[WSIS CS-Plenary] WIPO denies ad hoc NGO observor statusfor April Development Agenda meeting

Shari Steele ssteele at eff.org
Fri Feb 18 18:28:54 GMT 2005


Milton and Jamie.
I couldn't agree more.  I would love to see greater 
communication/coordination between the groups working at the various 
international norm setting bodies.  We all win.  I look forward to further 
discussion on ways we can make this happen well.
Shari



At 05:48 AM 2/18/2005, James Love wrote:
>On the IPR front, WIPO is the most important normative body.  But of 
>course it often is important to address norm setting in other bodies, like 
>the WHO, WTO, UNESCO, UNCTAD, WSIS, UNDP, UNCTAD, Hague Conference, OECD, 
>ITU, UN Committees on Human Rights, etc, etc......, as well as regional or 
>local strategies.  (right owners are certainly engaged everywhere).   I 
>hope Milton understands that *none* of the groups working on WIPO issues 
>are ignorant or indifferent to the plethora of fora for IPR issues.  We 
>(CPTech) now have a full time staff of 7 and maintain offices in 
>Washington, DC, London and Geneva, and spent a lot of time in regional 
>trade negotiations, bilateral trade disputes (I just returned from Brazil 
>this morning on discussions about patents on AIDS drugs).   I will say 
>that anyone who is serious about global IPR norm setting should attend 
>some WIPO standing committee events, and get to know personally many of 
>the national government delegates who follow these issues.  Our own 
>discussions on the WSIS IPR language have been directly with national 
>governments, building upon relationships that were began in WTO and WIPO 
>negotiations.  Many of the WIPO Delegations are surprised at the (until 
>recently) low level of civil society NGO activity at WIPO, compared for 
>example with the WTO or WSIS.  This has been changing recently, and hence, 
>it is alarming that the WIPO Secretariat is seeking to restrict access to 
>meetings by civil society groups.
>
>Coordination among groups working on global IPR issues is important, and 
>it has been improving quite a bit in the last 5 years.  If you look for 
>example at the signatures to the Geneva Declaration on the Future of WIPO 
>or the new letter on the medical R&D treaty (to be sent next week), there 
>is now much overlap between different groups (libraries, free software, 
>access to medicine, open access publishing, consumers organizations, 
>leading academics, development groups, cyber rights,etc).      There is of 
>course, more to be done, and we welcome suggestions about how this can be 
>best accomplished.
>
>
>   Jamie
>
>
>Milton Mueller wrote:
>>Hi, Shari
>>I hope I did not imply that EFF should not be working in WIPO - it 
>>should, and everyone appreciates that work. Also, I do not mean to imply 
>>that EFF must stretch its resources to become as involved in WSIS/WGIG as 
>>we are here. We all know that is not possible. Everyone needs to focus 
>>their efforts on one thing or another.
>>What we'd like to see is greater recognition and coordination of 
>>campaigns across venues. We have had a debate/dialogue here about the 
>>role of IPR issues in the WGIG and some have contended that the whole 
>>thing should be left to the WIPO forum. They have, I think, failed to 
>>understand the helpful and complementary effect that coordination across 
>>WSIS/WGIG, WIPO, and other forums could have.
>>Dr. Milton Mueller
>>Syracuse University School of Information Studies
>>http://www.digital-convergence.org
>>http://www.internetgovernance.org
>>
>>>>>ssteele at eff.org 02/16/05 2:59 PM >>>
>>Hi Milton.
>>WIPO's decision to reject ad hoc observers is terrible, and EFF plans to 
>>publicly criticize this.  But I believe our work at WIPO has been worth 
>>the time and effort we've put in, and I think our decision to focus 
>>resources there has been a good one.  We're not fighting the 
>>international IP battle at WIPO alone and never have been.  We've been 
>>working in a more focused way on free trade agreements, and we've 
>>recently dipped our toe into UNESCO's cultural diversity proceedings.  We 
>>believe that we can be effective in all of these fora, and we'll continue 
>>to focus our efforts there.
>>EFF has stretched our limited resources as far as we can at this point, 
>>and I don't believe we'd be able to be as effective at any of the things 
>>we're doing if we added WSIS to our queue.  I'm glad you're there 
>>fighting the good fight, because I know the work there is no less important.
>>Shari
>>
>>At 09:14 AM 2/16/2005, Milton Mueller wrote:
>>
>>>So, now maybe CPTech, EFF and others will understand better why it is 
>>>necessary for them to help us push the WGIG into linking internet 
>>>governance and ipr issues. This battle cannot be fought in WIPO alone, 
>>>because the playing field is tilted (deliberately).
>>>
>>>
>>>Dr. Milton Mueller
>>>Syracuse University School of Information Studies
>>>http://www.digital-convergence.org
>>>http://www.internetgovernance.org
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>martin_olivera at yahoo.com.ar 2/16/2005 9:10:57 AM >>>
>>>
>>>FYI
>>>
>>>--- James Love escribió:
>>>
>>>>WIPO has apparently decided to reject applications
>>>>for ad hoc observor
>>>>status for the April Development Agenda meeting.
>>>>That will leave a very
>>>>large number of speaking slots for right-owner NGOs,
>>>>and very few for NGOs
>>>>representing development groups, free software, or
>>>>consumer interests.
>>>>Perhaps a letter should be drafted to ask the WIPO
>>>>Secretariat to change
>>>>its position on this issue, in order to permit
>>>>groups concerned about
>>>>development and IP to attend.  I note also that few
>>>>developing country
>>>>NGOs have permanent NGO status at WIPO.
>>>>
>>>>Jamie
>>>>
>>>>--
>>>>A2k mailing list
>>>>A2k at lists.essential.org
>>>>http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/a2k
>>>
>>>=====
>>>SOLAR Software Libre Argentina
>>>http://www.solar.org.ar
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>___________________________________________________________
>>>250MB gratis, Antivirus y Antispam
>>>Correo Yahoo!, el mejor correo web del mundo
>>>http://correo.yahoo.com.ar
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>Plenary mailing list
>>>Plenary at wsis-cs.org
>>>http://mailman.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/plenary
>>
>>*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
>>Shari Steele
>>Executive 
>>Director                                                        ssteele at eff.org
>>Electronic Frontier 
>>Foundation                                       415.436.9333 (voice)
>>454 Shotwell 
>>Street                                                      415.436.9993 (fax)
>>San Francisco, CA  94110
>>_______________________________________________
>>Plenary mailing list
>>Plenary at wsis-cs.org
>>http://mailman.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/plenary
>>
>
>--
>James Love, Director, CPTech, http://www.cptech.org
>
>Consumer Project on Technology in Washington, DC
>PO Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036, USA
>Tel.:  1.202.387.8030, fax: 1.202.234.5176
>
>Consumer Project on Technology in Geneva
>1 Route des  Morillons, CP 2100, 1211 Geneva 2, Switzerland
>Tel: +41 22 791 6727
>
>Mobile +1.202.361.3040
>james.love at cptech.org

*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
Shari Steele
Executive 
Director                                                        ssteele at eff.org
Electronic Frontier 
Foundation                                       415.436.9333 (voice)
454 Shotwell 
Street                                                      415.436.9993 (fax)
San Francisco, CA  94110 




More information about the Plenary mailing list