- Bloomberg: CVS Will Exclude Xtandi From Formulary in 2017
- Vivendi-SFR lobbyist nominated to WIPO
- Harvoni & Sovaldi, Xtandi in Top 20 Costliest Medicare Drugs
- Letter from 56 non-profits and experts to Secretary of State John Kerry on pressure on global access to medicines initiatives
- Francis Gurry appoints Sylvie Forbin, lobbyist for Vivendi, as new head of copyright at WIPO
- SCP24:WIPO patent committee adopts robust work program on patents and health, limitations and exceptions and quality of patents
- WIPO Marrakesh Treaty for the blind to come into force September 30, 2016, following ratification by Canada
- Human Rights Council adopts watershed resolution on Access to Medicines
- SCP 24 - A fruitful discussion?
- SCP24: African Group submits revised proposal for a WIPO work program on Patents and Health
Knowledge Ecology International (KEI) is and has been supportive of the Committee's work on access and preservation of knowledge which is important for everyone and every country.
Preservation and safeguarding copies of works is to some degree a global public good. We all want and need works to be preserved, and copyright and reproduction rights coupled with limitations and exceptions are essential.
On Thursday, 10 December 2015 South Africa made the following general intervention on copyright limitations and exceptions at WIPO's 31st session of the Standing Committee on Copyright Right and Related Rights (SCCR).
The IFJ, represented by Mike Holderness expressed some concerns regarding the new layer of rights for broadcasters and cablecasters:
> International federation of journalists: Thank you. Since this is the first time I have spoken, congratulations to the chair and the Secretariat for the excellent running of this event.
KEI has the floor.
>> KEI: Thank you Mr. Chairman. KEI would be as concerned as anyone of piracy, of content that's provided over cable systems. I think, however, it will be interesting for the association of broadcasters, the APP, if they could explain if in any of the countries where they have problems with people stealing cable signals if it's actually not already against the law to do that.
SCCR 31 Day 3 on Broadcasting. How far does the EU want to go with rights to broadcasting &cablecasting?Submitted by Manon Ress on 9. December 2015 - 3:55
(4) The provisions of this Treaty shall apply mutatis mutandis to the protection of
cablecasting organizations in respect of their cablecasts.
The North American broadcasters represented by Erica Edler
>> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Nava represents broadcasters in North America, Canada, the United States and Mexico. I would like to thank the Chairman for his consolidated text which has served to focus discussions on some of the key issues on a new treaty for broadcasters.
>> Good afternoon. I'm speaking on behalf of electronic information for libraries, the works with libraries in developing and transitioning countries. I'd like to make a comment on the object of protection that has been under discussion here this afternoon. And the importance that any new instrument that might be created limits the object of protection to the signal and not to any underlying content.
Martin Moscoso, the Chair, invited NGOs' comments.
>> KEI: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. In listening to the conversation today and yesterday on this notion of signal versus the content, or container versus the content, it sounds appealing and people have been talking about this now for some years, the idea that you can separate the idea that there is a signal and there is content and things like that.
4pm Day 2 Paragraph 3 of Object of protection
(3) Broadcasting organizations shall also enjoy protection for simultaneous or near simultaneous retransmission by any means as if such transmission were a broadcast.
Day 2 SCCR31 Object of Protection discussion started a 12:45pm. At 1pm we left for lunch and a meeting on education.
II. OBJECT OF PROTECTION
(1) The protection granted under this Treaty extends only to broadcasts transmitted by, or
on behalf of, a broadcasting organization, but not to works or other protected subject
matter carried on them.
(2) The provisions of this Treaty shall not provide any protection in respect of mere
retransmissions by any means.
(3) Broadcasting organizations shall also enjoy protection for simultaneous or near
Day 2 of SCCR31. The morning session was well attended and took place in the "old" and smaller meeting room. Delegates and NGOs can see each other in this room and it was leading to quite a bit of diplomacy and thus most probably consensus. Here is a selection of interventions regarding definitions of retransmission as stated in the Chair's text under discussion:
(d) (1) “retransmission” means the transmission by any means of a broadcast [/cablecast] by any other entity than the original broadcasting [/cablecasting] organization, whether
WIPO SCCR 31 is having a text based discussion of the language for a proposed broadcasting treaty. The meeting is open to NGOs, instant transcripts are streamed over the Internet, and the proceedings are webcast. I was allowed to make to technical interventions this afternoon on the definitions. This is a slightly edited version of my second intervention, on the question of whether or not to have separate definitions for broadcasting and cable casting.
The Delegation of India made the following elegant but extremely to the point statement:
Opening Statement by India on the Broadcasting Treaty at the 31st session of the Standing Committee Copyright and Related Rights at WIPO on 7 December 2015, delivered by Dr. Sumit Seth, First Secretary (Economic)
Thank your Mr. Chairman