What next? End of WIPO meeting
The WIPO secretariat just published the summary of a draft report for this session. It says that member states need more time to “examine” the proposals “indepth”. This will take place on a second IIM on 2005-06-20 to 24. Submissions by member states possible until 2005-05-30.
If the fact that another meeting is planned already means that there was no consensus – not exactly surprising after the tense debates -, it also means that the conservative side, namely the USA and the lobby of the rights-holding industry, have not succeeded in pushing the issue into a subcommittee to “disappear” it.
After haggling about expressions for a bit, the debate almost instantly reached a boiling point when Trinidad and Tobago, who are on the progressive side, suggested that more than one additional meeting might be needed to manage the “transition” of WIPO. That comment prompted a sort of shock, as it referred to a massive change in WIPO as an established fact.
Instantly, the debate reached a boiling point and was interrupted. The representatives of the rich countries hectically huddled together:
Then, the regional coordinators disappeared into a side room to negotiate. The degree of transparency at WIPO is indeed striking.
That the next IIM in June is to last a full five days means that members expect that session to be no less conflictive than the present one. It also means that the conservative side, namely the USA, have not succeeded in pushing the issue into a subcommittee to “disappear” it.
At the moment, the Friends of Development and the United States with their allies are confronting each other at eye level, without either backing down. This might go on for quite a while. The Chairman is already suggesting that a third IIM might be necessary.
The procedure for preparing a report is the usual one. The Chairman, in this case the representative of Paraguay, has great power over what will appear in the final report. He is an interesting figure: While obviously acceptable to both sides of the debate, I’ve been told that during the beginning of his work with WIPO, he expressed views similar to those now expressed by the Friends of Development.