Original news and analysis on international IP policy
The United Nations Human Rights Council held a panel discussion yesterday to exchange views on good practices and key challenges relevant to access to medicines. The panel gave a large part of the discussion to the recent report of the United Nations Secretary General’s High-Level Panel on Access to Medicines, much to the chagrin of the European Union and the United States.
The United Nations Human Rights Council in Geneva this week will host a panel discussion among a notable range of experts on access to medicines and the controversial UN Secretary-General's High-Level Panel report issued last September. The panel is expected to lead to a report sent on to the Human Rights Council for possible action next autumn.
There seems to be something in the air at the World Intellectual Property Organization committee working to find solutions to protect indigenous traditional cultural expressions (folklore) from misappropriation. After 16 years of snail’s pace and mostly unfruitful efforts, the landscape appears to be moving, as developing countries seek a common proactive position, with new treaty language, while the European Union and the United States seem to be increasingly lonely, according to sources.
The creativity-oriented UN World Intellectual Property Organization is often at its best when displaying the colorfully multicultural nature of its membership.
Renewed discussions on the protection of traditional cultural expressions at the World Intellectual Property Organization have produced a new draft text that provides a clearer view of the different ways in which countries see a that treaty could help against misappropriation of indigenous cultural heritage. Divergences remain on core questions such as what and who should benefit from the protection of an international treaty, in which terms, and to what extent.
A panel of indigenous peoples speaking at the United Nations World Intellectual Property Organization on a potential treaty protecting their folklore from misappropriation asked that indigenous culture be recognised as unique, and not unduly considered as belonging to the whole of mankind. The keynote speaker chastised the United States position in the committee, criticised a US recent document equating the cultural significance of Santa Claus, pizza and sand paintings, and called for the respect of indigenous peoples' sovereign rights over their cultural expressions.
It is generally held that traditional cultural expressions reflect communities’ cultural and social background and include elements of their heritage. For indigenous and local communities, those expressions of their traditional culture are vital. Next week, World Intellectual Property Organization committee members are expected to advance on a draft treaty text to protect those expressions, and look for ways to agree on basic principles, such as what the treaty should protect, how, and who it should protect.
Calling it flawed and narrow and seemingly threatened by its contents, the leading United States business group and US government IP specialists are working to limit the impact of a recent United Nations report that made recommendations for the decades-old problem of ensuring affordable medicines reach people when they are under patent in a way that does not threaten innovation. One step in countering the UN report? Change the discourse in Geneva and elsewhere.
In discussion for close to 16 years at the World Intellectual Property Organization, a treaty aimed at protecting broadcasting organisations’ intellectual property rights has not reached conclusion. Intellectual Property Watch sat down recently with the European Broadcasting Union to understand what broadcasters actually say they need to protect their businesses against piracy. As to what they see hindering the technical resolution of the treaty? Politics.
Negotiations for a treaty providing protections for broadcasting organisations have been long and difficult at the World Intellectual Property Organization. In the corridors of WIPO, questions to a number of delegates are often answered with a puzzled look and what seems to be little understanding of technical issues. Intellectual Property Watch recently tried to untangle some of the technicalities of the discussions.