The just concluded OECD High Level forum, held June 21 in Noordwijk in the Netherlands is, if it follows the agenda it has set for itself, to give political and perhaps financial impetus to the effort to WHO Intergovernmental Working Group on Public Health, Innovation and Intellectual Property. Continue Reading
Friday June 22 1 pm
The following is circulating right now:
Draft conclusions of the Second Special Session of the SCCR on the Protection of Broadcasting Organizations
Prepared by the Chair
SNIP
The Committee made the following recommendation:
SNIP
The Director General
-convenes a session for joint analysis of notions, terms and conceptual basis of the instrument
The General Assembly
-decides that a Third Special Session of the SCCR be convened in November/December 2007
The Draft conclusions by the Chair are out , and wow, what brass. Jukka is recommending that:
It would even appear that webcasting is possibly back in.
This is discussed at 2pm. It is all quite surreal.
They go into session today at 10am to discuss how to report the week’s events to the WIPO General Assembly, so officially, nothing is decided yet, but it appears as though WIPO will not be approving a diplomatic conference. Jukka Liedes, who has apparently chaired the WIPO copyright committee for all but two days over a twenty year period, may try to find a way to keep this alive, but many delegates are determined to move on to something else. Continue Reading
In the new June 21 text of the non paper they have just handed out, the Chair has proposed a definition of a signal, finally. It is take from the Brussels Convention, and reads as follows:
( ) “signal” means an electronically-generated carrier capable of transmitting programs;
This is from Article 1 of the Brussels Convention, which reads:
(i) “signal” is an electronically–generated carrier capable of transmitting programmes;
?????????? ????????? ???: ????????? ??????? ???? ?? ?????? ????
??????????? ???????? ???????
?? ????????? ????????? ???? ????????? ??????? ???? ?? ?????? ????
??????????? ???????? ???????.
?????? ????? ??? 9 ??? ?????????, ? ?????? ????? ?????????? ????????????
??? ?????? ? ?????????? ???????? ???????? ???????, ??????? ?? ?? ???????
???????????????? ? ?????????????? ????????????? ????????, ???????????.
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