1 / 11

WIPO Conference on Building Partnerships for Mobilizing Resources for Development Geneva, November 5 and 6, 2009

WIPO Conference on Building Partnerships for Mobilizing Resources for Development Geneva, November 5 and 6, 2009 The cross-cutting role of IP for Development – the Conudrum WIPO Secretariat. The conudrum: how can we put IP at the service of economic and social development?.

yitta
Download Presentation

WIPO Conference on Building Partnerships for Mobilizing Resources for Development Geneva, November 5 and 6, 2009

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. WIPO Conference on Building Partnerships for Mobilizing Resources for Development Geneva, November 5 and 6, 2009 The cross-cutting role of IP for Development – the Conudrum WIPO Secretariat

  2. The conudrum: how can we put IP at the service of economic and social development?

  3. The more protection the better? For example, extending the terms of green-technology patents; extending patent protection to scientific discoveries; accelerating the procurement of certain patents (in practice, giving those patents an extended lifetime); adopting new social justifications for exclusivity (exclusivity to be grounded on a “first come first serve” approach rather than a “first to invent [to file] first serve”; or exclusivity justified by investment rather than by invention)

  4. This is not necessarily true, because more protection means that a bigger part of the social value of intangible assets would be captured by individuals. It also means to extend proprietary rights to assets that are not differentiating. An imbalance between individual capture and social output is a waste of social resources. Ultimately, it challenges the value of IP protection: Excessive IP turns out to be less IP.

  5. The less protection the better? For example, banning patents for certain technologies in LDCs; putting certain technologies under blanket compulsory licensing systems.

  6. This is not necessarily true either. Reducing protection means that society captures more of the social value and the inventor captures less, leading the latter to seek better commercial opportunies elsewhere.

  7. The better protection the better? This seems to be, definitely, the answer. But...

  8. ...what is better protection? Better protection is protection that operates “to the mutual advantage of producers and users of technological knowledge and in a manner conducive to social and economic welfare, and to a balance of rights and obligations.” (Article 7 of the TRIPS Agreement).

  9. If we know what better protection is, why we do not implement it? The reason is that we cannot pre-determine the level at which IP operates to the mutual advantage of the individual and the collectivty. As it happens with all other branches of Law, the solution(s) will be dynamic and will come on a basis of trial and error.

  10. This means that a balanced and efficient IP will be obtained only through constant assessment of its institutions and their impact. (This is, actually, the core value of the Development Agenda)

  11. Thank you.

More Related