Intergovernmental Committee (IGC) on Intellectual Property and Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge and Folklore. Is the thirty-eight session going to be the lucky one?
The Intergovernmental
Committee convened in Geneva, Switzerland between the 10th and the 14th of
December 2018 for its thirty-eight session. The agenda of the meeting is
considerably long, once again discussing inter alia subjects of direct relevance to the future of the
traditional IP system as we know it.
Notable in
this regard were the discussions on well-known issues for the IGC, such as the
protection of traditional knowledge, genetic resources and the status of
databases relating to genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge.
Below is an overview of the most important documents
discussed. You will find the fulltext version of all documents HERE.
THE PROTECTION OF TRADITIONAL KNOWLEDGE: DRAFT
ARTICLES
This
document prepared by the Secretariat, concerns the revised version of the Draft
Articles negotiated during the previous IGC meeting (27-31st of
August 2018).
THE PROTECTION OF TRADITIONAL CULTURAL
EXPRESSIONS: DRAFT ARTICLES
As with the
previous document, the Draft Articles as revised during the previous IGC
meeting were
transmitted to the current IGC meeting agenda for further
discussion.
THE PROTECTION OF TRADITIONAL KNOWLEDGE:
UPDATED DRAFT GAP ANALYSIS
The task of
the Secretariat with respect to the specific document is to:
(a)
describe what obligations, provisions and possibilities already exist at the
international level to provide protection for traditional knowledge (TK); (b)
describe what gaps exist at the international level, illustrating those gaps,
to the extent possible, with specific examples; (c) set out considerations
relevant to determining whether those gaps need to be addressed; (d) describe
what options exist or might be developed to address any identified gaps,
including legal and other options, whether at the international, regional or
national level; (e) contain an annex with a matrix corresponding to the items
mentioned in sub paragraphs (a) to (d), above.
The same document was prepared for the
Thirteenth IGC meeting held in 25th to 28th February
2008, and thus the current version has preserved the structure and content of
the earlier document. The only newly added elements were legislative
(international, regional and national) developments with impact in the field,
such as the Nagoya Protocol. Thus, the
specific document constitutes more of an updating than a new production.
THE PROTECTION OF TRADITIONAL CULTURAL
EXPRESSIONS: UPDATED DRAFT GAP ANALYSIS
This
document is the corresponding document as the previous one on Traditional
Knowledge, with the Secretariat having the limited mandate of updating the
original document produced for the February 2008 IGC meeting.
REPORT ON THE COMPILATION OF MATERIALS ON
DATABASES RELATING TO GENETIC RESOURCES AND ASSOCIATED TRADITIONAL KNOWLEDGE
The report
of the Secretariat provides a detailed review of the work done in the field by
the IGC and the member states (including seminars, activities at the WIPO and regional/national level), as well
as a reference to all documents submitted and discussed in the Committee regarding databases relating to genetic
resources and traditional knowledge.
The agenda
of the meeting included two documents with direct relevance to the functioning
of the patent system, namely: THE
ECONOMIC IMPACT OF PATENT DELAYS AND UNCERTAINTY: U.S. CONCERNS ABOUT PROPOSALS
FOR NEW PATENT DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS, submitted by the US Delegation and PROPOSAL
FOR THE TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR THE STUDY BY THE WIPO SECRETARIAT ON MEASURES
RELATED TO THE AVOIDANCE OF THE ERRONEOUS GRANT OF PATENTS AND COMPLIANCE WITH
EXISTING ACCESS AND BENEFIT-SHARING SYSTEMS, submitted by the delegation of
Canada, Japan, Norway, the Republic of Korea, the Russian Federation and the
United States of America.
The former
document concerns the negative effects of
the uncertainty of the scope and application of the disclosure requirement required
s for patent applications. In particular, the document refers to the economic
impact on firms due to delays of patent application and the effect this
has on employment and product sales’s
rates.
The second document concerns a request
submitted by the above-mentioned delegations to the Secretariat of the IGC
asking for mapping the experience of
jurisdictions that have introduced a disclosure requirement in their national
patent examination procedures. These delegations posed a series of probing questions relating to how the disclosure
requirement is interpreted and applied in practice, as well as a collection of
experiences regarding potential difficulties not envisaged at the outset that have arisen.
A collection of experiences and concrete
examples of legislation is the objective of the request set out in the document, entitled PROPOSAL FOR A STUDY BY THE WIPO SECRETARIAT
ON EXISTING SUI GENERIS SYSTEMS FOR THE PROTECTION OF TRADITIONAL KNOWLEDGE IN
WIPO MEMBER STATES, submitted by the delegations from the United States of America and Japan.
The Secretariat is requested to collect information from those member states with current, sui generis legislation related to the scope
of protectable subject-matter and the practical application of the system as
such.
Finally, the document entitled IDENTIFYING EXAMPLES OF TRADITIONAL
KNOWLEDGE TO STIMULATE A DISCUSSION OF WHAT SHOULD BE PROTECTABLE SUBJECT
MATTER AND WHAT IS NOT INTENDED TO BE PROTECTED, submitted by the delegation
of the United States of America, which seeks to initiate a salient discussion regarding which products or services, originating in or based
on traditional knowledge are to be included by the presumptive future system of
protection. The document includes a list of such products, including chocolate,
coffee, surfing, chewing gum and rubber, to illustrate how broad the scope of
protectable subject-matter could potentially be.
The work of the IGC and the impact on the IP
system. Hot getting hotter?
This Kat waits with anxiety the "to be continued" of the IGC |
The agenda of
the thirty-eight IGC meeting includes several interesting discussion points of relevance
and importance for the IPR system. This IPKat notes with increasing interest
the initiatives undertaken by the US delegation, which are both important and relevant for the
future of the IGC negotiations. The sensitive nose of this Kat says…new Trump
agenda bringing changes? Well, we will soon see…
It seems that the work of the IGC is moving
closer and closer to the core of the challenges in reconciling the protection of traditional
knowledge, genetic resources and traditional cultural expressions with the
modern IP system. IGC hot, getting hotter?
Intergovernmental Committee (IGC) on Intellectual Property and Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge and Folklore. Is the thirty-eight session going to be the lucky one?
Reviewed by Frantzeska Papadopoulou
on
Monday, December 17, 2018
Rating:
No comments:
All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.
It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.
Learn more here: http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/p/want-to-complain.html