IP-Watch Monthly Reporter on Development Agenda and IGF
In case you are interested to follow
what is going on at the United Nations: Despite its name, which
unfortunately adds to the confusion around this area, the articles by
the Intellectual
Property Watch (IP-Watch) Team are a very useful resource to
follow the proceedings in various fora.
The March issue of their "Monthly Reporter" covers both the WIPO Development Agenda talks and the Internet Governance Forum (IGF).
IP-Watch also -- among others -- quotes from my presentation at the IGF and an evaluation of the Development Agenda talks I gave for IP-Watch and quote here for your information:
The negotiations have moved forward in substance, but it is not clear
that the United States have given up their blockade on issues of
analysis and review at WIPO level.
The cycle of any organisation includes planning (norm-setting),
action (implementation), and analyis (impact review). WIPO is mainly
concerned with the first two, but not the last, and thereby ends up
with a lot of faith-based legislation about more monopolies always
meaning more innovation and more intellectual wealth.
The United States only focus on more effective implementation, and
do not acknowledge that norm-setting and impact review also require
improvement -- otherwise a more effective implementation will only
mean more effective implementation of bad policy.
This is a necessary effect of insisting to conduct studies only on a
national level, which the United States have been doing with fervor.
While national studies are necessary and useful, they are not
sufficient. Review has to take place on the level of norm-setting and
implementation to be effective.
That is why it will be necessary for this process to address all
three areas of activity if it is to come to the desired outcome of a
WIPO that addresses the needs of all of humankind.
Whether or not it will do so remains to be seen.
