On November 25, 2008, I was invited to give a talk in Vienna, at the meeting of the Chamber of Commerce (the WKO). The event was organized by Eva Lichtenberger, a Green Party MEP. Eva also spoke, and gave a great talk, in German. Her slides were in English, and I’ll add them when I can. The outline of my talk is given below.
In an exchange on the i+a listserve, I asked Professor Pogge if the decision to reject open licensing was in part because he was concerned about opposition from certain elements of the pharmaceutical industry. This was his response, shared here with permission:
In their recent book on the Health Impact Fund,* Aidan Hollis and Thomas Pogge discuss a number of issues. This is what they say about compulsory licensing of patents.
Page 53-54
In their recent book on the Health Impact Fund,* Aidan Hollis and Thomas Pogge discuss a number of issues. This is what they say about S.2210 (110th Congress), Senator Sanders’ proposal for the Medical Innovation Prize Fund.
Page 105-106
Medical Innovation Prize Act of 2007
In book on the Health Impact Fund,* Aidan Hollis and Thomas Pogge discuss why voluntary licensing of patents is not required.
Page 22
Voluntary Licensing
KEI will later issue a more detailed comment on the Health Impact Fund. One of the key issues that will be addressed is the way that Hollis and Pogge propose turning the prize fund proposals that are based upon open licensing of patents into something that reinforces the monopoly supply chain.
We understand that one motivation for doing this was to attract support from some large pharmaceutical companies, and the European governments that protect them.
WHO has announced the names for the Expert Working Group on R&D financing
We don’t know everyone on the list, but for the people that we do know, we are generally impressed. The WHO seems to have created a body with considerable expertise and reputation, and included people who will consider new ideas. This seems like a very good start.
Below is the final agreed upon text for the SCCR 17 on the issue of access for persons with reading disabilities. There are four sentences, in one paragraph.
The representative from the government of Chile (on behalf of Chile, Nicaragua, Brazil and Uruguay) delivered this very powerful statement this afternoon at WIPO during the Seventeenth Session of the Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights (SCCR).
Chile proposed that the WIPO secretariat distributes a questionnaire on copyright exceptions and limitations between all WIPO Member States in order to continue with the information gathering process. Chile remarked on the good experience with the APEC survey on exceptions and limitations.
KEI has filed comments on the EC’s Green Paper on Copyright in the Knowledge Economy. Here are pdf and odt copies. The html version follows below. Comments of Knowledge Ecology International (KEI) on the GREEN PAPER: Copyright in the Knowledge… Continue Reading