As promised in my previous blog, here in their own words, Tuesday April 29, 2014 afternoon session of SCCR 27, the view point of copyright owners on the proposed treaty for broadcasting organizations. The fact that it is quite repetitive is probably one of the points they were trying to make and it was in fact quite effective in “changing” the general mood of the meeting.
The two following quotes summarize the arguments:
The WIPO treaty for the Protection of Broadcasting Organization: The Way Forward?
On day 2 of Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights (SCCR) 27, it looks as if the US delegation was showing the SCCR delegates a “way forward” for a new treaty for broadcasting organizations. It seemed as if US diplomacy was working efficiently and the US proposal was gathering support. However, while the US proposal was indeed gathering support, public interest groups and copyright owners also became more vocal in their opposition to the proposal on the table.
This short note is about giving people the heads up about four upcoming USPTO public meetings relating to copyright policy making: re remixes, digital first sale and calibration of statutory damages. It is a good example of ONE US agency (PTO is within a Task Force) wisely seeking “additional input from the public in order for the Task Force to have a complete and thorough record upon which to make recommendations.” But this blog post is also about a really bad example: USTR.
On 17 March 2014, the African Group delivered the following opening statement at the Thirty-First Session of the WIPO Standing Committee on the Law of Trademarks, Industrial Designs and Geographical Indications (SCT) highlighting the need for an inclusion of an article on technical assistance (with legally binding effect) in the proposed design law treaty. The African Group noted,
On 17 March 2014, the European Union and its Member States issued the following clarion call to the Thirty-First Session of the WIPO Standing Committee on the Law of Trademarks, Industrial Designs and Geographical Indications (SCT) urging the committee to “make a clear and unambiguous recommendation to convene a diplomatic conference to the upcoming Extraordinary General Assembly” for a Design Law Formalities Treaty.
On 18 March 2014, the delegations of the Czech Republic, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Republic of Moldova and Switzerland submitted the following proposal (SCT/31/8 Rev.) on the Protection of Geographical Indications and Country Names in the Domain Name System for consideration by the WIPO Standing Committee on the Law of Trademarks, Industrial Designs and Geographical Indications (SCT).
The US Copyright Office held a two day roundtable event on the topic, “Orphan Works and Mass Digitization.” The two days were split into ten sessions, with extensive panels convened for each roundtable discussion. The meetings were held in the Montpelier Room at the Madison building of the Library of Congress, with the exception of the afternoon panels on the second day, which was held downstairs in the hearing room of the Copyright Office. Continue Reading
Informed sources have revealed that Mark Dybul, Executive Director of the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, is the brains behind an initiative to create global framework for the tiered pricing or in the Global Fund’s own words, “Equitable Access to Essential Medicines and Vaccines: Developing a Framework for Success”, enforced by the rules of the World Trade Organization. KEI has obtained this internal concept note prepared by the Global Fund which we understand is a work in progress.
Protection for geographical indications is an issue that divides the generally united front that Australia, Canada, the European Union, Japan, Switzerland, New Zealand and the United States maintain at WIPO and WTO negotiations on setting rules for the enforcement of patents, copyright, trademarks and industrial designs. In a 12 March 2014 piece, Europe wants its Parmesan back, seeks name change, the Associated Press reported that,
March 7, 2014
James Love, Knowledge Ecology International
Docket # USTR-2013-0040
These comments supplement KEI’s February 7, 2014 written submission (Also available here: https://www.keionline.org/ustr/special301, and /node/1927), and our February 24, 2014 oral testimony, and provide also comment or reply to the written or oral submissions by others.