The Development Agenda for WIPO

1
The Development Agenda for WIPO
SUMMIT OF THE AMERICAS CENTER Latin American and
Caribbean Center Florida International University
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY, TRADE AND ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT SEEKING CONSENSUS

• Luiz Otavio Beaklini
• Adviser for the President - INPI Brazil
• Univ. Federal Fluminense - Brazil
• lobeak_at_inpi.gov.br
• Tuesday, March 7th, 2006
• Florida International University University
  Park (South Campus) Miami, Florida
• MARC Pavilion

2
The Agenda

• WIPO General Assembly, Sept. 2004
• Argentina and Brazil presented a proposal
  relating to the establishment of a new
  development agenda for WIPO
• Co-sponsored by Bolivia, Cuba, Dominican
  Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, Iran, Kenya, Peru,
  Sierra Leone, South Africa, Tanzania and
  Venezuela
• Formation of Group of Friends of Development

3
What do the Agenda Seeks

• To incorporate the development dimension into
  WIPOs work.
• Insertion of questions related to development
  into WIPO
• Evaluation of benefits of I.P. protection should
  not be automatic
• (benefit should not be measured only by the
  existing of I.P. Law and enforcement)
• to promote a critical examination of the
  implications for developing countries of the
  adoption of increased IPR protection
• To recognize that States at differing levels of
  development face different challenges and have
  different needs.
• To effectively incorporate development promotion
  as one of its main goals for ex. addressing the
  issue of technical cooperation from a broader
  perspective

4
The Document of Group Friends of
DevelopmentWO/GA/31/11 DATE August 27,
2004IIM/1/4 DATE April 6, 2005

• 4 main points
• Norm-Setting
• Technology Transfer
• Mandate and Governance
• Technical Assistance and Evaluation

5
Norm-setting issues 1/2

• Points under criticism
• Tendency of broadening the system of protection
• Movement toward world-patent
• Focus in certain interests of some specific
  groups.

6
Norm-setting issues 2/2

• Suggestions
• New treaties should consider the implications on
  their development impact.
• consider the implications for development and
  consumer
• New treaties should be based on clearly defined
  principles and guidelines and on an assessment of
  their development impact
• impact assessments and research on existing WIPO
  administered treaties
• Openness of WIPO discussions and decisions and
  the participation of public interest groups in
  discussions on an equal footing with
  rightholders associations must be sought.

7
WIPOs mandate and governance 1/2

• Points under criticism
• WIPO activities and intellectual property
  discussions are driven towards development-oriente
  d results. The basic proposal of the
  Development Agenda is that development should
  be a central dimension in any negotiation
  involving IP systems.

8
WIPOs mandate and governance 2/2

• Suggestions
• Strengthening the Role of Member States on WIPOS
  decisions.
• Establishing an Independent Evaluation and
  Research Office
• Provide a transparent, independent and objective
  mechanism, through which WIPOs programmes and
  activities would be evaluated with respect to
  their development impact in general, and their
  impact on innovation, creativity and access to,
  and dissemination of knowledge and technology.

9
Technical Assistance 1/5

• Points under criticism
• it is critical to clarify that the development
  dimension of intellectual property is NOT the
  same thing as technical assistance.
• In most cases, the underlying philosophy, content
  and process of the technical assistance provision
  is that more I.P. protection leads automatically
  to more innovation and than, to economic social
  well-being

10
Technical Assistance 2/5

• Points under criticism
• I.P. and development is usually reduced to
  technical cooperation
• While WIPO has made significant strides in
  providing developing countries with technical
  assistance, more need to be done to ensure that
  such assistance is useful to development
  objectives.

11
Technical Assistance 3/5

• Suggestions
• technical assistance to be of value to developing
  and least developed countries, such assistance
  needs to be planned and delivered based on
  transparent principles and guidelines on the
  basis of which an objective assessment of its
  impact and effectiveness can be made. Principles
  and guidelines established by the Member States
  will provide a much needed road map for the
  expansion and qualitative improvement of WIPOs
  technical assistance.

12
Technical Assistance 4/5

• Suggestions
• wider transparency and participation of the
  Member States in the
• the design, delivery and evaluation of technical
  assistance
• The assistance should be tailored to meet each
  countrys level of development and so correspond
  to the needs of various stakeholders in
  developing and least developed countries and not
  just the intellectual property offices and I.P.
  rightholders.

13
Technical Assistance 5/5

• Suggestions
• independent evaluation of the technical
  assistance provided by WIPO, including to
  determine the impact and effectiveness of the
  assistance programmes.

14
Technology Transfer 1/3

• Points under criticism
• WIPO has concentrated its efforts in the
  diffusion of standardized approaches to IP
  policies that assume development follows suit
  as intellectual property rights protection
  is strengthened. So WIPO may have overlooked
  the access to and diffusion of science,
  technology and related knowledge and know-how,
  especially for LDCs and developing countries.

15
Technology Transfer 2/3

• Suggestions
• appropriate protection criteria (e.g.
  patentability) balanced monopolistic rights
  derived from IPR.
• More incentive to direct transfer of knowledge
  and technical cooperation

16
Technology Transfer 3/3

• Suggestions
• a wellbalanced design of IPR as regards,
  for example, exceptions for prior users,
  experimental or fair use, adequate
  disclosure, efficient and working requirements
  and misuse defenses, may help both to unburden
  competition policy and encourage private action
  against undue claims for protection.

17

• Obrigado !
• Gracias!
• Thank you!
• Luiz Otavio Beaklini
• lobeak_at_inpi.gov.br
• lobeak_at_gmail.com