This is technical. The United States delegation says
“US did oppose deletion of “by any means” so that simultaneous retransmission of traditional broadcasts on the internet is covered…..but we never spoke on deferred retransmissions last night.”
However, in the texts that have been made public, the “by any means” applies to both cases. The negotiations are now being held in secret.
My more recent Huffington Post blog on the negotiations is here, including this update:
At 9:43 PM tonight we hear that the casting discussions are stalling over the United States’ support of the inclusion of the phrase “by any means” in Jukka’s non-paper on Article 7 (Protection of Broadcasts) noting that this would be the “value added” component of any Treaty for the Protection of Broadcasting Organizations. Continue Reading
Invitamos a los delegados de la OMPI a que rechacen la propuesta de Tratado de Radiodifusión en la OMPI.
Después de más que 9 años de discusiones, los esfuerzos para buscar una formulación del tratado que se ocupe de la piratería de las señales de radiodifusión, pero que no dañe a los titulares de derechos de autor y a los usuarios legítimos de emisiones, han fracasado.
Maybe by now you’ve read the Joint NGO Statement?
Joint NGO Statement: Reject the WIPO Broadcast Treaty
We call upon WIPO delegates to reject the proposed WIPO Broadcast
Treaty……
It’s printed on yellow paper and looks like a REAL NGO flyer opposing a treaty that in fact everyone here (except the broadcasters) cannot stand. Delegates come to me to complain that no one likes it but no one seems to dare tell!
Informed sources have indicated that not much progress has been made in the morning informal sessions of the SCCR today which commenced at around 11:40 AM and ended at 1 PM for lunch. It is unlikely that the plenary will reconvene today. Delegations have only been able to discuss Article 1 of Jukka Liedes’ (20 April 2007) non-paper on the objective of the proposed treaty. This article states:
June 20, 2007
Morning session started late (10:50) and the Chair began with a 20 minutes lecture/monologue explaining the methodology (article by article), using the non paper as the “unofficial tool”, leaving the complex and controversial 15/2 document on the side even though that document is the only inclusive document, the one “that contains all the proposals” [except the Canadian proposal?].