The last bit of this message is the aspect of copyright based freedom
which concerns me.


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Andrew Rens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Oct 26, 2007 12:00 AM
Subject: [A2k] Development Agenda Regional Seminars: Cape Town
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
WIPO/DTI Cape Town Seminar 22-26 October 2007

The World Intellectual Property Organisation, and the South African
Department of Trade and Industry are holding a seminar entitled "WIPO
International Seminar on the Strategic Use of Intellectual Property for
Economic and Social Development" in Cape Town. The seminar started on 22
October and ends tomorrow 26 October.

The express purpose of the seminar is to discuss the Development Agenda, to
encourage regional co-ordination of development initiaves on intellectual
property issues. Most of the participants are country representatives,
veterans of Geneva, many from Africa, with a few from other regions (Ecuador
and Russia). Many of the South African participants represent the usual
array of interest groups, routinely advocating maximalist protection.

Strangely, the discourse has been dominated by protectionist language. The
idea that development for African countries is primarily addressing a lack
of capacity to imitate policies initiated in the developed world has been
thoroughly internalised. There are some voices calling for economic
research, so that intellectual property regimes may be evidence based. As a
whole however development appears to be associated with process, capacity
building, and networks without a substantial agenda for those processes,
capacity and network to pursue. The only non-process issue which have been
subject to any kind of indepth discussion are suggestions that traditional
knowledge and geographical indicators be used by developing countries to
secure knowledge for exploitation in a mirror image of the multi-national
corporations.

Limitations and Exceptions have received very little attention, until the
discussion of digital copyright on Thursday morning. However, except for the
presentations by Prof Coen Visser and Esme Du Plessis limitations and
exceptions are still characterised as marginal, rather than central to the
innovative and creative processes which Intellectual Property (ostensibly)
exists to enable.

There seems to be some danger of a collective failure of imagination,
failure to imagine how the existing rules might be re-written, failure to
imagine alternative incentive schemes, and failure to imagine a different
world.

Andrew Rens
Now blogging at www.aliquidnovi.org
_______________________________________________
A2k mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/a2k
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Reply via email to