Transcript INTEGRATING INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS AND DEVELOPMENT

INTEGRATING
INTELLECTUAL
PROPERTY RIGHTS AND
DEVELOPMENT POLICY
Report of the Commission on
Intellectual Property Rights
appointed by Clare Short –
U.K. Secretary of State for International Development
(May 2001 – September 2002)
THE COMMISSION’S MEMBERS
Members from developed and developing countries in
fields of science, law, ethics, economics, industry,
government, academics






Professor John BARTON – Commission Chair
(Stanford University, U.S.A.)
Mr. Daniel ALEXANDER
(barrister specialising in Intellectual Property Law, U.K.)
Professor Carlos CORREA
(University of Buenos Aires – Argentina)
Dr. Ramesh Mashelkar (Indian Council of Scientific and
Industrial Research and Department of Scientific and
Industrial Research, India
Dr. Gill Samuels (Pfizer LTD, U.K.)
Dr. Sandy THOMAS (Nuffield Council on Bioethics, U.K.)
THE COMMISSION’S OPERATING
MODALITY




Meetings with various stakeholders
Country visits and visits to research
institutes
Commissioned working papers and held
08 workshops on various subjects
Conference in London (February 2002) to
explore ways of moving the issues further
(recommendations are as far as possible
evidence-based)
REPORT BACKGROUND


MDG sets as a target the reduction of
people living in poverty (1.2 billion) by
50% by the year 2015
Developed countries: IPRs stimulate
economic growth thereby increasing
industrial production, promote investment,
facilitate technology transfer and avail
medicines/food, etc.
REPORT BACKGROUND (cont.)

Developing countries: IPR do little to
stimulate invention because of lack
of human and technical capacity (IPR
cripple development of local industry
because it limits learning through
imitation, harm local population and
benefit only the developed world)
REPORT BACKGROUND (cont.)

CONTEXT OF DEVELOPING COUNTRIES
• Developing countries are not a homogeneous
block: China, India and Latin America account
for 9% of worldwide R&D while other
developing countries 4% (½% sub-Saharan
Africa)
• Developing countries are net importers of
technology
• Impact of IP policies will also vary according to
socio-economic circumstances
REPORT BACKGROUND (cont.)

RECENT DEVELOPMENTS:
• Dramatical increase over the last 20 years in
the level, scope, territorial extent and role of
IP protection

Perception of too many “low quality” and broad-scope
patents
• Patenting of living things and materials found
in nature as opposed to man-made products
• Modification of protection regimes to
accommodate new technologies such as the EU
Biotechnology Directive or the Digital
Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA)
REPORT BACKGROUND (cont.)
• Extension of protection into new areas such as
software and business methods and sui generis
regimes for semiconductors and databases
• How to deal with traditional knowledge,
folklore and genetic resources
• Geographical extension of minimum standards
for IP protection through the TRIPS agreement
• Widening of exclusive rights, extension of the
duration of protection and strengthening of
enforcement mechanisms
• A new emphasis on protection of new
knowledge produced in the public sector
REPORT BACKGROUND (cont.)

CURRENT IPR RULES:
• TRIPS took effect 01 January 1995 and
requires all Member Countries to provide
minimum standards of protection for a wide
range of IPRs including copyrights, patents,
trademarks, industrial designs, geographical
indications, semiconductor topographies and
undisclosed information
• Paris, Berne and Rome Conventions
administered by the World Intellectual Property
Organisation (WIPO)
• International Convention for the Protection of
new varieties of plant (French acronym: UPOV)
THE COMMISSION’S TASK

ISSUES TO CONSIDER:
• Are IPRs economic/commercial rights or
political/human rights
• The Universal Declaration of Human Rights has
a broader definition than TRIPS “…the right to
the protection of the moral and material
interests resulting from any scientific, literary
or artistic production of which he/she is the
author…” balanced by “the right to share in
scientific advancement and its benefits”
THE COMMISSION’S TASK (cont.)

TRIPS does not allow – except in
narrow ways – discrimination
between goods essential to
life or education or other goods as
films, fast food, etc.
THE COMMISSION’S TASK (cont.)

NATURE OF IPRs: IP rights as a MEANS by
which nations can help to promote fulfilment
of human economic and social rights
• IP rights are granted by states for limited period
(patents/copyright) whereas human rights are
inalienable and universal
• IPR are an INSTRUMENT of public policy which
confer economic PRIVILEGES on
individuals/institutions solely for the purposes of
contributing to the greater public good (taxation
as a comparator)

Privilege is therefore
a means to an end, NOT an end
THE COMMISSION’S TASK (cont.)


If IPR produce economic gains to the
world as a whole, the distributional
consequences for income may not meet
with our sense of equity
Expansion of protection like in digital
materials through forms of encryption will
make knowledge less accessible and
endanger the concept of “fair use”
THE COMMISSION’S TASK (cont.)

Developing countries accepted TRIPS
because they sought the overall WTO
package including reduction of
protectionism in developed countries
(commitments to liberalise agriculture,
textiles and reduce tariffs)
THE COMMISSION’S TASK (cont.)

DOHA 2001 and MONTERREY 2002:
development objectives need to be integrated
in the making of IP rules (protection of
traditional knowledge, folklore, transfer of
technology, pro-public health TRIPS)
• Too often the interests of the producer
dominate in the evolution of IP policy
• The IP system evolution should facilitate the
application of the rapid advances in science
and technology for the benefit of developing
countries
REPORT BACKGROUND (cont.)

THE CHALLENGE:
• Getting the IP system “wrong” in
developing countries is likely to be far
higher than in developed countries

Heavy costs may be incurred but the
benefits for many countries are less easy to
identify
THE REPORT’S CONTENTS
The chapters identify key issues for
developing countries




Chapter 1: INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND
DEVELOPMENT
Chapter 2: HEALTH
Chapter 3: AGRICULTURE AND GENETIC
RESOURCES
Chapter 4:
TRADITIONAL KNOWLEDGE AND
GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS
THE REPORT’S CONTENT (cont.)




Chapter 5: COPYRIGHT,
SOFTWARE AND THE INTERNET
Chapter 6: PATENT REFORM
Chapter 7:
INSTITUTIONAL CAPACITY
Chapter 8:
THE INTERNATIONAL ARCHITECTURE
Chapter 1: INTELLECTUAL
PROPERTY AND DEVELOPMENT
Intellectual property is
a form of knowledge
which societies have decided can be
assigned specific property rights but
KNOWLEDGE IS
MUCH MORE THAN
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
(it is the main engine for growth and
competitive advantage)
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY (cont.)

2 characteristics of knowledge:
• the more people use the knowledge,
the “better” for society
• difficult to prevent others from
copying it leading to market failure
(IPR regime was devised to solve this
economic paradox)
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY (cont.)

The development of
indigenous technological capacity
has proved to be a key determinant of
economic growth and
poverty reduction
for DEVELOPING COUNTRIES
• The success of technology transfer is the early
emergence of an indigenous technological
capacity (in 2001 less than 1% of US patents
and 2% of international applications under PCT
in 1999-2001 were granted to applicants from
developing countries)
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY (cont.)

FEW developing countries have been
able to develop a strong indigenous
technological capability
• It is difficult for developing countries
either to develop a strong
indigenous technological capability
or to assimilate technology from
developed countries
WHAT ARE IPR

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS
(IPR) are the rights
awarded by society
to individuals or organisations
principally over creative works
• Give the creator the right to prevent
others from making unauthorised use of
their property for a limited period
WHAT ARE IPR (cont.)

Intellectual Property (IP) is categorised
as:
• INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY (functional
commercial innovations)

Patents, industrial design, trademarks, GI, trade
secrets
• ARTISTIC AND LITERARY PROPERTY
(cultural creations)

Literary, scientific and artistic work, software treated
as literary expression
• emerging hybrid SUI GENERIS SYSTEMS

Integrated computer circuits, Plant Breeders’ Rights,
database protection
INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY

PATENTS
• It is an exclusive right awarded to an inventor
to prevent others from making, selling,
distributing, importing or using their invention,
without licence or authorisation, for a fixed
period of time
• The invention must be disclosed to enable
others to put it into practice

This increases the body of knowledge available for
further research (assuming that there is latent
capacity to innovate)
INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY (cont.)
• PATENTABILITY OF AN INVENTION:



Novelty
Non-obviousness (an inventive step)
Utility (in the U.S.) or
industrial applicability (in U.K.)
• Temporary market exclusivities allow producers
to recoup R&D costs and reap a profit
• The level of protection afforded in practice is
necessarily a compromise (not too long and
not too broad)
INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY (cont.)
• Firms in developing countries can seldom bear
the cost of acquisition and maintenance of
rights and, above all, of litigation if disputes
arise

IPRs necessarily involve restrictions on competition
• “…countries with little export trade in industrial
goods and few, if any, inventions for sale have
nothing to gain from granting patents on
inventions worked and patented abroad except
the avoidance of unpleasant foreign retaliation
in other directions…” (Edith Penrose - 1951)
ARTISTIC AND LITERARY
PROPERTY

COPYRIGHT
• Protects the form in which ideas are
expressed, not the ideas themselves
• Protects for much longer than patents
but does not protect against
independent derivation of the work
• Affordable access to works essential for
development may be affected by unduly
strong copyright rules
ARTISTIC AND LITERARY
PROPERTY (cont.)
• The rights of owners of copyright are
moderated by “fair use” provisions. The
extension of copyright to the Internet
and software have weakened these
provisions
• Developing countries are net importers
of copyrighted material needed for their
development, education, etc.
HISTORY OF IP


IP regimes have been used to further what
the countries perceived as their own
economic interests (US joined Bern
Convention in 1989 – Taiwan, Korea –
flexible path to join the current IPR regime)
Paris Convention protecting industrial
property (1883)
• Including national flexibility to exclude certain
fields of technology
• National determination of length of protection

Berne Convention on
literary and artistic works (1886)
HISTORY OF IP (cont.)



Between 1850 and 1875 Europeans debated
whether patents are obstacles to free trade
principles or the best practical means of
stimulating inventions
In Holland the movement against patents
succeeded and from 1869 until 1912 no
patents were issued there
India’s weakening of IP protection on
pharmaceuticals in 1970 is widely considered
to have been an important factor in
subsequent rapid growth of the sector
IMPACT OF IP



TRIPS agreement i.e. globalising minimum
standards for IP protection
TRIPS removed a large part of countries’
flexibility on patents
WB statistics indicate that developing
countries would be the net losers of the
TRIPS agreement (in 1999 $7.5 billion
deficit in royalties and licence fees)
IMPACT OF IP (cont.)

CONCLUSION:
• IPR will benefit developing countries
only through promoting invention and
technological innovation, thereby
enhancing growth

Rapid growth is more often associated with
weaker IP protection
• Utility models (petty patents: lower standards of
inventiveness, registration – no examination,
shorter duration – 3 years) like in Japan, Brazil,
Korea)
Chapter 2: HEALTH IPR

Pharmaceutical industry is more
dependent on patent protection than other
industries
• 20 years patent protection for new medicine
delay production of inexpensive generic
substitutes upon which the poor depend
HEALTH IPR (cont.)

Does the IP system have a role to play in
stimulating the capacity of developing
countries themselves to develop and
produce drugs that they or other
developing countries need ?
• WHO Commission on Macroeconomics and
Health (WHO/CMH) took the view that patent
protection offered little incentive for research
on developing country diseases in the absence
of significant market. It recommended
“differential pricing” favouring poor countries
backed by more extensive use of compulsory
licensing
HEALTH IPR: RESEARCH AND
DEVELOPMENT

The large pharmaceutical companies are:
• unwilling to pursue a line of research
unless the potential outcome is a product
with annual sales of the order to $1 billion
• it is not worth the expense of obtaining and
maintaining protection when THE
POTENTIAL MARKET IS SMALL AND THE
RISK OF INFRINGEMENT IS LOW
HEALTH IPR: ACCESS TO
MEDICINES

Less than 5% of the drugs on the WHO
Essential Drugs List are patented
(2002 survey)
• The argument advanced by the industry is that
even where there is no patent protection, the
drugs are still not available
• Drugs currently (whose patent applications
prior to 1994) produced as generics in India or
elsewhere will continue to be available for
export provided they are not patented in the
importing country
HEALTH IPR: ACCESS TO
MEDICINES (cont.)

CONCLUSION:
developing countries’ patenting
options are severely limited by the
small size of their markets and lack
of indigenous technological,
productive and regulatory capacity
HEALTH IPR: POLICY
IMPLICATIONS


Compulsory licences could be granted on
grounds determined by TRIPS member
countries (TRIPS should not prevent
countries from taking measures to protect
public health)
A system of differential pricing will
optimise profit of patent holder but need
to ensure prevention of low-priced
products undermining high-priced markets
HEALTH IPR: DEVELOPING
COUNTRY LEGISLATION

BOLAR EXCEPTION makes it legal for a
generic producer to import, manufacture
and test a patented product prior to the
expiry of the patent in order that it may
fulfil the regulatory requirements imposed
by particular countries as necessary for
marketing as a generic
• Lower priced generics can reach the market
as soon as a patent expires
Chapter 3: AGRICULTURE AND
GENETIC RESOURCES


Agricultural sector is the main source of
food, income and employment in
developing countries (75% of the world’s
poor live and work in rural areas)
Traditionally progress occurred through
on-farm experimentation, selection and
adaptation supplemented by purposive
breeding of new crop varieties (CGIAR –
Consultative Group on International Agri
Research)
AGRICULTURE AND GENETIC
RESOURCES (cont.)

In the last 20 years:
• Biotechnology (genetic engineering) –
introducing new genetic traits in plants
• Expansion of private sector investment
in agricultural research

Protection of plant varieties started
in 1930’s – PBR
AGRICULTURE AND GENETIC
RESOURCES (cont.)

TRIPS obliges developing countries to
protect plant varieties by patents or other
means. Is it beneficial ? What is the
impact on food security ? What about the
earlier contribution of farmers to
conservation and innovation ?
• Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) calls
for facilitating access to genetic resources and
fair sharing of benefits
AGRICULTURE AND GENETIC
RESOURCES (cont.)

Currently intellectual property in
plants can be secured by
technological means e.g. hybrid
maize cannot be reused if production
levels are to be maintained and
sterile seed is becoming possible
AGRICULTURE AND GENETIC
RESOURCES (cont.)

CGIAR played a major role in Green
Revolution (1960’s) and acts as the
guardian of the world’s largest
collection of genetic resources which
is the source of future crop
improvement
AGRICULTURE AND GENETIC
RESOURCES (cont.)

CONCLUSION:
• Developing countries should develop tailored Sui
Generis System that provide for the farmer’s
exception – unlike patents, PVP permit farmers
to re-use their own harvested seeds on their
land but not to sell
• Introduction of PVP in Brazil resulted in market
concentration which raises concerns over
competition issues (may exclude small farmers)
• US Department of Agriculture: “…whether the
current IP regime (in Agriculture) is stimulating
or hampering research is unclear…”
Chapter 4: TRADITIONAL
KNOWLEDGE AND
GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS


Traditional knowledge is essential to
the food security and health of
millions of people in the developing
world
Knowledge of the healing properties
of plants has been the source of
many modern medicines
TRADITIONAL KNOWLEDGE AND
GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS (cont.)


In 1992 the Convention on Biological
Diversity (CBD) highlighted the need
to promote and preserve traditional
knowledge
Final and universally acceptable
solutions for the protection and
promotion of traditional knowledge
have not yet emerged
TRADITIONAL KNOWLEDGE AND
GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS (cont.)

EXAMPLES OF CURRENT USE OF IPR
REGIME:
• Use of copyright protection in Canada to
protect tradition-based creations including
masks, totem poles and sound recordings of
Aboriginal artists
• Use of industrial designs to protect the
external appearance of articles such as head
dresses and carpets in Kazakhstan
• Use of geographical indications to protect
traditional products such as liquors or sauces
and teas in Venezuela and Vietnam
TRADITIONAL KNOWLEDGE AND
GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS (cont.)

MISAPPROPRIATION OF TRADITIONAL
KNOWLEDGE
• Traditional knowledge is such that more of it is
transmitted orally than written down
TRADITIONAL KNOWLEDGE AND
GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS (cont.)

RECOMMENDATION:
• Digital libraries of traditional knowledge
should, as soon as it is practical, be
incorporated into the minimum search
documentation lists of patent offices
• Further study on what role geographical
indications (under TRIPS provisions)
could play in development
• A register of geographical indications
TRADITIONAL KNOWLEDGE AND
GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS (cont.)
• Sui generis protection of traditional
knowledge

Many countries believe current IPR system
not adequate for traditional knowledge
• How to promote the objectives related
to benefit sharing and prior informed
consent set out in the CBD
Chapter 5: COPYRIGHT,
SOFTWARE AND THE INTERNET

Those who control copyright have a
significant advantage in the
emerging, knowledge-based global
economy
• Copyright industries are a huge source
of wealth and employment creation
($460 billion in US with $80 billion in
exports in 1999)
COPYRIGHT, SOFTWARE AND
THE INTERNET (cont.)


Protection of copyright dates back to the
1700s with the Statute of Anne and at the
end of the 19th century it was enshrined in
the Berne Convention
The Berne Convention permit countries to
allow limited copying of protected works
without permission for certain purposes
defined in national legislation such as
teaching, research and private use
COPYRIGHT, SOFTWARE AND
THE INTERNET (cont.)

Ambitious waivers were planned by the 1967
Stockholm Conference on the Berne
Convention for developing countries but in
Paris in 1971, agreement was reached on a
watered down set of exemptions for
developing countries, essentially allowing
limited compulsory licensing of works for
translation into local languages
COPYRIGHT, SOFTWARE AND
THE INTERNET (cont.)


US justified its persistent refusal to grant
copyright protection to foreign authors
during the 19th century on the grounds
that this was a necessity to meet the
nations’ needs for knowledge and
enlightenment
Copyright holders propose “budget”
editions of books and computer
programmes for cost-sensitive users
COPYRIGHT, SOFTWARE AND
THE INTERNET (cont.)


Availability of copyright protection may be
a necessary but not sufficient condition for
development of viable domestic
publishing, entertainment and software
industries (ex. India with $10.2 billion and
Chad and Benin)
System of access to books and materials
is important for life-long learning and
education in developing countries
(especially for professionals)
COPYRIGHT, SOFTWARE AND
THE INTERNET (cont.)

RECOMMENDATIONS:
• Developing countries should be allowed
to maintain or adopt broad exemption
for educational, research and library use
in their national copyright laws
COPYRIGHT, SOFTWARE AND
THE INTERNET (cont.)
• Developing countries and their donor
partners should review policies for
procurement of computer software, with a
view to ensuring that options for using lowcost and/or open-source software products
• Developing countries should ensure that
their national copyright laws permit the
reverse engineering of computer software
programmes
COPYRIGHT, SOFTWARE AND
THE INTERNET (cont.)


Developing countries to resist WIPO
Copyright Treaty which calls for countries to
provide effective legal remedies against the
circumvention of technological protection
measures
Users of information available on the Internet
in the developing nations should be entitled
to “fair use” rights such as making and
distributing printed copies from electronic
sources in reasonable numbers for
educational and research purposes
COPYRIGHT, SOFTWARE AND
THE INTERNET (cont.)

Countries should not follow the lead
of the US and the EU by
implementing legislation in the lines
of the DMCA or
the EU Database Directive
Chapter 6: PATENT REFORM


The “modern” patent system was in the
words of the American Constitution “to
promote the Progress of Science and
useful Arts, by securing for limited Times
to Authors and Inventors the exclusive
Right to their respective Writings and
Discoveries”
PURPOSE: to stimulate invention
• The disclosure of information in the patent was
also seen as stimulating technical progress
PATENT REFORM (cont.)


The emphasis now has shifted towards
viewing the patent system as a means of
generating the resources required to
finance R&D and to protect investments
There are concerns about the way the
system has evolved which apply to
developed countries as well as developing
countries (new generation of technologies,
patenting of living things)
PATENT REFORM (cont.)


The patent system fits best a model of
progress where the patented product is
the discrete outcome of a linear research
process
In knowledge-based industries, the
process of innovation may be cumulative,
and iterative, drawing on a range of prior
inventions invented independently (for the
most part, the “cumulative” model now
seems to fit more research than the
“discrete” model)
PATENT REFORM (cont.)

One of the fundamental dilemmas is the
large number of patents on technologies
that may be outputs of one research
process, but are possible inputs into one
or several downstream processes
• One example is the issue of patenting
“research tools”
PATENT REFORM (cont.)

The ultimate goal of the reform is an
international patent, valid throughout the
world and based on a single application
process
• But if developing countries should be
encouraged to devise patent systems that
suit their individual circumstances and
objectives, which themselves will vary
according to their stage of development,
how should developing countries then
proceed ?
PATENT REFORM (cont.)

FOR DEVELOPING COUNTRIES:
a pro-competitive strategy is best realised
by seeking to restrict the scope of patent
protection provided i.e. :
• Limiting the scope of subject matter that can
be patented
• The breadth of each patent is commensurate
with the inventive contribution and the
disclosure made

The UK Courts have also recently stated that the
disclosure must be sufficient to enable all aspects of
the claimed invention to be performed
PATENT REFORM (cont.)
• Restricting the ability of the patentees to
prohibit others from building on or designing
around patented inventions
• Considering the suitability of other forms of
protection to encourage local innovation
PATENT REFORM (cont.)


Developing countries should introduce the
so-called “Bolar exception” to patent
rights to facilitate early entry of generic
competition in the pharmaceutical field
Utility model or petty systems for
stimulating and rewarding incremental
innovations
PATENT REFORM (cont.)

The Commission concludes that there
is a role for IP in public research
institutions to promote the transfer
and application of technologies
• Care be taken to ensure that research
priorities, be it in agriculture or health,
are not distorted by the search for a
larger licensing income
Chapter 7: INSTITUTIONAL
CAPACITY


Developing countries need to ensure that
their national IP regime operates in the
public interest (they tend to limit human
and resource cost of establishing IP
regimes because they deem they have
little to gain)
Developing countries needed to comply
with TRIPS as of January 2000 + Paris and
Berne conventions (if they so chose)
INSTITUTIONAL CAPACITY (cont.)

Also they need to implement IP-related
reforms such as:
• appropriate protection systems for plant
varieties
• whether and how to protect traditional
knowledge
• how to regulate access and benefit sharing
from national biological resources under CBD
• science and technology policy and anti-trust
legislation
INSTITUTIONAL CAPACITY (cont.)



How IP policy is used to promote national
development objective
Mechanism for coordinating policy
making: ministries of health, justice,
science, environment, agriculture, culture,
education
Skeleton office for IPR administration
would perhaps be 10 professionals + 10
support staff
INSTITUTIONAL CAPACITY (cont.)


Membership in the Patent Co-operation
Treaty (PCT) and Madrid system for
trademark registration will reduce the load
of examination of patent applications
Enforcement by juridical system
• Thailand and China established specialised
courts to hear IPR cases
• Best approach is to strengthen commercial
courts
INSTITUTIONAL CAPACITY (cont.)

Technical assistance
• TRIPS oblige WTO developed members
to provide technical and financial
assistance to developing countries to
facilitate its implementation
Chapter 8: THE INTERNATIONAL
ARCHITECTURE


The implication of the Commission’s
Report is that the interests of
developing countries are best served
by tailoring their intellectual property
regimes to their particular economic
and social circumstances
Costly errors of policy will be harder
to bear (for developing countries)
THE INTERNATIONAL
ARCHITECTURE (cont.)


WIPO should give explicit recognition to both
the benefits and costs of IP protection and
the corresponding challenge to adjust
domestic IPR regimes in developing countries
to ensure that the costs do not outweigh the
benefits
LDCs should be granted an extended
transition period for implementation of TRIPS
until 2016, at least
THE INTERNATIONAL
ARCHITECTURE (cont.)

Though developing countries have the
right to opt for accelerated compliance
with or the adoption of standards beyond
TRIPS, if they think it is in their interests
to do so, developed countries should
review their policies in regional/bilateral
commercial diplomacy with developing
countries so as to ensure that they do not
impose on developing countries standards
or timetables beyond TRIPS
THE INTERNATIONAL
ARCHITECTURE (cont.)

WTO and WIPO should increase the
opportunities for civil society organisations
to play their legitimate roles as
constructively as possible. For instance,
this could be done by inviting NGOs and
other concerned civil society groups to sit
on, or observe, appropriate advisory
committees and by organising regular
public dialogues on current topics in which
NGOs could participate
THE INTERNATIONAL
ARCHITECTURE (cont.)

Research sponsors, including WIPO,
should provide funds to support
additional research on the
relationships between IP and
development in the subject areas
identified by the Report