Tuesday, September 12, 2006

Summary of notes Day 2 "Moving toward a dip conf"

by Manon Ress
Summary of notes of Day 2 of the WIPO Broadcasting Treaty

The buzz is that it's moving fast toward a diplomatic conference.....

The morning session that was scheduled last night started at 10 and did not last long because the chair asked delegations to meet informally to resolve differences. The room was packed and for the first time WIPO did not provide extra chairs and there was no "room B" where one could at least listen to the proceedings.

The committee ended its discussion on rights and limitations and exceptions (and TPM). Korea, Singapore and other called for a diplomatic conference, South Africa made an excellent intervention asking questions about the broad scope and lack of clarity. Like Iran, the delegation stated that the proposed text be cleaned of ambiguous terms. South Africa supports the non exhaustive list of limitations and exceptions and want TPM provision deleted.

During lunchtime, the civil Society Coalition hosted a briefing in room B. Representatives from a coalition that signed a joint statement and representatives of organizations that signed onto a proposal for a signal protection only proposal expressed their concerns regarding the treaty.

Here is the list of presenters: Jeffrey Lawrence, Director, Global Content Policy Intel Corporation; Sarah B. Deutsch, Vice President & Associate General Counsel Verizon Communications; Matthew Schruers, Senior Counsel for Litigation & Legislative Affairs, Computer & Communications Industry Association (CCIA);Nick Ashton-Hart Adviser, NGO & Industry Coalition, Former Executive Director International Music Managers Forum (IMMF), James Love Director
Consumer Project on Technology, Respondent: Mr. Sisule Musungu, Acting Coordinator, Innovation, Access to Knowledge and Intellectual Property Programme (IAIPP) South Centre.

Main points were there's no justification for the treaty, no evidence was given by demandeurs, the current rights-based approach of the treaty must be abandoned, intermediary liability is not resolved, and impact on innovation.

Sisule Musungu, noted that while people say that the treaty has been under discussion for "9 long years", the committee has in fact only met (at most) for 66 days...and that may not be enough "substantial discussions" for a treaty of such importance and that will last for maybe a century!

And the following afternoon session was a case in point. There were very few substantial interventions. Switzerland supports the scheduling of a diplomatic conference and wants limitations and exceptions as suggested by the US corresponding to the WPPT. The Dominican Republic supports flexible limitations and exceptions as proposed by Chile, brazil and Perou. They are not really opposed to TPM but warned that they should not be detrimental to the public interest.

At 5pm, the committee had a break and will meet again. The plan is (maybe) to hear the African group position on rights and limitations and exceptions and then to start the "assessment".

Back from break
Nigeria on behalf of the African group expressed caution regarding access to knowledge and information and TPM. They support a study on the impact of such provisions. Morocco, Kenya, Benin and Egypt spoke briefly to support the convening of a diplomatic conference in 2007. They all emtnioned the long years of discussions.

Break at 6pm, we;ll be back at 7:45 to discuss how the process will move forward.


Dean Whitbread said...

Thanks for this coverage. It's being followed with interest from the UK.

1:33 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home