Transcript No Slide Title

Traditional Knowledge,
Traditional Creativity and
Cultural Expressions: What Role for IP?
World Bank
Distance Learning Course on
Indigenous Knowledge
March 31, 2005
Antony Taubman,
Traditional Knowledge Division, WIPO
Overview
•
•
•
What is the problem?
– protection vs. preservation
Background to WIPO’s activities
Snapshot of the WIPO Intergovernmental
Committee:
– current issues and possible outcomes
Overview
•
•
•
What is the problem?
– protection vs. preservation
Background to WIPO’s activities
Snapshot of the WIPO Intergovernmental
Committee:
– current issues and possible outcomes
The Call for Protection: the ‘Deep Forest’ case
This is an illustrative example
for educational purposes only:
no views are expressed, and no
conclusions should be drawn,
on any legal question
on the basis of this presentation
Baegu Music: Rorogwela Lullaby
sung by Afunakwa
The rorogwela lullabies are often sung not by the
mother but by the child’s elder sister. The words
refer to such a situation: the elder sister asks the
baby not to cry because its parents are dead
and there is no one else there to hear it.
The call for protection: the ‘deep forest’ case
•
•
•
1973 UNESCO recording: “Fateleka and Baegu Music
from Malaita”
Baegu lullaby from Northern Malaita, “Rorogwela” sung
by Afunakwa
Some elements (substantial?) of (i) the melody of the
lullaby and (ii) the recording (‘fixation’) of the vocal
performance used in ‘Sweet Lullaby’ by Deep Forest
– Attributed to African cultures
– CD a huge commercial success, ‘Sweet Lullaby’ widely
used in commercials
– 1996, Norwegian saxophonist Jan Garbarek records an
adaptation of "Rorogwela,” credited as "a traditional
African melody, arranged by Jan Garbarek"
The call for protection: the ‘deep forest’ case
•
•
•
Immediate legal issues: musical work,
performance, moral rights, economic rights
Broader issues: preservation vs. protection;
enforcement of legal rights; recognition of
traditional works, communal ownership,
customary law
Policy choices: what is needed here:
– sui generis (stand alone) protection?
– adapted or extended use of existing intellectual
property system?
– better, more equitable use of existing
intellectual property system?
The call for protection: the ‘deep forest’ case
•
Sui generis protection under existing treaties:
– WIPO Performers and Phonograms Treaty
protects performances of expressions of folklore
– Moral rights
– Economic rights [even if recordings are not for
commercial gain]
– Berne Convention protects “certain unpublished
works of unknown authorship”
• including traditional musical works
• fifty years after the work has been lawfully
made available to the public.
Overview
•
•
•
What is the problem?
– protection vs preservation
Background to WIPO’s activities
Snapshot of the WIPO Intergovernmental
Committee:
– current issues and possible outcomes
Overlapping areas of concern
•
Definitions are needed to focus work, but need not
create firm boundaries:
– Cultural heritage - expressions of folklore or
traditional cultural expressions (TCEs)
– Traditional knowledge (TK) - ‘technical’
knowhow e.g. medical knowledge
Genetic Traditional
resources knowledge
– Genetic resources
Cultural
expressions
Overlapping areas of activity
•
•
Folklore - TCEs:
– UNESCO (intangible cultural heritage)
– WIPO (folklore, Berne Convention, WPPT)
– WTO (folklore and TRIPS)
– ITC (capacity building on crafts)
Traditional knowledge
– CBD (Article 8(j), 10(c), 17.2)
– FAO (Farmers’ rights)
– UNCTAD (TK in trade and development)
– WHO (Traditional medical knowledge)
– WTO (TRIPS)
– WIPO (TK and patent issues: PCT, IPC)
Overlapping areas of activity
•
•
Genetic resources:
– CBD: conservation, sustainable use, equitable benefitsharing
– FAO International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for
Food and Agriculture
– WTO (TRIPS)
– WIPO (IGC)
Indigenous rights
– ILO Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention, 1989
(No. 169)
– Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights
(OHCHR)
Working Group on Indigenous Populations (WGIP)
Draft Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
Background to WIPO’s work
•
International cooperation on folklore since 1970s
– Berne Convention protection of ‘folklore’
– Article 15.4 [In the case of certain unpublished works of
unknown authorship]
– (a) In the case of unpublished works where the identity of the
author is unknown, but where there is every ground to
presume that he is a national of a country of the Union, it shall
be a matter for legislation in that country to designate the
competent authority which shall represent the author and shall
be entitled to protect and enforce his rights in the countries of
the Union.
– (b) Countries of the Union which make such designation
under the terms of this provision shall notify the Director
General by means of a written declaration giving full
information concerning the authority thus designated. The
Director General shall at once communicate this declaration to
all other countries of the Union.
Background to WIPO’s work
•
International cooperation on folklore since 1970s
– Berne Convention protection of ‘folklore’
– UNESCO-WIPO work in early 1980s:
– UNESCO-WIPO Model Provisions for National Laws on the
Protection of Expressions of Folklore Against Illicit Exploitation
& Other Prejudicial Actions
– Expressions of folklore developed and maintained in [country]
shall be protected by this [law] against illicit exploitation and
other prejudicial actions as defined in this [law].
– "expressions of folklore" productions consisting of characteristic
elements of the traditional artistic heritage developed and
maintained by a community of [country] or by individuals
reflecting the traditional artistic expectations of such a
community ...
Background to WIPO’s work
•
International cooperation on folklore since 1970s
– Berne Convention protection of ‘folklore’
– UNESCO-WIPO work in early 1980s:
– UNESCO-WIPO Model Provisions
– 1985: treaty ‘premature’
– 1996: WIPO Performances & Phonograms Treaty:
• protection of expressions of folklore
• “performers” include those who perform expressions of
folklore
• rights include moral rights, rights of fixation, rights over
communication and dissemination, economic rights
– even if recording was not made for commercial gain
Background to WIPO’s work
•
•
•
International cooperation on folklore since 1970s
– Berne Convention protection of ‘folklore’
– UNESCO-WIPO work in early 1980s:
– UNESCO-WIPO Model Provisions
– 1985: treaty ‘premature’
– 1996: WIPO Performances & Phonograms Treaty:
• protection of expressions of folklore
– 1997: Phuket plan of action
1998-99 Fact-finding missions on TK
2001- : Intergovernmental Committee on GR, TK, F
Overview
•
•
•
What is the problem?
– protection vs preservation
Background to WIPO’s activities
Snapshot of the WIPO Intergovernmental
Committee (IGC):
– current issues and possible outcomes
Traditional Values and IP at Odds?
•
•
What does WIPO have to do with traditional knowledge
and cultural expressions?
Disquiet on the part of proponents and opponents of the
received IP system; concerns raised about:
– imposing an IP straitjacket on traditional cultures,
overriding collective values of indigenous and other
traditional communities
– IP concerns ‘mainstream’ technology; commercialises
& commodifies knowledge & culture; facilitates
misappropriation of TK and cultural expressions
– IP rights are atomistic, private, individual - at odds with
values of traditional communities
– IP concerns creativity and innovation, not tradition
Where did the IGC come from, where is it going?
•
•
From 1998-99, WIPO visited some 60 locations for
dialogue with around 3,000 representatives of TK
holder communities
– idea was to base the new program on direct
learning of the needs & expectations of TK holders
themselves
– these insights still central to WIPO’s work
IGC established in 2001 - building on practical
experience worldwide
– clarifies that this is an existing area of IP law and
practice; many laws and practical cases
worldwide, within and beyond the conventional IP
system
– but what is the international dimension?
Towards resolution: back to basics
•
•
•
The IP system criticized for misappropriating TK/TCEs,
neglecting the interests of Indigenous & local communities.
But these very concerns often expressed in terms that echo
core principles of the IP system:
– promoting equity and balance,
– reconciling private and collective interests,
– recognizing distinctive origins and the legitimate source of
innovation and creativity,
– suppressing free-riding and unjust enrichment,
– defending distinctive reputations from illegitimate
exploitation,
– providing for rights of attribution and integrity
This observation is the essence of an emerging consensus
What kind of challenge to the IP system?
•
•
•
Indigenous and local communities continue to innovate and
create within their traditions
– seek recognition for their past & continuing contribution to
humanity’s cultural & intellectual heritage
– and appropriate respect for customary laws
IGC a process of reviewing the core principles of IP law,
assessing how to apply those principles for equitable
protection of TK and TCEs
– analysing validity, equity, effectiveness of IP system from
the distinct vantage point of indigenous and local
communities
Responding to critical concerns about the relevance and
legitimacy of IP system, the IGC has seen deep reflection on
the nature of IP, its objectives, its assumptions, its limitations
and its boundaries.
Some key substantive issues:
– misappropriation - what is it to misappropriate TK/TCEs,
what is the cause of action and the nature of the
damage?
– retroactivity - is the existing public domain legitimate &
inviolable?
– localisation - how to recognize and defer to a
community’s customary law?
– collectivity - what legal status or legal personality for
traditional communities?
– ownership - what is the nature of custodianship? Who
benefits?
– subject matter - what makes knowledge and cultural
expressions ‘traditional’ ?
Some key process issues:
– coordination - already an active area of national
and regional legislation - what is the international
layer?
– interface with IP law - what is the sui generis
element of protection of TK and TCEs?
– interface with other law - access regimes for
genetic resources, cultural policy, etc.; what is the
(adapted, expanded or sui generis) IP element?
New IGC mandate for 2004-05
•
•
•
•
•
continue work on questions included in previous
mandate
new work to focus on consideration of
international dimension, without prejudice to work
in other fora,
no outcome is excluded, including possible
development of an international instrument(s)
the ICG urged to accelerate its work and to
present a progress report
International Bureau to continue to assist by
providing necessary expertise and
documentation.
Folklore/Traditional Cultural Expressions (TCEs)
•
•
IGC agrees in March 2004 to focus and accelerate
substantive work on TCEs, including preparing:
– an overview of policy objectives and core principles for
protection of TCEs (‘draft provisions’)
– document WIPO/GRTKF/IC/7/3
If Member States so choose, this could form the basis of a
new international instrument to protect TCEs
– the draft provisions could provide the substance or
content of an international instrument
– political decision remains as to what legal status and
future process is needed to carry this forward
Traditional Knowledge (TK)
•
•
IGC agrees in March 2004 to focus and accelerate
substantive work on TK, including preparing:
– an overview of policy objectives and core principles for
protection of TK (‘draft provisions’)
– document WIPO/GRTKF/IC/7/5
If Member States so choose, this could form the basis of
a new international instrument to protect TK
– the draft provisions could provide the substance or
content of an international instrument
– political decision remains as to what legal status and
future process is needed to carry this forward
What principles for TCEs/folklore?
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Responsiveness to aspirations and expectations of
relevant communities
Balance and proportionality
Respect for and cooperation with other
international and regional instruments and
processes
Flexibility and comprehensiveness
Recognition of the specific nature, characteristics
and traditional forms of cultural expression
Respect for customary use and transmission of
TCEs/EoF
Effectiveness and accessibility of protection
Specific substantive principles for TCEs/folklore
•
•
•
•
•
•
Scope of subject
matter
Criteria for protection
Beneficiaries
Management of
rights
Scope of protection
Exceptions and
limitations
•
•
•
•
•
•
Term of protection
Formalities
Sanctions, remedies
and enforcement
Application in time
Relationship with
intellectual property
protection
International and
regional protection
What forms of protection?
•
•
•
•
culturally significant/sacred TCEs/EOF:
– prevent reproduction, adaptation, public communication
and other such forms of exploitation of; any distortion,
mutilation or other modification of, or other derogatory
action in relation to; and the acquisition by third parties of
IP rights;
secret TCEs/EoF
– prevent unauthorized disclosure and subsequent use of
and acquisition by third parties of IP rights;
performances of TCEs/EoF
– protect moral and economic rights as per WPPT
other TCEs/EoF:
– identify source; prevent offensive use, prevent misleading
indications, and equitable remuneration
What forms of protection?
•
•
•
•
culturally significant/sacred TCEs/EOF:
– prevent reproduction, adaptation, public communication
and other such forms of exploitation of; any distortion,
mutilation or other modification of, or other derogatory
action in relation to; and the acquisition by third parties of
IP rights;
secret TCEs/EoF
– prevent unauthorized disclosure and subsequent use of
and acquisition by third parties of IP rights;
performances of TCEs/EoF
– protect moral and economic rights as per WPPT
other TCEs/EoF:
– identify source; prevent offensive use, prevent
misleading indications, and equitable remuneration
What forms of protection?
•
•
•
•
culturally significant/sacred TCEs/EOF:
– prevent reproduction, adaptation, public communication and
other such forms of exploitation of; any distortion, mutilation or
other modification of, or other derogatory action in relation to;
and the acquisition by third parties of IP rights;
secret TCEs/EoF
– prevent unauthorized disclosure and subsequent use of and
acquisition by third parties of IP rights;
performances of TCEs/EoF
– protect moral and economic rights as per WPPT
other TCEs/EoF:
– identify source; prevent offensive use, prevent misleading
indications, and equitable remuneration
What forms of protection?
•
•
•
•
culturally significant/sacred TCEs/EOF:
– prevent reproduction, adaptation, public communication and
other such forms of exploitation of; any distortion, mutilation
or other modification of, or other derogatory action in relation
to; and the acquisition by third parties of IP rights;
secret TCEs/EoF
– prevent unauthorized disclosure and subsequent use of and
acquisition by third parties of IP rights;
performances of TCEs/EoF
– protect moral and economic rights as per WPPT
other TCEs/EoF:
– identify source; prevent offensive use, prevent misleading
indications, and equitable remuneration
What objectives for protection of TK?
•
Recognise value
•
Promote respect
•
Meet the actual needs of holders
of traditional knowledge
•
Empower holders of TK
•
Support traditional knowledge
systems
•
Contribute to safeguarding
traditional knowledge
•
•
Repress unfair and inequitable
uses
Concord with relevant
international agreements and
processes
•
Promote innovation and
creativity
•
Promote intellectual and
technological exchange
•
Promote equitable benefit
sharing
•
Promote community
development and legitimate
trading activities
•
Preclude the grant of invalid IP
rights
•
Enhance transparency and
mutual confidence
•
Complement protection of
traditional cultural expressions
What guiding principles for TK protection?
•
Responsiveness to the needs and expectations of TK
holders
Recognition of rights
Effectiveness and accessibility
•
Flexibility &comprehensiveness
•
•
Equity and benefit-sharing
Consistency with existing legal systems
Respect for and cooperation with other international and
regional instruments and processes
Respect for customary use and transmission of TK
•
Recognition of the specific characteristics of TK
•
•
•
•
What substantive principles for TK protection?
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Protection against
misappropriation:
- suppression of misappropriation
- general nature of
misappropriation
- acts of misappropriation
- unfair competition
Recognition of the customary
context
Legal form of protection
General scope of subject matter
Eligibility for protection
Beneficiaries of protection
Equitable compensation and
recognition of knowledge holders
•
•
•
•
•
•
Prior informed consent
Exceptions and limitations
Duration of protection
Application in time
Administration and
enforcement of protection
International and Regional
Protection
What form of protection?
Next steps
•
•
•
•
Comment period on draft provisions for TK and TCE
protection
Revised draft provisions to be circulated approx. end
March
Further informal consultations in April - May
IGC meets on June 6 to 10 to consider
– substance of provisions
– how to take the substance forward?
– what recommendations to the General Assembly?
policy objectives & core principles
options for
recognizing TK/TCE
protection in foreign
jurisdictions
elements of TK
protection
at the national level
An
emerging
framework
elements of folklore/
TCE protection
at the national level
measures on IP &
genetic resources
Link to detailed capacity
building materials
Genetic Resources and
Intellectual Property
Overview
•
•
•
•
•
Linking equitable benefit-sharing from genetic
resources and the patent system
Issues and processes in WIPO fora
Some working materials
Cooperation with the Convention on Biological
Diversity (CBD)
Some substantive questions
Overview
•
•
•
•
•
Linking equitable benefit-sharing from genetic
resources and the patent system
Issues and processes in WIPO fora
Some working materials
Cooperation with the Convention on Biological
Diversity (CBD)
Some substantive questions
Access & equitable benefit-sharing:
what links to the patent system?
•
•
Access and benefit-sharing in line with objectives of CBD
and FAO International Treaty
– e.g. CBD objectives:
(i) conservation of biological diversity
(ii) sustainable use of its components
(iii) fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising
out of the utilization of genetic resources
Patent system - in particular treatment of inventions that
arise out of the utilization of genetic resources (and
associated TK)
Access & equitable benefit-sharing:
what links to the patent system?
•
•
•
Two essential scenarios put forward:
– Direct patenting of source material
• a patent (or application) directly claims as an
invention genetic resources (or associated
traditional knowledge) obtained from a separate
source
– Patenting inventions derived from source material
• a patent (or application) claims an invention that
is somehow derived from or somehow uses
genetic resources or TK - this link expressed in
several ways
Has the GR/TK been legitimately accessed?
Is the patent consistent with equitable benefit-sharing?
Access & equitable benefit-sharing:
what links to the patent system?
•
•
•
Opens up some fundamental questions:
Legal: what obligations arise (or should arise) from the
circumstances of access and the nature of use of genetic
resources (and associated TK)?
How does (or should) this affect:
– the entitlement to apply for and be granted a patent
(should the applicant receive a patent?)
– the patentability of the invention as such (does the
invention
– other interests and entitlements (e.g. equitable or
ownership interests, expectation to benefit)
– other obligations (e.g. obligation to report on patenting
activity, obligation to disclose)
Access & equitable benefit-sharing:
what links to the patent system?
•
‘Disclosure requirements:’
– various existing mechanisms,
national/regional legislative initiatives,
and international proposals
– create or confirm a legal linkage between
GR or TK used and the claimed invention
– beyond disclosure per se (provision of information),
have variously been linked to:
• patentability of invention as such
• entitlement to apply or be granted a patent
• capacity to enforce a patent
Access & equitable benefit-sharing:
what links to the patent system?
•
•
Supplementing basic legal issues, some practical questions:
E.g. what kinds of practical arrangements would:
– reduce the likelihood of illegitimate patents being granted
that claim GR/TK directly, or non-inventive derivatives of
GR/TK
• continuing work on various defensive protection and
enhanced search and examination measures
– facilitate equitable sharing of benefits from legitimate
patenting of derivative inventions (what kinds of
agreements and partnerships promote monetary and
non-monetary benefit sharing - Bonn Guidelines)
• information and capacity building work (database of
benefit sharing agreements, practical guide to
supplement general ABS capacity-building projects)
• UNEP-WIPO study on IP aspects of access and
benefit-sharing
Overview
•
•
•
•
•
Linking equitable benefit-sharing from genetic
resources and the patent system
Issues and processes in WIPO fora
Some working materials
Cooperation with the Convention on Biological
Diversity (CBD)
Some substantive questions
WIPO fora and GR/patent issues
•
•
•
Intergovernmental Committee on IP and Genetic
Resources, TK & Folklore
– considers legal issues (technical study)
– oversees capacity-building initiatives
Standing Committee on Patent Law
– proposed text for Article 2 of draft Substantive
Patent Law Treaty
– reference to issue of disclosure at last meeting
Working Group on PCT Reform
– Swiss proposal for amendment of PCT
Regulations to allow for disclosure mechanisms
Overview
•
•
•
•
•
Linking equitable benefit-sharing from genetic
resources and the patent system
Issues and processes in WIPO fora
Some working materials
Cooperation with the Convention on Biological
Diversity (CBD)
Some substantive questions
Technical study on disclosure mechanisms
•
Prepared initially under the supervision of the IGC,
responding to invitation from Sixth CBD Conference of
Parties
– based on questionnaire responses from WIPO
Member States
– successive drafts considered by IGC
– transmitted to CBD COP VII by the WIPO General
Assembly
– triggers request for follow-up work from CBD COP,
and proposed further feedback from CBD to WIPO
Technical study
•
•
•
“...to contribute to international discussion and analysis of
this general issue, and to help clarify some of the legal
and policy matters it raises...
“...technical input to facilitate policy discussion and
analysis in the CBD and in other fora, and it should not be
considered a formal paper expressing a policy position on
the part of WIPO, its Secretariat or its Member States...”
“...explored issues relevant to the interaction between the
patent system and GR/TK used in an invention... not
sought to resolve these issues but rather to illustrate and
elucidate them. … may wish to consider future work in
this area … including additional exchange of national
experience, and the elaboration of case studies and the
analysis of some of the specific disclosure scenarios
described and discussed in the draft study…
Technical study
•
•
•
“...to contribute to international discussion and analysis of
this general issue, and to help clarify some of the legal
and policy matters it raises...
“...technical input to facilitate policy discussion and
analysis in the CBD and in other fora, and it should not be
considered a formal paper expressing a policy position on
the part of WIPO, its Secretariat or its Member States...”
“...explored issues relevant to the interaction between the
patent system and GR/TK used in an invention... not
sought to resolve these issues but rather to illustrate and
elucidate them. … may wish to consider future work in
this area … including additional exchange of national
experience, and the elaboration of case studies and the
analysis of some of the specific disclosure scenarios
described and discussed in the draft study…
Technical study
•
•
•
“...to contribute to international discussion and analysis of
this general issue, and to help clarify some of the legal
and policy matters it raises...
“...technical input to facilitate policy discussion and
analysis in the CBD and in other fora, and it should not be
considered a formal paper expressing a policy position on
the part of WIPO, its Secretariat or its Member States...”
“...explored issues relevant to the interaction between the
patent system and GR/TK used in an invention... not
sought to resolve these issues but rather to illustrate and
elucidate them. … may wish to consider future work in
this area … including additional exchange of national
experience, and the elaboration of case studies and the
analysis of some of the specific disclosure scenarios
described and discussed in the draft study…
Analyses options under five aspects (Section VI):
• relationship between the claimed invention and the
GR/TK; or what would be a sufficient link between the
two to trigger a disclosure requirement
• legal principle forming basis of requirement
• nature of the obligation placed on the applicant
• consequences of failure to comply with the requirement
• how the requirement would be implemented, verified or
monitored
Sets out specific methods for disclosure (Section
VIII)
Possible disclosure scenarios (191-199):
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
TK as relevant prior art
TK holder as inventor
Disclosure of origin of genetic resources
(enablement and best mode)
Disclosure of the actual genetic resources
Evidence of entitlement to apply
Registration of equitable/ownership interests
Disclosure of information in compliance with other legal
obligations (e.g. access regimes)
Specific GR/TK disclosure mechanisms
– various specific mechanisms, various legal bases for
requirements
UNEP-WIPO study on ABS and IP
•
•
•
Pre-launch version submitted to Ministerial
Conference, CBD COP VII
Joint UNEP-WIPO launch imminent
– (inspection copies available today)
Professor AK Gupta (Honey Bee Network)
– explores three case studies of the role of patents in
access and benefit sharing
– independent analysis of the practical and legal
issues that arise, limitations of current approaches
Overview
•
•
•
•
•
Linking equitable benefit-sharing from genetic resources
and the patent system
Issues and processes in WIPO fora
Some working materials
Cooperation with the Convention on Biological Diversity
(CBD)
Some substantive questions
CBD invitation to WIPO
Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD)
Conference of Parties (COP) VI:
Decision VII/19 - interrelation of access to
genetic resources and disclosure requirements
in IP rights applications
Invitation to WIPO to...
“examine, and where appropriate address, taking into
account the need to ensure that this work is supportive
of and does not run counter to the objectives of the
[CBD], issues regarding the interrelation of access to
genetic resources and disclosure requirements in IP
rights applications, including, inter alia:
Invitation to WIPO to...
“examine, and where appropriate address, taking into account the need to
ensure that this work is supportive of and does not run counter to the
objectives of the [CBD], issues regarding the interrelation of access to
genetic resources and disclosure requirements in IP rights applications,
including, inter alia:
– Options for model provisions on proposed disclosure requirements;
– Practical options for IP rights application procedures with regard to
the triggers of disclosure requirements;
– Options for incentive measures for applicants;
– Identification of the implications for functioning of disclosure
requirements in various WIPO-administered treaties;
– IP-related issues raised by proposed international certificate of
origin/source/legal provenance;”
Possible Reporting Procedure
“… and regularly provide reports to the
CBD on its work, in particular on actions or
steps proposed to address the above
issues, in order for the CBD to provide
additional information to WIPO for its
consideration in the spirit of mutual
supportiveness …”
Possible future work proposed to IGC
…in the light of developments … to consider possible
future work for the Committee on this issue, including
the proposals in para 12(ii) of WIPO/GRTKF/IC/5/10:
including the continued exchange of national
experience and case studies, and the development
of guidelines and recommendations concerning the
interaction between access to genetic resources
and patent disclosure.
Overview
•
•
•
•
•
Linking equitable benefit-sharing from
genetic resources and the patent
system
Issues and processes in WIPO fora
Some working materials
Cooperation with the Convention on
Biological Diversity (CBD)
Some substantive questions
Some substantive questions
•
•
•
Legal and policy issues concerning:
– eligibility of inventions per se for protection
– eligibility of applicants to gain patents
– ownership, inventorship and equitable interests
– capacity to exploit and benefit from patents
– interplay between obligations incurred in one
jurisdiction arising from access to genetic resources,
and the operation of the patent system in another
jurisdiction
Incentives to use patent system to promote ABS
Sanctions for failure to comply with ABS regulations
The various avenues proposed
•
•
•
•
CBD invitation
– model provisions
– practical options for triggers of disclosure requirements
– options for incentive measures for applicants;
– implications for various WIPO-administered treaties;
– IP-related issues from proposed international certificate
PCT system: Swiss proposal to enable disclosure requirements
Standing Committee on Patent Law: reference to genetic
resources in draft, disclosure issue raised
Intergovernmental Committee: proposed guidelines and
recommendations, policy and legal development