ENB:09:65
[Next] .
[Previous] .
[Contents]
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS : (AGENDA ITEM 14)
Agenda Item 14 was treated as a cross-cutting issue, focusing on knowledge, innovations and practices of indigenous and local communities, as well as issues relevant to technology transfer. The Secretariat introduced background documentation (UNEP/CBD/COP/3/22 and 23) on intellectual property rights (IPR) in the COW on Friday, 8 November.
During discussion of this issue, the EU linked well-functioning IPR systems to CBD implementation. CÔTE D’IVOIRE, on behalf of the African Group, called for IPR for traditional knowledge and a legal mechanism on access. Echoing this, INDIA, BRAZIL, TANZANIA and MALAYSIA supported the recommendation for study on disclosure of origin in patent application policies. The US supported voluntary disclosure.
Several interventions highlighted the engagement of the CBD with other IPR processes. The G-77/CHINA and FRANCE called for collaboration with the World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO). MEXICO expressed concern over a WIPO proposal for copyrighting databases and urged an impact analysis.
NORWAY, NEW ZEALAND, AUSTRALIA and the G-77/CHINA agreed that the CBD should participate in the deliberations of the CTE. SWITZERLAND, FRANCE, the EU and the US advocated that the CBD apply for CTE observer status. BRAZIL suggested that the COP make proposals to the WTO to review TRIPs in 1999.
A drafting group on IPR, chaired by Diego Malpede (Argentina), considered such issues as: a reference to a WIPO proposal on copyright protection for databases; the relationship between the COP and the TRIPs; and the impact of IPR to genetically modified organisms (GMOs) on the CBD. The latter was deleted entirely.
The final decision (UNEP/CBD/COP/3/L.18) encourages communication on case studies on the impact of IPR on CBD objectives for dissemination through the CHM. These case studies could consider existing IPR systems in achieving CBD objectives, including technology transfer and benefit-sharing with indigenous and local communities, and consider the development of IPR, such as sui generis systems or alternative forms of protection, that are consistent with Parties’ international obligations.
The decision also: notes that the possible establishment of a new IPR regime for databases could have implications for scientific and technical cooperation and calls for a transparent evaluation of this possibility; requests the Executive Secretary to contact WIPO on capacity building for implementing CBD objectives; requests the Executive Secretary to transmit COP-3 decisions to the WTO and to undertake further cooperation and consultation, as appropriate; and requests that the Secretariat apply for observer status at the CTE. The decision notes mutual benefits of exchanging information on Article 16 of the CBD (technology transfer) with the TRIPs Council on Trade-Related IPR and recognizes the need to develop a common appreciation of the relationship between IPR, TRIPs and the CBD.