headers
Seth Johnson | 5 Jul 2005 02:36
Picon

3 on WIPO Patent Committee Meeting


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [A2k] Fw: N-S divide at WIPO Patents Committee (Rpt 1)
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2005 16:41:21 +0800
From: "Martin Khor" <mkkp <at> pd.jaring.my>
To: <Undisclosed-Recipient:; <at> lists.essential.org>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]

TWN Info Service on WTO and Trade Issues (Jun05/7)
25 June 2005
Third World Network
www.twnside.org.sg

WIPO members split on future work on patent law treaty

A meeting of the World Intellectual Property Organisation's
standing committee on patents (SCP) was held on 1-2 June 2005. 
At the meeting, WIPO member states were unable to agree on how
the future work of the committee should proceed.

The SCP in recent years has been negotiating a possible new
treaty, the substantive patent law treaty (SPLT).   There is a
division of views, mainly on North/South lines, on what such a
treaty should contain. These major differences surfaced again
during this meeting.

Below is the first of 3 reports on the WIPO's SCP meeting.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Seth Johnson | 5 Jul 2005 02:34
Picon

IPJ on 2nd IIM WIPO Development Agenda Meeting


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [A2k] IPJ Report on 2nd IIM WIPO Development Agenda Mtg
Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2005 16:55:56 -0700
From: Robin Gross <robin <at> ipjustice.org>
Organization: IP Justice
To: a2k <at> lists.essential.org

Available online at:
  http://www.ipjustice.org/WIPO/IIM2/IIM2_IPJ_Report.shtml
  http://www.ipjustice.org/WIPO/IIM2/IIM2_IPJ_Report.pdf
  http://www.ipjustice.org/WIPO/IIM2/IIM2_IPJ_Report.doc

IP Justice Report
on the 2nd IIM of the
WIPO Development Agenda
20-22 June 2005

Debate on Proposals to Reform WIPO Begins Despite Delays:
Friends of Development Coalition Maintains Strong Front Against
US/UK/EU

By IP Justice Executive Director Robin D. Gross
www.ipjustice.org

I.  Background on the Development Agenda and Call for Reform at
WIPO

IP Justice was one of a handful of public-interest NGO's
accredited to participate at the Development Agenda meetings at
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Seth Johnson | 5 Jul 2005 02:33
Picon

IIM 2 Day 3: WIPO + Development Agenda


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [A2k] Blogging WIPO and the Development Agenda, Second
IIM (Day 3)
Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2005 15:21:29 +0200
From: Thiru Balasubramaniam <thiru <at> cptech.org>
To: ip-health <at> lists.essential.org, a2k <at> lists.essential.org

-----------------------------------------

http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/archives/003744.php

    WIPO: Trying to Bury the Development Agenda

    June 27, 2005

The second meeting on the WIPO Development Agenda
<http://www.eff.org/IP/WIPO/dev_agenda/> is now finished, and the
opponents of reform have made their strategy clear: tie-up the
meeting in procedural posturing to forestall substantive debate
on the real issues. Even as the Friends of Development
<http://www.wipo.org/edocs/mdocs/mdocs/en/iim_1/iim_1_4.pdf>
tried to discuss unassailable reforms like an ethics code for
WIPO, the proceedings kept getting sidetracked by countries that
wanted to cut off debate.

[We've got deeper analysis and the whole day's notes after the
jump.]

The United Kingdom - along with the U.S., Canada, Australia,
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Seth Johnson | 5 Jul 2005 20:08
Picon

EU Votes Tomorrow on Right to Express Logic Freely in Code


This is such a critical vote, and while it's still not clear
whether the set of amendments put forth by Rocard, designed to
assure a clear exclusion of software from patentability, will
garner the necessary 367 votes, it is nevertheless very clear
that the pro-software patent forces are running scared.  They are
also showing their true colors in advance of the vote in a way
that they didn't for the First Reading of September 2003.

If we win the Second Reading vote, the EU Commission and Council
evidently plan to drop the Directive entirely.  In my estimation,
the effort will still be profoundly successful.  The tricks have
been played out, and the nature of the issue is now much more
clearly understood.  Our forces will be marshalled, as well, and
we'll likely see more and more sideliners come out with strong
support.  As that happens, we'll also see the issue discussed in
its own nature, rather than according to blind, jingoistic
appeals to property rights to information as the supposed source
of innovation.

If they keep the Directive, then the EPO's practice will
naturally undergo reconsideration, despite their not presently
being subject to effective EU oversight.  If they don't keep the
Directive, then a successful Second Reading vote will still stand
as a strong historical register.

If we don't win this Second Reading vote, then we will finally
taste the effects of software patents, as the EU's explicit
exclusion of software from patentability is basically the only
reason why we have not seen more software patent cases
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Seth Johnson | 6 Jul 2005 01:52
Picon

Re: EU Votes Tomorrow on Right to Express Logic Freely in Code


The latest seems to be that they will vote to throw the Directive
out.  I, who always look for the moment of insight and awareness,
when everything turns around in an instant, wonder whether
somebody could make this the moment that a clear pitch would
bring all parties around.  I mean, it's pretty plain that they're
backing down simply because Rocard's message has such simple
clarity at this point and because the fact that the pro-sw-patent
folks have been both deceived and deceptive is also clear.  It
basically comes down to: The pro-sw-patent folks have really been
trying to codify the EPO case law rather than having an honest
discussion of the matter on its own terms.  At that point it
becomes a simple question for the MEPs of who's really staking
out an honest and forthright position here?

A pitch that doesn't put across the above message, but plays on
the situation instead, saying in practical and empathetic terms
what the confusion really is, might convert the situation (I
would summarize it as the pro-sw-patent folks holding onto the
notion that there is abstraction in patents; but failing to
recognize that pure abstraction at the level of logic, math and
geometry is just not the same -- but there could be other
somewhat empathetic couchings that might also fly).  I really
wish we could have this issue confronted forthrightly, and
suddenly begin a new march in the dazzling light of reason once
again.  To seize victory out of the situation would be so
*helpful* to us.  But of course, according to reasonable
calculus, that's not to be advised.  A real statesperson might
pull it off, but they'd really need to have an assured way to
gauge the MEPs' response.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Seth Johnson | 6 Jul 2005 13:11
Picon

FSFE: No Software Patents in Europe, requests EPO Review Instrument


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [FSFE PR][EN] Free Software Foundation Europe: No
software patentsin Europe, requests EPO review instrument
Date: Wed, 06 Jul 2005 12:41:32 퍭
From: "Free Software Foundation Europe" <press <at> fsfeurope.org>
To: press-release <at> fsfeurope.org

Free Software Foundation Europe:

  No software patents in Europe, requests EPO review instrument

After years of struggle, the European Parliament finally rejected
the software patent directive with 648 of 680 votes: A strong
signal against patents on software logic, a sign of lost faith in
the European Union and a clear request for the European Patent
Office (EPO) to change its policy: the EPO must stop issuing
software patents today.

"This outcome does not affect patents on high-tech inventions in
any way," explains Stefano Maffulli, Italian representative of
FSFE: "High-tech innovation has always been patentable, and even
if the directive had been passed with all proposed amendmends, it
would have remained patentable. It is important to point this out
because the proponents of software logic patents have tried to
confuse people about high-tech inventions being subject of this
directive."

FSFE's president, Georg Greve adds: "The parliament understood
this when it amended the directive in the first reading to keep
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Seth Johnson | 6 Jul 2005 13:13
Picon

FFII: EP Rejects Software Patent Directive, 648 to 14, 18 abstentions


PRESS RELEASE FFII -- [ Europe / economy / ICT ]

================================================================================
Parliament says No to Software Patents
================================================================================

Strasbourg, 6 July 2005 -- The European Parliament today decided
by a margin of 648 votes to 14, with 18 absentions, to _reject_
the directive "on the patentability of computer implemented
inventions", also known as the software patent directive.

This rejection was the logical answer to the Commission's refusal
to restart the legislative process in February and the Council's
unwillingness to take the will of the European Parliament and
national parliaments into account.  The FFII congratulates the
European Parliament on its clear "No" to bad legislative
proposals and procedures.

This is a great victory for those who have campaigned to ensure
that European innovation and competitiveness is protected from
monopolisation of software functionalities and business methods.
It marks the end of an attempt by the European Commission and
governmental patent officials to impose detrimental and legally
questionable practises of the European Patent Office (EPO) on the
member states.  However the questions created by this practise
remain unsolved.  FFII believes that the Parliament's work, in
particular the 21 cross-party compromise amendments, can provide
a good basis on which future solutions, both at the national and
European level, can build.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Seth Johnson | 14 Jul 2005 23:16
Picon

IPJ: Support Development Agenda at WIPO


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Request for support for reform at WIPO - Group NGO stmt
supportingDevelopment Agenda available for sign-on
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2005 12:06:08 -0700
From: Robin Gross <robin <at> ipjustice.org>
To: bxl <at> ffii.org

Dear colleagues,

Apologies for the cross-posting, but ....

Below is a statement for publication at next week's WIPO
Development Agenda Meeting.  Civil society groups are invited to
sign-on to the statement to show support for reform at WIPO, and
specifically, support for the Friends of Development proposal.

Background info on the WIPO Development Agenda meeting is posted
at:
  http://www.ipjustice.org/WIPO/WIPO_DA.shtml

If your NGO would like to sign-on in support of this statement,
please send me an email (robin <at> ipjustice.org) and indicate the
NGO name and country in which your NGO is based.

Please send your support for this statement by TUESDAY 19 JULY so
we can publish this on Wednesday JULY 20th at the beginning of
3rd IIM of the Development Agenda meeting at WIPO.

And please distribute this statement as widely as possible and
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Seth Johnson | 21 Jul 2005 20:00
Picon

Harry Potter and the Right to Read


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [IP] Harry Potter and the Right to Read
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2005 13:29:36 -0400
From: "David Farber" <dave <at> farber.net>
Reply-To: dave <at> farber.net
To: <ip <at> v2.listbox.com>

-----Original Message-----
From: "Michael Geist"<mgeist <at> pobox.com>
Sent: 21/07/05 12:27:04 PM
To: "dave <at> farber.net"<dave <at> farber.net>
Subject: Harry Potter and the Right to Read

Dave,

Of possible interest -- my latest Law Bytes column (posted
below)  answers the question of what Harry Potter, Beethoven, the
Internet  Archive and an 1800s painter named Paul Kane have in
common.  It  focuses on the damage that can occur when copyright
law goes awry  including the disturbing Harry Potter court order
which barred  Canadians from reading the latest Harry Potter book
before its  authorized release.  The order was used to compel
innocent purchasers  to return the book and to bar the Globe and
Mail from publishing its  book review since the publisher argued
that the review was based on  an "unlawful reading." 

A second story is less known: the attempt by a Manitoba school 
district to obtain the rights to use a photography of Paul Kane,
a  well-known Canadian painter during the 1800s.  The National
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Seth Johnson | 29 Jul 2005 13:17
Picon

The Commons Doesn't Have a Business Plan


(If you think about it, this is a very, very good line to be
propagating right now.  I think we're at the point where straight
up stating the nature of the beast, rather than framing things in
other terms for the sake of seeking relevance, is now much more
viable.  Specifically, the inroads at WIPO and re software
patents in Europe, have established historical registers that we
can point to as signaling as new phase, one in which "the problem
in general" is now being acknowledged in official venues, to
whatever extent.  But of course, I have always pushed the
"Information Is Free, not that it Wants to be Free" line, simply
as a matter of taking the long view.  -- Seth)

> http://www.onlamp.com/pub/a/onlamp/2005/07/28/commons.html

The Commons Doesn't Have a Business Plan

by Andy Oram
07/28/2005

The "commons" is the part of the economy that doesn't have a 
business plan yet.

Once somebody can figure out how to turn a social trend into  a
moneymaking operation, he or she can raise capital, get a 
product on the shelves, and collect revenue. A business plan 
certainly isn't child's play, but at least there's a process  in
place.

It's during that breathless span of time before the business
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |

Gmane