[pp.int.general] Fwd: [SPICY IP] See-sawing at Copenhagen

Sat Dec 19 04:53:49 CET 2009

this is a little late of course. they're currently on a recess from the 9th
session (which can be followed here
http://www5.cop15.meta-fusion.com/kongresse/cop15/templ/live.php?id_kongressmain=1&theme=unfccc&id_kongresssession=1if
you happen to be wake) so there's no knowing what will happen....

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Swaraj Paul Barooah <swaraj.barooah at gmail.com>
Date: 2009/12/17
Subject: [SPICY IP] See-sawing at Copenhagen
To: spicyip at googlegroups.com

<http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_OMUnNbcROEs/SyqKlvwj-HI/AAAAAAAAADg/mtyrTX08YVA/s1600-h/tug-o-war.jpg>
With just a couple of more days remaining for discussions at 'Hopenhagen',
the position of IP in the treaty text continues to remain ambiguous,
see-sawing between a number of IP references being mentioned (1st draft), to
IP not being mentioned explicitly at all (2nd draft) , and back to IP being
mentioned again in the 3rd draft text (provided by IP-Watch
here<http://www.ip-watch.org/weblog/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/skmbt_c65209121615470.pdf>)
on the development and transfer of technology at the 7-18th December United
Nations Climate Change Conference (COP15) being held at Copenhagen. This
third draft, like the previous two, has been prepared by officials but is
being referred to the ministers to negotiate/discuss in the 'high-level'
meeting due to the clashing of interests (and therefore positions) on
Intellectual Property Rights in the text. While developing countries are
happy with this re-introduction of IP, developed countries are unhappy with
this, as they would prefer not having to discuss IP issues at this stage.
The 2nd draft of the treaty created a disturbance, with developing countries
of the opinion that by not mentioning it, developed nations were using IP as
a bargaining chip to try to force developing countries to raise their levels
of commitment. Countries such as Japan and USA have expressed concerns that
negotiations over IP issues at the climate change meeting would bring all
discussions to a standstill, as it would take too long to come to a
consensus about it. However, the 3rd draft treaty, once again included it.
[Original image taken from
here<http://hilarygardner.files.wordpress.com/2009/11/tug-o-war.jpg>
]

Currently, two tracks are being followed, with one focusing on the UN
Convention under the Ad Hoc Working Group on Long Term Cooperative Action
under the Convention (LCA) and the other track discussing the Kyoto
Protocol. Earlier, on December 8th, developing countries showed great
concern when a leak of a draft agreement (provided by the Guardian
here<http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/dec/08/copenhagen-climate-change>)
by the Danish hosts which implied that transfers would be linked to
specific actions that developing countries were to take. This was quickly
brushed aside by embarrassed officials as merely being one of several
unofficial papers, however the G77 countries haven't been so quick to forget
it. The leaked document suggested that $10 billion was to be given as a
'quick start' fund. Considering the amount of money that countries have
given to bail out their financial institutions, and the enormity and urgent
nature of the global warming situation, responses included "paltry amount"
and "it won't even pay for the all the coffins".

According to IP
Watch<http://www.ip-watch.org/weblog/2009/12/16/copenhagen-meeting-third-tech-transfer-draft-may-go-to-ministers-with-ip/>,
"Bernarditas de Castro-Muller, one of the lead negotiators of G77 developing
countries, said that developed countries had committed to the transfer of
technology to developing countries under the UN Convention, especially
Article 4.1.c. “It is a commitment already in the Convention,” she said."

However, it is quite alarming to look at USA's internal discussion on the
matter. To quote a member of the House of Representatives, as well as a
member of the USA delegation to Kyoto in 1997, on the issue of compulsory
licensing under the UNFCCC, "The American people need to know that those
were code words, like ‘compulsory licensing’ and ‘technology transfer’, that
really mean allowing other countries to steal the American patents,
copyrights and trademarks for anything related to climate change, efficiency
or energy under the draft climate change treaty." To read more, check
here<http://jiplp.blogspot.com/2009/11/road-to-copenhagen-intellectual.html>
.

On December 16th, WIPO Director General Francis Gurry, speaking at some side
events at Copenhagen, took a more pro-developed country viewpoint on the
issue. As per the WIPO Press
Release<http://www.wipo.int/about-wipo/en/climate_change_conf_09.html>,
"Two major policy objectives need to be prioritized: Encouraging investment
in the creation of environment-friendly technologies, and the rapid
dissemination of those technologies. In both cases, the IP system, and in
particular patents, are fundamental in that they provide a stimulus for
investment in green innovation and contribute to a rapid – and global –
diffusion of new technologies and knowledge.

Green innovation requires significant private sector investment, which is
incentivized through an effective patent system. The IP system makes an
invention a tradable good, which can be licensed or assigned, thus
facilitating technology partnerships.

Effective patent protection in recipient countries can spur international
technology transfer from the private sector. Moreover, since all patents are
published, the patent system also provides the most comprehensive public
repository of information on latest technologies. It reveals knowledge that
already exists, which helps to develop new technologies, and it helps
identify technologies that are not protected and thus freely available."
With the huge spotlight being placed on Copenhagen, many of the bigger
nations are conscious that steps taken are being viewed on the global
political stage as well. While developing countries such as India, China,
Brazil are essentially crying out that it is only reasonable for richer
countries which have historically contributed more to global pollution be
more responsible for their actions, and developed nations are stating that
everyone should have an equal burden - each wanting the other to take on
more of the burden, the island nations just want anyone to take it on,
before they are drowned out. The smaller island nations however, being in
the most urgent need of action, since they are in danger of being washed out
by rising waters, are desperate to get any or all of the international
community to start taking immediate action.

Although its complicated enough on its own, one would hope that in addition
to transfer of technology, the negotiations also include collaboration of
efforts at innovating and creating new technology, since that would mean
more relevant technology as well as more efficient deployment. As it
currently stands, such collaborations are extremely difficult due to various
barriers including IPRs.

Update <http://www.greendetectives.net/?gclid=CKzp-IW03p4CFSIdawodOAV1Jg>:
At COP 15, US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, just
announced<http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKTRE5BG1ID20091217>that by
2020 the United States will work towards providing poor countries
$100billion annually for climate change, contingent on all major economies
contributing and helping to seal a deal, transparent to all parties.

To see the non-working papers prepared by the LCA, check
here<http://unfccc.int/meetings/ad_hoc_working_groups/lca/items/5012.php>
.
IP watch has good coverage of the 1st and 2nd drafts
here<http://www.ip-watch.org/weblog/2009/12/09/ip-issues-may-go-to-%E2%80%98higher-political-level%E2%80%99-in-copenhagen-amid-difficulties/>and
here<http://www.ip-watch.org/weblog/2009/12/14/tough-talks-on-ip-in-technology-paper-at-copenhagen-no-mention-in-latest-draft>respectively.
For more general reading on IP and climate change, click
here<http://www.globalclimatelaw.com/2009/07/articles/intellectual-property/countdown-to-copenhagen-the-debate-over-technology-transfers-and-the-protection-of-intellectual-property/>

--
Posted By Swaraj Paul Barooah to SPICY
IP<http://spicyipindia.blogspot.com/2009/12/see-sawing-at-copenhagen.html>at
12/18/2009 01:05:00 AM

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"SPICY IP" group.
To post to this group, send email to spicyip at googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
spicyip+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com<spicyip%2Bunsubscribe at googlegroups.com>
.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/spicyip?hl=en.

-- 
Amelia Andersdotter
Lissabon-MEP
+46 722063698
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.pirateweb.net/pipermail/pp.international.general/attachments/20091219/0a85791a/attachment-0001.htm>