Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2005 01:33:30 +0200 From: Bernard Lang Subject: Re: [Patents] CPTech Statement on WIPO General Assembly To: Seth Johnson Cc: C-FIT_Community@RealMeasures.dyndns.org, C-FIT_Release_Community@RealMeasures.dyndns.org, fairuse-talk@nyfairuse.org, patents@aful.org, DMCA_Discuss@lists.microshaft.org, DMCA-Activists@gnu.org, pho@onehouse.com I believe that, as is frequently the case, part of the problem lies in the words used. For example people often use "intellectual property" to mean "intellectual resource" or "intellectual creation", thereby implicitly stating that it can exist only as property, though there is no natural law (and sometimes no man-made law) that says so, quite the opposite. Similarly people will speak of "protection" of an intellectual creation or resource to actually mean its "appropriation". It is like protective custody :-) Well the problem with WIPO is its name: World Intellectual Property Organization So they naturally believe that their job is to develop intellectual property, thus confusing the means and the ends, or rather perpetuating this confusion that obviously existed in the minds of the creators of WIPO. We know better now. Fortunately, mankind improves its knowledge as its chugs along history. So maybe it is time to change the name ... I suggest WICO : World Intellectual Creation Organization since the purpose is really to promote creation and innovation, rather than promote blindly more appropriation of everything under the sun (except those things that are of use to lawyers ... there are limits :-) Then, having a purpose, rather than a mean without purpose, the organization could start doing its work more rationally. Bernard * Seth Johnson , le 05-10-05, a écrit: -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [A2k] James Love: CPTech Statement regarding WIPO General Assembly (2005) Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2005 17:57:41 -0400 From: Manon Ress To: a2k discuss list "The WIPO General Assembly continues to support the WIPO Development Agenda discussions and it stopped just short of making a decision about a Diplomatic Conference regarding the Broadcasting, Cablecasting and Webcasting Organizations treaty. The current impasse over the patent treaty demonstrates that the old patent agenda has run out of steam. WIPO needs to come up with a new patent agenda. This new patent agenda should focus on new ways to improve patent quality, control anti-competitive practices and address problems facing standards organizations. We also hope that member states will identify the appropriate forum to discuss elements of a treaty on access to knowledge. It is important for WIPO to demonstrate it has a positive agenda for innovation, creativity and access to creative and inventive works. The United States government and the European Commission should abandon efforts to use WIPO as an instrument of uncritically expanding intellectual property protection and the protection of their export industries. They should support a new dialogue within WIPO. A dialogue consistent with modern intellectual discourse about the reform of intellectual property regimes in order to promote the public interest, North and South. We look forward to discussions in November at the Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights (SCCR) regarding the proposed treaty on the protection of broadcasting, cablecasting and webcasting organizations and regarding the proposal by Chile for a global minimum standards for limitations and exceptions for copyright." James Love, Director CPTech mailto:james.love@cptech.org tel. +1.202.332.2670 / mobile +1.202.361.3040 _______________________________________________ A2k mailing list A2k@lists.essential.org http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/a2k