Below are several links to recent Huffington Post articles about the WIPO negotiations for a treaty on copyright exceptions for blind persons.
The first is a link to my report for HuffPo on the April 2013 negotiations, which have not gone well. The blog includes a discussion of some of the changes in key provisions of the text over time, and the recent quite harmful MPAA lobbying efforts.
Attached is the final version of the negotiating text that will be considered at the diplomatic conference in June 17 to 28, 2013 in Marrakesh, Morocco.
88 brackets in text, plus 17 “Alternative” versions of text.
8 references to: “do not conflict with the normal exploitation of the work,” plus 3 additional references the “three-step test.”
11 references to technological protection measures
The WBU just issued the attached press release. (On a related note, a video of their statement Saturday morning is available here).
WORLD BLIND UNION (WBU) press release 20th April 2013
In Geneva this week the US government is taking a harder line in the WIPO negotiations for a treaty on copyright exceptions for the blind, and the reason is simple — lobbyists for the MPAA and publishers have been all over the White House, demanding a retreat from compromises made in February, and demanding that the Obama Administration push new global standards for technical protection measures, strip the treaty text of any reference to fair use and fair dealing, and impose new financial liabilities on libraries that serve blind people. Continue Reading
This week the WIPO Standing Committee is holding a meeting to consider a possible treaty for broadcasting organizations. KEI thought this treaty negotiation had been blocked by fundamental differences over the purposes and scope of the treaty in 2007, but in the past few years the US Copyright office asked to put the issue back on the SCCR agenda, and subsequently Francis Gurry and Ambassador Trevor Clarke from the WIPO Secretariat have pushed to reach a conclusion, and more recently South Africa, Mexico, Japan and some other countries are now quite active, in favor of a new treaty.
In a bid to generate sympathy for its defeat in the Supreme Court of India over efforts to evergreen patent protection for the cancer drug imatinib (trade names Gleevec or Glivec) in developing countries, Novartis has been making increasingly spectacular claims as regards its investments in the development of the drug. Continue Reading
There is so much that one could say about today’s decision, it is hard to know where to start.
This is a copy of the negotiating text for the India-EU Broad-based Trade and Investment Agreement (BTIA), also referred to as the India/EU FTA. It does not include Article 6, which I assume concerns patents, or have any text for Article 9 on Geographical Indications. The text includes country positions. We are not certain of the date of this text. KEI has some commentary at /node/1692
Consolidated draft India-EU FTA (BTIA)
IPR chapter
Art. 1 – Definition [Agreed]
Knowledge Ecology International (KEI) comments
U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Ways and Means, Subcommittee on Trade, March 13, 2013 Hearing on U.S.-India Trade Relations
Name: James Love
Organization: Knowledge Ecology International
Address: 1621 Connecticut Avenue NW, Suite 500, Washington, DC 20009
Phone Number: 1.202.332.2670
Contact E-mail Address: James.Love@KEIonline.Org
Title of Hearing: U.S.-India Trade Relations
Introduction
On March 13, 2013, the U.S. House of Representative held a hearing on U.S.-India Trade Relations. Among the several topics under discussion were “the issuance of compulsory licenses, patent revocations, and other policies on pharmaceuticals” in India.