that the proponents of the Development Agenda don't even seriously want the Agenda to go forward, or never really expected it to succeed. Instead, frustrated by their failure to achieve their ends at the WTO and in other trade negotiations on agriculture subsidies and other issues, their only intention is to tie up and frustrate WIPO as a way to lash out at developed countries.