And now:Ish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

Date: Fri, 24 Sep 1999 16:00:24 +0800
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: GRAIN Los Banos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Mime-Version: 1.0

BIO-IPR docserver
________________________________________________________

TITLE: Biotechnology and intellectual property
AUTHOR: Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe
PUBLICATION: Recommendation 1425 (provisional edition)
DATE: 24 September 1999
SOURCE: Press Unit PACE
URL: http://stars.coe.fr/index_e.htm
NOTES: The recommendation below was adopted in plenary on 23 September 1999. 
The original proposal calling for this motion (Doc. 8459) as well as the 
committee opinion on it (Doc. 8532) can both be downloaded from the PACE 
website in English or French. 
A political organisation set up in 1949, the Council of Europe works to 
promote democracy and human rights continent-wide. It also develops common 
responses to social, cultural and legal challenges in its 41 member states.
________________________________________________________


Council of Europe
Parliamentary Assembly
Strasbourg, 24 September 1999

Provisional edition


BIOTECHNOLOGY AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY

Recommendation 1425 (1999) [*]

1. The Assembly recalls its Recommendation 1213 (1993) on developments in 
biotechnology and the consequences for agriculture.

2. It is aware that the patent system, as a system for the protection of 
intellectual property, is an integral part of market economy and therefore 
can be a driving force for innovation in many technological questions.

3. A guideline on patents legislation should help to develop criteria for 
granting patents continuously according to technological progress in favour 
of both the interests of the claiming party, as well as the interests of the 
public in regard to public order, morality and general aspects of state 
economy.

4. Living organisms are able to reproduce themselves even if they are 
patented and in view of this special quality of living organisms, the scope 
of a patent is difficult to define, which makes it nearly impossible to find 
a balance between private and public interests.

5. The Assembly deems it necessary to oblige scientists, as well as 
scientific research and development units working in the field of 
biotechnology, to conform with the Convention on Biological Diversity (Rio 
de Janeiro, 1992). guaranteeing both the principle of free scientific 
approach to worldwide genetic resources and the interests of developing 
countries in sharing the benefits of technological progress.

6. However, it is aware that for ethical reasons there are also severe 
reservations against patenting living organisms.

7. It considers that the issue of patenting living organisms should comply 
with the provisions of the Convention on Biological Diversity, and that 
greater account should be taken of the interests of developing countries in 
the Agreement on TradeRelated Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS 
Agreement) of the World Trade Organisation; it asks the World Trade 
Organisation to comply with the Convention on Biological Diversity.

8. The Assembly has taken note that Directive 98/44/EEC on the legal 
protection of biotechnological inventions of 6 July 1998 (BioPatenting 
Directive of the European Community) was challenged at the European Court of 
Justice by the governments of the Netherlands and Italy, and that Norway is 
considering not implementing it.

9. The Assembly considers that monopolies granted by patent authorities may 
undermine the value of regional and worldwide genetic resources and of 
traditional knowledge in those countries that provide access to the these 
resources.

10. It considers that the aim of sharing the benefits from the utilisation 
of genetic resources on this broader view does not necessarily require 
patentholding but requires a balanced system for protecting both 
intellectual property and the "common heritage of mankind".

11. It also considers that the many outstanding questions regarding the 
patentability and the scope of protection of patents an living organisms in 
the agrofood sector must be solved swiftly taking into account all interests 
concerned, not least those of farmers and developing countries.

12. The Assembly therefore believes that neither plant, animal nor human 
derived genes, cells, tissues or organs can be considered as inventions nor 
be subject to monopolies granted by patents,

13. For these reasons, the Assembly recommends that the Committee of 
Ministers, in cooperation with the European Union, the World Intellectual 
Property Organization, the Food and Agriculture Organization, the World 
Trade Organization, Unesco and in accordance with the Convention on 
Biological Diversity (CBD):


i. study in detail all aspects linked to the protection of intellectual 
property in biotechnological innovations with a view to further improving 
international legislation in this field;

ii. assess and review the effects of granting patents on a broad scope as 
regards the progress of research and development and the free market;

iii. develop a code of conduct for scientists and scientific units working 
in the field of biotechnology which guarantees both free scientific approach 
to worldwide genetic resources and benefitsharing with developing countries;

iv. discuss a suitable alternative system of protecting intellectual 
property in the field of biotechnology fitting the purposes of the CBD and 
meeting the needs of worldwide private as well as public interests;

v. encourage the ratification by those member states that have not yet done 
so of the 1963 Convention of the Council of Europe on the Unification of 
Certain Points of Substantive, Law on Patents for Invention, and envisage 
updating the Convention in the light of the conclusions of the report;

vi. consider the ethical aspects of the patentability of inventions 
involving biological, and in particular human material.


[*] Assembly debate on 20 September 1999 (25th Sitting). See Doc. 8459, 
report of the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development (rapporteur: Mr 
Wodarg) and Doc. 8532, opinion of the Committee on Legal Affairs and Human 
Rights (rapporteur: Mr Vishnyakov). Text adopted by the Assembly on 23 
September 1999 (30th Sitting).


_________________________________________________________
ABOUT GRAIN -- For general information about GRAIN, kindly visit our website 
http://www.grain.org or write us at <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. 

Reprinted under the Fair Use http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html doctrine 
of international copyright law.
            &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
           Tsonkwadiyonrat (We are ONE Spirit)
                      Unenh onhwa' Awayaton
                   http://www.tdi.net/ishgooda/       
            UPDATES: CAMP JUSTICE             
http://shell.webbernet.net/~ishgooda/oglala/
            &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
                              

Reply via email to