[Fsf-friends] OFFTOPIC: Call for 'paradigm shift' in WIPO

Frederick Noronha (FN) fred@bytesforall.org
Thu Dec 23 22:17:27 IST 2004


CALL FOR 'PARADIGM SHIFT' IN W.I.P.O.

When the history of intellectual creativity and technological innovation is 
written, it may cite recent events as significant. For a shift of paradigm took 
place in the way the public and the governments of developing countries view 
the role of intellectual property rights.

By Martin Khor
Third World Network Features


 	A declaration on intellectual property was launched in Geneva by 500 
people and groups on 29 September, whilst a debate also took place at the 
world's premier intellectual property organisation on whether to set up a 
'development agenda'.

 	The declaration called for a change in direction and priorities in the 
way intellectual property rights (IPRs) are treated. Among the signatories were 
Sir John Sulston (2002 Nobel prize winner for Physiology), Burton Richter (1976 
Nobel Laureate for Physics), Medecins Sans Frontieres (Nobel Peace Prize 
winner), several other scientists, law and economics professors and public 
citizen groups.

 	With too many monopolistic privileges of owners of patents, copyright 
and other IPRs, there is a global crisis in the governance of knowledge, 
technology and culture, says the Declaration on the Future of the World 
Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO).

 	The crisis caused by excessive granting of IPRs is manifested in many 
ways:  Millions die without access to medicines; there is unequal access to 
education, knowledge and technology; anti-competitive practices impose enormous 
costs to consumers and retard innovation; authors, artists and inventors face 
barriers to follow-on innovation; and IPRs in digital environments threaten the 
exceptions in copyright laws for disabled persons, libraries, educators and 
consumers.

 	The declaration says there are astoundingly promising innovations in 
information, medical and other essential technologies, as well as in social 
movements and business models. These include campaigns for access to medicines, 
scientific journals and databases, and hundreds of innovative collaborative 
efforts including the Internet, Wikipedia, GNU Linux and other free and open 
software projects and distance education tools.

 	Alternative compensation systems, other than IPRs, have been proposed 
to expand access and interest in cultural works, while providing artists and 
consumers with fair systems of compensation.

 	The declaration pinpoints WIPO as part of the problem, for having 
created and expanded monopoly rights through excessive IPRs. It calls for a 
change in WIPO's approach and programmes, by striking a proper balance between 
IPR rights holders on one hand, and the public and competition on the other 
hand.

 	It also called for WIPO to broaden its mission from solely promoting 
IPRs to also include promoting creative intellectual activity and facilitating 
technology transfer to developing countries in order to accelerate development. 
These larger goals are in an agreement that WIPO signed when it became part of 
the United Nations system in 1974.

 	Detailing other changes in WIPO, the declaration asked the governments 
and the WIPO Secretariat to choose a future with a change of direction, new 
priorities and better outcomes for humanity. 'We cannot wait for another 
generation.'

 	Parallel to the declaration launching, the government delegations in 
WIPO's General Assembly debated a landmark proposal by a group of developing 
countries, calling for WIPO to embark on a 'development agenda'.

 	The proposal was signed by 12 countries, led by Brazil and Argentina, 
and supported from the floor by the Asian and African Groups. Thus, almost all 
the developing countries put their weight behind this initiative that calls for 
a reform in WIPO's approach to its work.

 	The proposal said that the role of intellectual property has been 
debated for years.  IPRs are intended as an instrument to promote technological 
innovation and are not an end in itself. It can produce benefits as well as 
costs and action is needed to ensure the costs do not outweigh the benefits.

 	The proposal calls for integrating the 'development dimension' into 
WIPO's activities, including in negotiations taking place on new treaties, and 
for WIPO to set up a programme for technology transfer.

 	There was palpable excitement at the WIPO General Assembly hall when 
Brazil, Argentina and other co-sponsors (including Kenya, South Africa, 
Tanzania, Bolivia, Iran and Venezuela) introduced their proposal on 30 
September and 1 October.

 	Among the actions they demanded were for WIPO to set up a working group 
to come up with recommendations to integrate the development dimension in WIPO 
activities and to organise an international conference on intellectual property 
and development.

 	The proposal was supported from the floor by most developing countries, 
including Egypt (on behalf of the Africa Group) and Sri Lanka (on behalf of the 
Asia Group). Other countries that spoke in support of the proposal were India, 
Pakistan, the Philippines, China, Oman, Senegal, Ethiopia, Benin, Peru, 
Colombia, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Uruguay, Trinidad and Tobago, and Jamaica.

 	While the proposals had the support of developing countries, they were 
implicitly opposed by many developed countries which suggested instead that an 
assessment be carried out on the effects of WIPO's activities on development.

 	Introducing the main proposal on 30 September, the Brazilian delegate 
said intellectual property is not an end in itself and cannot be seen as such 
by WIPO. If development is the overriding principle, then WIPO should act in 
support of that goal.

 	The time had come for WIPO to fully integrate the development dimension 
in all its work, said Brazil. As part of the agenda, WIPO should also act on 
issues such as technology transfer and anti-competitive practices.

 	Egypt, on behalf of the Africa Group, said development was Africa's 
highest priority and it was only natural for Africa to welcome the proposal to 
put development at the forefront of WIPO's activities. It was only natural for 
WIPO to build on its existing work for developing countries by integrating 
development in all its activities so as to ensure that development is addressed 
in a holistic way.

 	South Africa, speaking in support, said that the development must be 
mainstreamed in WIPO. No new WIPO instruments should proceed without being 
informed by the development dimension.

 	Sri Lanka, on behalf of the Asia Group, said that the proposal was 
timely, and a working group on the development agenda was a good idea.

 	India said that the damage caused by the World Trade Organisation's 
intellectual property (TRIPS) agreement has raised public consciousness 
worldwide as to the problems associated with intellectual property.

 	As developing countries moved to comply with the TRIPS agreement, they 
faced major challenges and realised that they need the flexibility and space to 
choose appropriate policies. However, the process of harmonising patent laws 
has the danger of promoting the interests of rent seekers.

 	Remarking that TRIPS is a tribute to the logic of power, not economics 
or fairness, India stated that a WIPO development agenda would help steer the 
organisation away from the same course. No longer would developing countries 
agree that intellectual property will nurture innovation everywhere. At 
present, it exists to serve patent holders, who are mainly in the North, at the 
expense of public interest.

 	Each country needs flexibility in IP policy so that it can ensure the 
costs outweigh the benefits. India said it fully supported the objective of the 
Brazil-Argentina proposal which should be translated into action.

 	Major developed countries were not as supportive of action on a 
development agenda in WIPO. They indicated that WIPO had been doing enough for 
developing countries. Instead of establishing a working group on a development 
agenda, they proposed that an assessment be made of WIPO's work as it relates 
to development. - Third World Network Features.

                                                                   -ends-

About the writer: Martin Khor is Director of the Third World Network.

When reproducing this feature, please credit Third World Network Features and 
(if applicable) the cooperating magazine or agency involved in the article, and 
give the byline. Please send us cuttings.




More information about the Fsf-friends mailing list