We hope that further progress can be made on the basis of the revised consolidated text, on the rights to be granted and other issues that has been prepared nor this session.
We still have a number of technical and substantive comments on the text and we are ready for in-depth discussions on this text.
We consider whether the committee’s work should result in a meaningful treaty, but reflects the technological developments that have occurred in the 21st century. In particular, we believe that the transmissions of traditional broadcasting organizations over computer networks such as simultaneous transmissions or catch up transmissions weren’t international protection from acts of piracy. As we have stated in the past sessions of this Committee, we also attach great importance to the adequate catalog of rights which would allow the necessity protection for the broadcasting organizations against acts of piracy, whether they occur simultaneously with the protected transmissions or after these transmissions have taken place.
Finally, we look forward to discussing in more detail the other issues that have not yet been discussed in depth by the committee.
More generally, what is needed is a broad consensus as to the extent of the protection to be granted so that a future treaty can provide broadcasting organizations evolving in a complex word with adequate protection. We hope that considerable efforts which have been made during previous sessions and the work still to be undertaken during this and future sessions can allow us to find a solution on the main elements of the treaty and bring us to a successful outcome.
To that effect, we will continue to work — to work towards the convening of a diplomatic conference in line with the mandate of the 2007 WIPO General Assembly.
A way forward for reaching that goal is to carefully discuss the definitions contained in document SCCR/34/3 in a way that reduces ambiguities and ensures legal certainty. We are committed to working towards a balance text that reflects the legitimate interests and priorities of all stakeholders. Brazil will make additional comments on this session, including other issues that have not been discussed yet in this committee.
GEORGIA on behalf of the central European and Baltic States group
We are looking forward to building our discussions on the latest revision of the text, which illustrates the progress achieved during the last session, and advised work in developing an effective and legal instrument that would protect the broadcasting organizations in the traditional sense, but would take into account an ever rapidly evolving digital environment.
I would like to reiterate that the group is committed to work towards convening a diplomatic conference on adopting the treaty, which will produce a meaningful outcome.
Finally, Mr. Chair we believe that Member States will engage in formal discussions over the articles in order to finalize a treaty that has been discussed for a long time.
In this committee, society’s free access to knowledge shall not be compromised at the expense of certain right holders. Traditional broadcasting remains a central mechanism for access to information, knowledge, and culture in many countries. In our view, the committee should avoid guaranteeing a strange or extra rights which will cause extra costs for the public and affect access to broadcasting content. This committee plays an important role in developing a legal framework for the protection of broadcasting organization against signal piracy.
In this regard, we would like to recall the mandate given to this committee, which is to negotiate and conclude a WIPO treaty on the protection of broadcasting organizations including cablecasting organizations. Based on this mandate, it’s crystal clear that a scope of the treaty will be confined to the protection of broadcasting and cablecasting organizations in the traditional sense.
Taking into being the mandate of this committee, the definition of broadcasting should be limited to the traditional definition and type of the transmission exploited by the traditional broadcasters. While we know the evolving digital environment and technology development, we would like to underline that the scope of the treaty as one of the main elements to be discussed would, indeed, affect the entire provisions of the treaty. Hence, it is essential to reach agreement on the definition of broadcasting and cablecasting organizations in the tradition a sense.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
We think that the revised consolidated text is a reasonable basis for further discussion, on the issues that we have been addressing in the last few sessions, that is definitions, objective protection and rights, as well as the new other issues.
We must note, however, that while we have reached a better understanding of each other’s positions, and the text has become clearer, there are still significant disagreements among Member States on some of the most fundamental issues. Notably the object of protection and the rights to be granted.
We support the statement of Group B in stressing the mandate of the 2007 WIPO General Assembly, which establishes the need for the SCCR to reach agreement on the objectives, specific scope and objective protection before making any recommendation to proceed to a diplomatic conference.
We are eager to hear from delegations that have not been actively involved in the discussion of the draft treaty lately, as broad participation is necessary to be able to realistically evaluate the status of our work.
We believe that a mature text with a clear path forward is of utmost importance before deciding to convene a diplomatic conference. We look forward to our discussions today and tomorrow. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Chair, at the outset, we would like to reiterate the importance of legal framework for the effective protection for broadcasting organizations to address the technological issues and the reality that broadcasting organizations face in the modern world.
We stress the importance of remaining faithful to the mandate of 2007 WIPO General Assembly, which conditions the convening of diplomatic conference on the SCCR reaching agreement on the objectives specific scope and object of protection of the treaty.
Group B believes that there are other elements that require further discussions, if we are to progress to a stage where this committee can progress to the — to the General Assemblies, the convening of diplomatic conference.
We can propose to the General Assembly the convening of a diplomatic conference. This group believes that Member States have differing understanding of the underpinning principles that the Chair’s text is based upon. Therefore we must discuss these elements so that a consensus can be found on which the Chair’s text is based.
We remain committed to our discussions and furthering our technical understanding in order to remind the most relevant, effective Len mutually acceptable provisions that will allow us to make progress on the maturity of the text. For Group B, we recount discussion of this document.
We should keep in mind that the critical element here is the technical understanding and the knowledge of the issue facing broadcasting organizations in today’s world, and how it can be the basis of a treaty text. Therefore, due consideration must be paid to this text, and any kind of exercises that this and the future sessions of this committee, in order to facilitate the negotiation process of the treaty.
Mr. Chair, as a group, we commit ourselves to reaching a meaningful outcome that will best serve all Member States and the stakeholders.
>> MOLDOVA: The delegation of the republic of the Moldova, congratulate you and your colleagues as the chair and the vice chairs of the current SCCR session. Also, express the grayfulness for the continuation of the debates on issues discussed at previous session.
The delegation of the Republic of Moldova continuously supports the CEBS statement on the importance of the treaty on the protection of broadcasting organizations, and also we appreciate the visible progress realized during the last session on the consolidation of this text.
At the same time, the Republic of Moldova encourages all the states and stakeholders to actually get involved in the negotiation on the treaty adoption or the broadcasting, in the technological process should own appropriate legal protection mechanisms. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
>> CHAIRPERSON: I thank the delegate from Moldova and I now ask the delegate from the >> RUSSIAN FEDERATION: Thank you, Chairman. We too would like to congratulate you and your vice chairs on your elections and we hope that your experience in legislation will help us to make greater progress than we have so far. We would also like to thank the outgoing chairman for the text that has been prepared and Russia would like to examine this text as soon as possible and to focus our attention precisely on this prepared and agreed upon text.
We have made significant progress in recent times and, in fact, it seems to me that the committee is ready to subcommit this treaty to a diplomatic conference.
Now at the same time, however, we do understand the problem with the object of protection. We have seen the main obstacles to agreement of the treaty at the diplomatic conference that we are planning to protect.
Will we be able to make new progress that leads to new forms of communication are we going to approach it from the point of view of traditional broadcasting? This is what distinguishes this session from the previous ones. So are we going to take into account Internet broadcasting or not? Are we going to concentrate on traditional broadcasting and therefore prepare that document in that way or not? It seems to me that we do have to find a compromise here.
It’s extremely important because otherwise, if we don’t find such a compromise in this committee, then I think we will continue to discuss this for another 20 years. The discussion as to whether it will be traditional broadcasting or whether we take into account new forms of broadcasting as well.
And we have to decide what is more important to achieve a new agreement and a new treaty or to continue the discussion. We are in support of preparing our agreement, a new treaty, and we propose that we do our best to focus our efforts and our work on the text that has been.
JAPAN: Thank you Mr. Chair. The Japanese delegation would like to congratulate you on your election of the chair of the committee and we would like to appreciate the WIPO for all the peremptory works for this committee.
Under current copyright, phonogram producers and the dissemination of copyrighted works. Among them the performers and the phonogram enjoy protection. The international protection for broadcasting organizations has been left behind for a long time, from the wave of this work. This sense, we believe we should include our positive and intensive work on a text to convening a diplomatic conference on this new treaty as early as possible.
The Japanese delegation is ready to engage in work in the constructive manner.
REPUBLIC OF KOREA:
The Republic of Korea would also like to thank the Secretariat for its hard work to prepare for this meeting.
In regards on whether to protect different transmission of the broadcasting organizations, the Republic of Korea is of the view that the catchup service should not be included in the object of protection, nor rights to be granted. Nevertheless, the Republic of Korea would like to emphasize that we stay open and flexible to a possible solution option which may be able to breach the gap between those in support of the aforementioned position and those that are not. And we are very much looking forward to engaging in a dialogue with other Member States on this topic.
In order to create concrete outcomes that will lead to the planning of the diplomatic conference in the nearest future, the Republic of Korea is committed to participating in both plenary and informal discussions in a positive and constructive manner.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
COTE D’IVOIRE: Chairman. The delegation of the Cote d’Ivoire congratulates you on your election to the chair of this session. And we assure you of our support in achieving a good outcome. We would also like to congratulate your vice chairs and thank the Secretariat for its excellent work in the preparation of the working documents.
Our delegation following those that have already spoken supports the statement from the African Group. Cote d’Ivoire attaches great importance to all the items on the agenda of this session and we hope that the discussions will lead to a consensus text, and that the diplomatic conference will be very soon convened.
[…] Cote d’Ivoire is in the process of changing anything to do with the audio visual area and ill take everything that is said here into account in that work.
MALAWI: We congratulate you for being elected chair and the vice chairs. We thank you for your support. And we would like to thank the Martin Moscoso, the former chair of the SCCR, for the amazing work he did in guiding the SCCR.
The delegation of Malawi would like to thank the Secretariat for the smooth organization of the SCCR and also congratulates Senegal and Congo for the wonderful organization and successful international of resale rights last week.
We welcome the statement made by the delegation of Senegal on behalf of the the African Group. We further wish to discuss these substantive issues such as achieving agreements on object and scope of protection of broadcasting organizations and therefore a text that was prepared by the chair forms a good basis for a healthy debate on the outstanding issues with a view to making progress on the outstanding issues and possibly convene a diplomatic conference in 2018.