TWN Info Service on Intellectual Property Issues (Oct15/05)
5 October 2015
Third World Network

WIPO Assemblies to tackle several key unresolved issues

Geneva, 5 October (K M Gopakumar) – The Fifty-fifth series of meetings of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Assemblies taking place from 5 to 14 October at the WIPO headquarters in Geneva is expected to deal with several important unresolved issues.

During the next 10 days WIPO Member States will discuss matters related to governing and institutional bodies, program, budget and oversight matters, WIPO Committees and the international normative framework, assemblies of the various WIPO treaty bodies including the Patent Cooperation Treaty, Madrid System on trademarks, Hague System on industrial designs, Lisbon System on appellations of origin and geographical indications and staff matters.

Last year, the WIPO General Assembly failed to reach any decision on four areas viz. the Intergovernmental Committee on Intellectual Property and Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge and Folklore, Design Law Treaty, the Standing Committee on Copyrights, and Matters Concerning External Offices and the establishment of WIPO External Offices.

In view of the lack of consensus on these issues the General Assembly is expected to find a way forward on these issues at the current session.

Intellectual Property and Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge and Folklore (IGC)

This year there are three proposals before the General Assembly regarding the way forward. The first proposal is from the African Group that seeks to convert the IGC into a permanent standing committee. Originally the IGC was set up as a temporary committee and its mandate was renewed every two years.

The second proposal is from the Holy See, Kenya, Mozambique, New Zealand, Norway and Switzerland. This proposal proposes an IGC work program for two years consisting of three sessions of the Committee in each year that will make recommendations to the General Assembly in 2017 regarding the future course of action.

The third is from the United States of America (US) that proposes the discontinuance of the IGC. The US proposal consists of three decision points: “(i) Not to renew the mandate of the IGC for the 2016/2017 biennium; (ii) That Program 4 should continue to provide seminars and to conduct studies; and (iii) That an ad-hoc, cross regional group of experts (an Ad-Hoc Experts Working Group) shall be established, to determine what, if any problems exist and what, if anything, can be done at the international level to address any such problems and to address the questions and matters referenced above”.

The US proposal is largely seen as a pressurising tactic and there is an expectation for the renewal of the IGC mandate.

Design Law Treaty

There is no specific recommendation from the Standing Committee on Law of Trademark, Industrial Design and Geographical Indications (SCT). The Central European and Baltic States (CEBS), the European Union and Group B (several developed countries) are pushing for a decision to hold a diplomatic conference to conclude the Design Law Treaty (DLT). Even though the treaty is projected as a procedural law treaty it is a fact that it has implications on the substantive law, particularly on the grace periods, multiple applications and licensing of designs. WIPO observers point out that the WIPO Governing Bodies or the concerned standing committee did not take any explicit decision with regard to the initiation of a text-based DLT.

Developing countries especially the African Group feels that the text is not mature enough for a Diplomatic Conference. Further, the African Group has two specific proposals with regard to DLT. First is the inclusion of the provision on technical assistance in the treaty. Second is the inclusion of a specific provision in DLT for the disclosure of traditional knowledge or traditional cultural expression in any industrial design application to prevent the misappropriation of traditional designs. 

During the 32^nd session of the SCT the African Group introduced the textual proposal under Article 3 (1) (a) of the draft DLT.  Group B also introduced a draft decision to convene the Diplomatic Conference during the 32^nd SCT. However, this proposal did not find any consensus. The 33^rd Session of the SCT also ended without making any specific recommendation with regard to the Diplomatic Conference on DLT.

Standing Committee on Copyrights (SCCR)

The General Assembly is to consider two issues related to copyrights. First is the decision with regard to holding a diplomatic conference to conclude a treaty on the protection of broadcasting organisations. Second is the work towards an appropriate international legal instrument or instruments (whether a model law, joint recommendation, treaty and/or other forms), with the target to submit recommendations on limitations and exceptions for libraries and archives as well as on educational and research institutions and persons with other disabilities.

There is an existing General Assembly mandate to conclude a treaty on protection of broadcasting organisations. However, the mandate is restricted to protect only traditional broadcasting and does not include new forms of broadcasting such as webcasting.

However, the last two sessions of the SCCR failed to make any recommendations to the General Assembly. The General Assembly is expected to provide guidance with regard to the process on two issues.

External Offices and financing Lisbon Agreement

Even though there is an informal document circulated by the WIPO Secretariat there is no consensus with regard to the establishment of external offices. In the absence of any consensus on the issue the Program and Budget Committee (PBC) referred the issue for the consideration of the General Assembly. The General Assembly is expected to resolve the issue or to set a process to review the differences. 

Apart from the New York UN liaison office, WIPO currently has external offices in Singapore, Japan, Brazil, China and Russia. These offices were started without the approval of WIPO governing bodies; however the demand from Member States to open more external offices and its budget implications led to a division among the WIPO membership on this issue. To date there is no consensus with regard to the number and location of new external offices.

Another important issue to be considered by the General Assembly is the US proposal to the Assemblies of Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) and Madrid Union (trademark protection) to decide whether the financial resources from these two services can be used to fund the Lisbon Union (Geographical Indications).  This is a response of the US for the exclusion of full participation of the recently concluded Diplomatic Conference to finalise the Geneva Act of the Lisbon Agreement on Appellations of Origin and Geographical Indications.  Full participation, i.e. with voting rights, has been granted only to the Lisbon Agreement’s member countries. The US attempt to participate in the diplomatic conference failed because the Lisbon Agreement Members rejected the proposal of full participation of non-Lisbon Agreement members.

Many WIPO Member States are of the view that the US proposal may set a bad precedent of blocking allocation of resources from the PCT and Madrid systems, a major source of revenue for WIPO for other activities.

The US also submitted another proposal that the WIPO Director-General should submit the recommendations of the administrative arrangements of the Geneva Act of the Lisbon Agreement for the WIPO General Assembly’s approval. According to an observer the move is politically motivated with the intention of impeding the implementation of the treaty.+