Original news and analysis on international IP policy
Indigenous peoples are losing their genetic resources and traditional knowledge and need to be involved in negotiations on World Trade Organization intellectual property rules and the UN Convention on Biological Diversity, representatives told a conference on the subject last week. In a podcast and video interview with Intellectual Property Watch below, the indigenous representatives explain their case.
L' « accès aux ressources génétiques » et le « partage juste et équitable des avantages découlant de leur utilisation » s’est révelé un véritable casse-tête pour l’ensemble des 13 Conférences des Parties à la Convention des Nations Unies sur la Diversité Biologique (CDB). La formule, entre guillemets, qu’on désigne par l’acronyme « APA », se réfère au troisième objectif de la Convention, lequel est étroitement liée aux deux premiers, à savoir la conservation et l’utilisation durable de ces ressources. Malgré 25 années consécutives d’efforts et dans un contexte où le marché de la biotechnologie représente, annuellement, un trillion de dollars, peu d’accords APA ont été conclus jusqu’ici. Les bénéfices monétaires des quelques contrats existants sont si faibles que les contractants répugnent à les dévoiler. La « législation APA brésilienne » de 2015, qui est entrée en vigueur le 6 novembre 2017, permet par exemple d’offrir des royalties jusqu’à un dixième de pour cent du chiffre d’affaire. Selon les termes d’un éminent juriste: « les usagers paient des cacachuètes pour se servir de la biodiversité ».
Efforts by developing countries to prevent the misappropriation of genetic resources and traditional knowledge have thus far been fruitless at the World Trade Organization. In particular, discussion on the relationship between the rules of the Nagoya Protocol on access and benefit-sharing and the intellectual property trade rules are going nowhere. In this context, India, supported by other major developing nations, initiated a two-day conference recently in order to look at ways to unlock the situation.
The heads of national telecommunications and technology regulatory authorities are gathering next month at the International Telecommunication Union to address new technologies. Not surprisingly, artificial intelligence and data hold centre stage in the programme. The meeting comes after a recent event at the United Nations where divergent voices recognised the potential beneficial uses of new technology, but warned against the undeclared intentions behind it. Separately, a new study from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology shows the influence of data in machine learning algorithms with chilling consequences.
O “acesso aos recursos genéticos” e a “participação justa e equitativa dos benefícios provenientes de sua utilização” vêm aturdindo delegados e delegações das 13 Conferências das Partes da Convenção das Nações Unidas sobre Diversidade Biológica, que entrou em vigor no ano de 1993. A expressão entre aspas conhecida pela sigla em inglês “ABS” é o terceiro objetivo do Convênio e se encontra entrelaçada pelos dois primeiros objetivos que são a conservação e o uso sustentável. Apesar de 25 anos de esforços e de uma bioeconomia de quase um trilhão de dólares, são muito poucos os contratos celebrados. Desses poucos, os benefícios monetários são tão baixos que as partes contratantes relutam em revelá-los. A “Lei brasileira de ABS” de 2015, que entrou em vigor no dia 6 de novembro de 2017 permite, por exemplo, a obtenção de royalties sobre vendas líquidas tão baixos que isso implica a celebração de contratos pela bagatela de uma décima parte de um por cento. Citando as palavras de um jurista erudito, os Usuários pagam “uma miséria pela biodiversidade”.
Legislative changes giving effect to South Africa’s recently published Intellectual Property Policy “Phase 1” will not take place during this term of government, the country’s trade minister has said. Meanwhile, a side-by-side comparison with the 2017 draft legislation shows a series of changes in the final policy, and the pharmaceutical industry is complaining but appears determined to continue investing in the country.
Leaders at the G7 Summit tried to mitigate tensions by taking on some US favourites in their final communiqué like “forced technology transfers,” a topic brought up only recently by the United States at the World Trade Organisation. Forced technology transfers, according to US diplomats, are licensing and administrative rules entertained by China to oblige foreign firms to share technology in exchange for gaining access to the Chinese market. They also had sought to agree on a vision for artificial intelligence, a range of health issues, and foreign cyber interference with elections.
The Third annual United Nations Multi-stakeholder Forum on Science, Technology and Innovation for the Sustainable Development Goals opened with Marie Chatardová, president of the Economic and Social Council, stating that “STI is shaping the trajectory of our society, helping the world address global challenges and achieve Sustainable Development Goals.”
Frederick Abbott writes: On 20 May 2018, US Treasury Secretary Mnuchin announced that the US and China were “putting the trade war on hold” while the two countries seek to “execute the framework” of a broad agreement intended to reduce the US trade deficit in goods with China. According to the joint statement issued on 19 May 2018, “Both sides attach paramount importance to intellectual property protections, and agreed to strengthen cooperation. China will advance relevant amendments to its laws and regulations in this area, including the Patent Law.”
Whether intellectual property rights are improving lives or whether they should be reined in by tools such as competition law to increase access to medicine, education, and innovation, was debated this week at the World Trade Organization committee on intellectual property. Also on the agenda was a suggestion by least-developed countries to create incentives for developed country companies and institutions to transfer technologies for the benefit of the poorest countries.