Podcasts about Wipo

The difference between a brilliant innovation and a costly lawsuit often comes down to one critical factor: understanding the legal landscape before you launch. Patents, market barriers, and licensing traps aren't just fine print—they're the playing field that determines which ideas succeed and which ones crash.In this eye-opening exploration of intellectual property strategy, we dive deep into landmark legal battles that have shaped how companies navigate innovation today. From Apple and Samsung's billion-dollar design war to pharmaceutical giants' strategic licensing deals, each story reveals crucial lessons on bringing ideas to market without stepping on legal landmines.We unpack how the "doctrine of equivalence" catches companies who think minor tweaks will avoid infringement, why China's strengthening patent enforcement demands specialized strategies, and how India's stance on pharmaceutical patents challenges traditional notions of innovation. Through cases like Halo Electronics and Global-Tech Appliances, we discover why willful blindness to patent rights can triple your damages and sink your business.But this isn't just about avoiding trouble—it's about finding opportunity. We introduce powerful tools from WIPO that democratize patent intelligence, helping innovators large and small identify paths forward. Whether you're sketching your first prototype or leading an R&D department, you'll gain practical insights on turning potential legal barriers into strategic bridges.The most valuable innovation skill isn't just creating something new—it's knowing how to bring that creation into the world strategically. Join us to discover why, in the words of our AI co-host Artemisa, "Ignorance isn't bliss, it's bankruptcy." Subscribe now and learn to map your innovation journey before taking the first step.Send us a text

In this episode of Sustainability Matters, we get into the numbers behind scholarly publishing. We unpack why publishing consumption patterns vary so widely across countries, how data can inform efforts around diversity, equity, and inclusion, and how it supports progress toward the UN Sustainable Development Goals. Finally, we explore the evolving role of artificial intelligence in shaping the future of data and sustainability in publishing.All this and more with Dr. Michiel Kolman and Rachel Martin, authors of the article “What Can Data Tell Us about Publishing? How data can potentially drive progress in sustainability” published in the Brill journal Logos.Host: Ramzi NasirGuests: Dr. Michiel Kolman and Rachel Martin

Has your creative work been secretly fed to AI systems without your knowledge or consent? Across the creative landscape, from journalism to literature to visual arts, professionals are discovering their life's work has been quietly scraped, processed, and monetized by tech companies building the next generation of AI tools.We pull back the curtain on what many are calling theft at an unprecedented scale. Meta's controversial harvesting of 81 terabytes from shadow libraries to train their Llama models. OpenAI and Microsoft facing lawsuits from major newspapers whose archives now power competing AI systems. The startling reality that creative works are being absorbed by machines programmed to mimic—and potentially replace—their human creators.The legal landscape is transforming in response, with dramatically different approaches emerging worldwide. The US Copyright Office questions whether AI training constitutes infringement while the UK proposes an opt-out system that artists condemn as a "default license to steal." Meanwhile, the EU demands transparency about training data, and Australia calls for stronger creator protections. As courts grow skeptical of expansive fair use claims, new models are taking shape: collective licensing systems, creator opt-in platforms, and calls for a global WIPO treaty to harmonize rights across borders.At its core, this isn't just about legal technicalities—it's about the future of human creativity itself. Can AI innovation flourish without erasing the value of human labor? The decisions we make today will determine whether copyright remains meaningful in a world where machines can copy everything. Join us as we navigate this critical intersection of innovation and authorship, and explore what a balanced future might look like—one where AI assists creators rather than replacing them. Subscribe now to stay informed as this pivotal battle for creative ownership unfolds.Send us a text

Speaker: Professor Margo Bagley, Emory University School of Law Abstract: 2024 was a year for multilateral IP like no other. WIPO Member states adopted two new treaties last year: the WIPO Treaty on IP, Genetic Resources and Associated Traditional Knowledge and the Riyadh Design Law Treaty. Both were groundbreaking in their mention of one or more of genetic resources, traditional knowledge, traditional cultural expressions, and indigenous peoples and local communities, none of which are standard IP topics and all of which have been controversial additions to the normative work at WIPO. Moreover, both treaties address disclosure of origin for one or more of these controversial areas, another first for a WIPO treaty. I will discuss how these two treaties came to fruition and their ramifications for future multilateral IP treaty-making.Biography: Margo A. Bagley is Asa Griggs Candler Professor of Law at Emory University School of Law. She returned to Emory in 2016 after ten years at the University of Virginia School of Law, where she held the Hardy Cross Dillard chair. She was the Hieken Visiting Professor in Patent Law at Harvard Law School in Fall 2022. Her scholarship focuses on comparative issues relating to patents and biotechnology, pharmaceuticals and access to medicines, and IP and social justice issues. Professor Bagley served on two National Academies Committees on IP matters, is a technical expert to the African Union in World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) matters, and has served as a consultant to several United Nations organizations. She has served as a US Department of Commerce Commercial Law Development Program advisor and currently serves as a member of the U.S. DARPA ELSI Team for the BRACE project. She is an elected member of the American Law Institute and a faculty lecturer with the Munich Intellectual Property Law Center at the Max Planck Institute in Germany, and also has taught patent related courses in China, Cuba, Israel, and Singapore. She has published numerous articles, book chapters, and monographs as well as two books with co-authors with a third on the way. She is registered to practice before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, practiced patent law with both Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, and Smith, Gambrell and Russell, and has been an expert witness in several patent cases. A chemical engineer by training, Professor Bagley worked in industry for several years before attending law school at Emory where she was a Woodruff Fellow. She is a co-inventor on patents on peanut butter and bedding technology. For more information see: https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/seminars-and-events/cipil-seminars

Speaker: Professor Margo Bagley, Emory University School of Law Abstract: 2024 was a year for multilateral IP like no other. WIPO Member states adopted two new treaties last year: the WIPO Treaty on IP, Genetic Resources and Associated Traditional Knowledge and the Riyadh Design Law Treaty. Both were groundbreaking in their mention of one or more of genetic resources, traditional knowledge, traditional cultural expressions, and indigenous peoples and local communities, none of which are standard IP topics and all of which have been controversial additions to the normative work at WIPO. Moreover, both treaties address disclosure of origin for one or more of these controversial areas, another first for a WIPO treaty. I will discuss how these two treaties came to fruition and their ramifications for future multilateral IP treaty-making.Biography: Margo A. Bagley is Asa Griggs Candler Professor of Law at Emory University School of Law. She returned to Emory in 2016 after ten years at the University of Virginia School of Law, where she held the Hardy Cross Dillard chair. She was the Hieken Visiting Professor in Patent Law at Harvard Law School in Fall 2022. Her scholarship focuses on comparative issues relating to patents and biotechnology, pharmaceuticals and access to medicines, and IP and social justice issues. Professor Bagley served on two National Academies Committees on IP matters, is a technical expert to the African Union in World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) matters, and has served as a consultant to several United Nations organizations. She has served as a US Department of Commerce Commercial Law Development Program advisor and currently serves as a member of the U.S. DARPA ELSI Team for the BRACE project. She is an elected member of the American Law Institute and a faculty lecturer with the Munich Intellectual Property Law Center at the Max Planck Institute in Germany, and also has taught patent related courses in China, Cuba, Israel, and Singapore. She has published numerous articles, book chapters, and monographs as well as two books with co-authors with a third on the way. She is registered to practice before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, practiced patent law with both Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, and Smith, Gambrell and Russell, and has been an expert witness in several patent cases. A chemical engineer by training, Professor Bagley worked in industry for several years before attending law school at Emory where she was a Woodruff Fellow. She is a co-inventor on patents on peanut butter and bedding technology. For more information see: https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/seminars-and-events/cipil-seminars

Marc is an award-winning trademark attorney and experienced entrepreneur with over 20 years of launching and scaling businesses. He created the Power Trademark 360, a comprehensive framework that empowers entrepreneurs to leverage trademarks for business growth and sustainability. What are some emerging trends in intellectual property that entrepreneurs should be aware of? How do you see intellectual property intersecting with sustainability and social impact, particularly in the African market? What inspired you to develop the Power Trademark 360, and how does it benefit entrepreneurs? How can a strong IP strategy turn intangible assets into business growth drivers? What are the most common mistakes entrepreneurs make when it comes to protecting their intellectual property? Marc Luanghy Marc is an award-winning trademark attorney and experienced entrepreneur with over 20 years of launching and scaling businesses. Holding a Master's in Entrepreneurship from Cambridge University, he has worked across various industries, including tech, fashion, sports, and health, advising startups and SMEs on brand protection and growth. As a former consultant at WIPO, Marc brings deep expertise in intellectual property strategy, helping businesses avoid legal pitfalls and fortify their brand value. He created the Power Trademark 360, a comprehensive framework that empowers entrepreneurs to leverage trademarks for business growth and sustainability. Excellent Executive Coaching Podcast If you have enjoyed this episode, subscribe to our podcast on iTunes. We would love for you to leave a review. The EEC podcasts are sponsored by MKB Excellent Executive Coaching that helps you get from where you are to where you want to be with customized leadership and coaching development programs. MKB Excellent Executive Coaching offers leadership development programs to generate action, learning, and change that is aligned with your authentic self and values. Transform your dreams into reality and invest in yourself by scheduling a discovery session with Dr. Katrina Burrus, MCC to reach your goals. Your host is Dr. Katrina Burrus, MCC, founder and general manager of Excellent Executive Coaching a company that specializes in leadership development.

Last year, two new treaties were adopted by the WIPO, one relating to patents and the other design law, in a bid to increase protections for original and indigenous ideas. 

Hii leo jaridani tunakuletea mada kwakina inayotupeleka Havan Cuba ambapo mmoja wa walumbi wa lugha ya Kiswahili Jorum Nkumbi, ambaye pia ni mwandishi wa vitabu anayetumia sanaa ya uandishi wa vitabu kuitangaza lugha mama yake ya Kiswahili amezindua kitabu kipya hivi karibuni wakati wa kongamano la kimataifa la Kiswahili. Mengine tuliyokuandalia ni kama yafuatayo.Yerusalem Mashariki eneo la wapalestina linalokaliwa na Israeli ambako Mkuu wa Ofisi ya Umoja wa Mataifa ya kuratibu misaada ya dharura, OCHA, Tom Fletcher yuko ziarani na amepata shuhuda halisi za wanaokabiliwa na kufurushwa makwao. Mmoja wao ni Um Nasser ar Rajabi ambaye amemweleza kuwa Nimekuwa kwenye ndoa katika nyumba hii kwa miaka 50.Wataalamu wa Umoja wa Mataifa wamelezea wasiwasi wao mkubwa kuhusu mahitaji ya dharura ya ulinzi na mazingira magumu yanayokabili raia kwenye eneo la Mashariki mwa Jamhuri ya Kidemokrasia ya Congo, DRC lenye utajiri mkubwa wa madini, wakati huu uhasama ulioshika kasi tangu mwezi uliopita kati ya jeshi la serikali na waasi wa M23 wanaoungwa mkono na Rwanda umesababisha vifo vya watu 900, majeruhi zaidi ya 2000 na kufurusha watu 700,000 mjini Goma. Wametaka pande kinzani zizingatie sheria ya kimatiafa ya kibinadamu na zilinde raia wote.Shirika la Umoja wa Mataifa kuhusu Hakimiliki, WIPO hii leo limetoa ripoti mpya kuhusu mustakabali wa usafirishaji wa watu na bidhaa duniani ikimulika teksi za angani, magari yasiyokuwa na dereva pamoja na maroketi yanayoweza kutumika ten ana tena tofauti na sasa, likisema ndio majawabu ambayo wabunifu na wagunduzi wanahaha duniani kote ili kupunguza usafirishaji unaochafua mazingira.Na katika kujifunza lugha ya Kiswahili, mchambuzi wetu Dkt. Josephat Gitonga, kutoka Kenya ambaye ni mhadhiri katika Chuo Kikuu cha Nairobi kwenye kitivo cha tafsiri na ukalimani anatufafanulia maana ya methali “MTI WENYE MATUNDA NDIO HURUSHIWA MAWE”.Mwenyeji wako ni Anold Kayanda, karibu!  

SummaryIn this episode, Samar and Jamie discuss various resources for independent inventors. They highlight the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) website as a top resource, which provides information on patent basics, patent scams, and free services offered by the Patent Office. They also mention the Inventor Assistance Center and the Pro Bono Program, which are available through the USPTO. Other resources discussed include search tools like patents.google.com, PQ AI, Pantzilla, WIPO, and the European Patent Office. They also mention local inventor groups and inventor clubs, law schools and nonprofits that help inventors, and the book 'One Simple Idea' by Stephen Key as a great resource for patent licensing.TakeawaysThe USPTO website is a valuable resource for independent inventors. It provides information on patent basics, scams, and free services.Search tools like patents.google.com, PQ AI, Pantzilla, WIPO, and the European Patent Office can help with patent searches.Local inventor groups and clubs offer a supportive community and access to experienced inventors.Law schools and nonprofits can provide pro bono assistance to inventors.The book 'One Simple Idea' by Stephen Key is recommended for those interested in patent licensing.Chapters00:00 Introduction and Purpose of the Episode01:24 Top Resources for Independent Inventors05:37 Useful Patent Search Tools10:21 Joining Inventor Groups and Clubs13:39 Pro Bono Assistance from Law Schools and Nonprofits15:07 Recommended Book for Patent LicensingResourceshttps://www.uspto.gov/https://www.uspto.gov/learning-and-resources/inventors-entrepreneurs-resourceshttps://www.uspto.gov/learning-and-resources/official-gazette/official-gazette-patentshttps://www.uspto.gov/patents/basics/using-legal-services/pro-bono/patent-pro-bono-programhttps://patents.google.com/https://projectpq.ai/https://docs.ip-tools.org/patzilla/https://www.wipo.int/patentscope/en/https://www.epo.org/en/searching-for-patents/technical/espacenethttps://inventleader.org/inventor-groups/https://inventright.com/books/one-simple-idea/

Aksel Mash Part VII Седьмой выпуск серии мешапов от AKSEL. Теперь в свободном доступе. uniqe, nkeeei, ARTEM SHILOVETS, Wipo x Lady Gaga - ГЛАМУР (AKSEL Blend) (ВСЕ ТРЕКИ У МЕНЯ В ТЕЛЕГРАММ-КАНАЛЕ) t.me/akmpool здесь делюсь музыкой

VLOG Dec 5 Diddy dismissal for MDC raid? Book https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0DHP7YF19Daniel Penny jury Day 3, book https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0DNXVK8JCCuomo seeks gag order re taxpayer funded defense; Trump's DEA, EDNY, Harvey Weinstein echo - & WIPO in corrupt UN https://www.innercitypress.com/ungate1fwipoicp120424.html

Kết quả bầu cử Quốc Hội Nhật Bản ngày 28/10/2024 gây thêm hoang mang cho các nhà đầu tư vào lúc cuộc đối đầu giữa Hoa Kỳ và Trung Quốc đã đẩy Tokyo vào thế kẹt giữa một bên là đồng minh quân sự và bên kia nền kinh tế « gắn kết » chặt chẽ nhất với Nhật Bản. Bài toán càng thêm phức tạp khi mà Tokyo phải đối mặt với nhiều thách thức về mặt xã hội để vẫn là nền kinh tế thứ 3 toàn cầu, để vẫn tiên phong về công nghệ mới. Sau 15 năm liên tục cầm quyền, đảng Dân Chủ Tự Do LDP cánh hữu với lập trường bảo thủ mất đa số ở Quốc Hội. Thủ tướng Shigeru Ishiba mới nhậm chức hôm 01/10/2024 có hai giải pháp : hoặc là thành lập một chính phủ liên minh với đa số rất sít sao và rất dễ bị bất tín nhiệm, hoặc phải từ chức. Ở góc đài bên kia, đảng Dân Chủ Lập Hiến CDP cánh trung tả về đầu với 148 dân biểu nhưng không hội đủ đa số tuyệt đối 233 ghế và cũng không dễ thành lập chính phủ liên minh thay thế nội các Ishiba.Yếu tố chính trị này bất lợi cho kinh tế Nhật Bản vào lúc nền kinh tế lớn thứ nhì tại châu Á mới vừa phục hồi. Trả lời đài RFI tiếng Việt, giáo sư Brieuc Monfort, giảng dậy tại đại học Sophia -Tokyo và hiện là khách mời của Quỹ Nghiên Cứu Pháp-Nhật, trường Cao Đẳng Khoa Học Xã Hội EHESS Paris phác họa về toàn cảnh kinh tế Nhật Bản hiện nay :Brieuc Monfort : « Nhìn chung, kinh tế Nhật Bản còn chưa vững chắc lắm nhưng đã có nhiều tiến bộ trong ba năm từ 2021 đến 2024 dưới thời thủ tướng Fumio Kishida. Đấy cũng là thời điểm sau đại dịch Covid và trung bình, GDP tăng khoảng 1,2 % một năm. Nợ công bắt đầu giảm và tỷ lệ thất nghiệp hiện ở mức 2,5 % tức là mức thấp chưa từng thấy. Bên cạnh những chỉ số khả quan đó thì như đã biết trong một thời gian dài, Nhật Bản phải đối mặt với hiện tượng giảm phát. Cố thủ tướng Shinzo Abe đã bắt đầu lật ngược tình thế, đẩy lạm phát lên được đến 1 %. Dưới chính quyền Kishida, Nhật Bản hoàn toàn thoát khỏi giảm phát và khi ông rời phủ thủ tướng, thì lạm phát ở Nhật Bản là 3 %. Tuy nhiên một phần dân chúng bị thiệt thòi vì lương của họ không tăng nhanh như vậy. Thêm vào đó là hiện tượng đồng yen bị mất giá khiến đời sống càng thêm đắt đỏ. Trong khi đó một số khó khăn trong giai đoạn Nhật Bản phải đối mặt với đại dịch Covid vẫn chưa hoàn toàn được khắc phục ». Tác động kép đè nặng lên sức mua của người dân Theo giới quan sát, đảng cầm quyền LDP đã bị cử tri trừng phạt qua lá phiếu lần này, chủ yếu do những tai tiếng tham nhũng trong bối cảnh mãi lực của người dân sụt giảm dưới tác động kép của lạm phát và nhất là hiện tượng đồng yen trượt giá so với đô la Mỹ. Brieuc Monfort : « Trong năm nay tỷ giá của đồng yen Nhật Bản trồi sụt thất thường. Đầu năm, 140 yen đổi lấy 1 đô la Mỹ nhưng đến tháng 7 vừa qua thì phải cần đến 160 yen mới mua được 1 đô la. Thế rồi chúng ta đang trở lại với tỷ giá hối đoái 140-150 yen ăn 1 đô la như hồi đầu năm. Đơn vị tiền tệ của Nhật bị mất giá do lãi suất ngân hàng của Nhật rất thấp so với tại châu Âu và Hoa Kỳ. Nhưng trong tháng 3/2024 và tháng 7/2024, Ngân Hàng Trung Ương tăng lãi suất chỉ đạo trở lại. Dù vậy, lãi suất ngân hàng ở Nhật vẫn thấp hơn so với ở các nơi khác, cho nên các nhà đầu tư Nhật Bản và nước ngoài rút vốn khỏi xứ hoa anh đào, để mua đô la và euro, ký gửi vào các ngân hàng ở Mỹ và châu Âu để kiếm lãi nhiều hơn. Một khi có lãi, họ đem euro và đôla đổi trở lại sang đồng yen và do tiền tệ của Nhật bị mất giá, các nhà đầu tư này lại càng lãi nhiều hơn nữa. Đó là hiện tượng đầu cơ carry trade - giao dịch chênh lệch lãi suất. Hiện tượng này càng làm suy yếu đồng yen ».Trên nguyên tắc một đồng yen mất giá có lợi cho các nhà sản xuất xứ hoa anh đào bởi Nhật Bản là một quốc gia xuất khẩu công nghiệp - đặc biệt là trong lĩnh vực hàng cao cấp, nhưng nguy hiểm đối với đảng cầm quyền trong thời gian gần đây, theo giới sư Monfort, là ở chỗ công luận Nhật « khó thở » vì những tai tiếng tham nhũng. Hai ẩn số lớn : Trung Quốc và Hoa Kỳ  Bất ổn chính trị từ sau cuộc bầu cử lần này càng gây thêm lo ngại cho các doanh nghiệp Nhật Bản và các nhà đầu tư nước ngoài. Nhưng đây chỉ là một thách thức mới vào lúc mà Nhật Bản bị xem là quốc gia chịu áp lực lớn nhất từ cuộc đọ sức giữa hai nền kinh tế và siêu cường thế giới là Hoa Kỳ và Trung Quốc. Cuộc tranh hùng giữa Washington và Bắc Kinh khuấy động tình hình tại châu Á Thái Bình Dương với hai điểm nhậy cảm nhất hiện tại là Biển Đông và eo biển Đài Loan. Cuối tháng 9/2024 lần đầu tiên một tàu chiến Nhật Bản đi qua eo biển Đài Loan, nơi mà theo thẩm định của hãng tin Mỹ Bloomberg « gần 50 % trong số các tàu chở hàng của thế giới phải đi qua ; 88 % giao thương đường biển cũng phải trung chuyển qua eo biển Đài Loan » vào lúc Bắc Kinh luôn xem việc thống nhất Đài Loan là một mục tiêu phải đạt được.Đài Loan cũng là nguồn cung cấp chính trên thế giới chip điện tử tân tiến nhất, một tử huyệt của ngành công nghiệp Nhật Bản. Giáo sư Brieuc Monfort nhấn mạnh, hai câu hỏi lớn đang đặt ra tại Tokyo hiện nay là kịch bản nào trong trường hợp Trung Quốc đưa quân xâm chiếm Đài Loan và Mỹ cần bao nhiêu thời gian để can thiệp.Brieuc Monfort : « Nhật Bản và Trung Quốc là hai nền kinh tế có những mối liên hệ chặt chẽ. Ngay sau khi nhậm chức thủ tướng hôm mồng 01/10 Shigeru Ishiba đã lập tức điện đàm với chủ tịch Trung Quốc Tập Cận Bình và đôi bên nhấn mạnh đến các mục tiêu tăng cường hợp tác, duy trì ổn định trong khu vực… Trung Quốc là đối tác thương mại lớn nhất của Nhật Bản ; 20 % xuất và nhập của Nhật là để hướng sang thị trường Trung Quốc. Ngoài ra Tokyo còn là bên tham gia Hiệp Định Đối Tác Kinh Tế Toàn Diện Khu Vực -RCEP, cùng với Trung Quốc, Hàn Quốc, Úc, New Zealand và khối ASEAN… Tầm ảnh hưởng của hiệp định này có thể chỉ giới hạn nhưng điều đó thể hiện quyết tâm của Nhật hội nhập vào mạng lưới thương mại mà ở đó Bắc Kinh cũng hiện diện. Trong điều kiện đó, nếu có xảy ra xung đột thì bên nào cũng sẽ phải trả giá đắt ».Như phần còn lại trên thế giới,  Tokyo cũng rất hồi hộp chờ đợi kết quả bầu cử tổng thống Hoa Kỳ ngày 05/11/2024 khi biết rằng 55.000 lính Mỹ đang đồn trú trên lãnh thổ Nhật Bản và ứng cử viên của bên đảng Cộng Hòa từng đem cả vế an ninh ra để mặc cả với các đồng minh quân sự thân thiết nhất của Washington. Đó là lý do giải thích vì sao, Tokyo không ngừng tăng ngân sách quốc phòng.  Nguy cơ bị tụt hậu, nỗi ám ảnh của Nhật Bên cạnh những mối lo ngại vừa nêu, một trong những điểm cơ bản khác nữa là Nhật Bản có nguy cơ bị mất ngôi vị hạng ba kinh tế toàn cầu vì hai lý do : viễn cảnh mất 30 triệu người lao động trong 25 năm sắp tới và bị tụt hậu trong lĩnh vực công nghệ số so với hai đại cường hiện nay là Mỹ và Trung Quốc. Vào lúc mà Trung Quốc đang vươn lên như một cường quốc công nghệ của thế kỷ 21 đủ sức để thách thức Hoa Kỳ thì liệu rằng Nhật Bản vẫn là một ngọn hải đăng trong thế giới công nghệ ? Với 40 % dân số trên 65 tuổi trong tương lai không xa, Nhật Bản liệu có thể tiếp tục dẫn dầu cuộc đua để cho ra đời những phát minh mới hay sẽ bị Mỹ và Trung Quốc đã đành, mà cả Hàn Quốc và Ấn Độ cùng qua mặt ?Brieuc Monfort : « Nhật Bản bị chậm trễ so với nhiều quốc gia khác trong lĩnh vực phát triển công nghệ kỹ thuật số. Tuy nhiên, nói như thế cũng hơi bất công, bởi vì tuy không có những công ty khởi nghiệp, không có thung lũng công nghệ Silicon như của Mỹ nhưng Tokyo có một chính sách phát huy những công nghệ mới rất riêng biệt. Hơn thế nữa, Nhật Bản đẩy mạnh một số công nghệ mũi nhọn ít được phổ biến trong đại chúng. Về hiện tượng dân số bị lão hóa, thì đúng là từ nay đến ngưỡng 2050 thị trường lao động Nhật Bản sẽ mất đi thêm khoảng 30 triệu người ; tỷ lệ trên 65 tuổi trong dân số đang từ 30 % sẽ bị đẩy lên tới gần 40 % nhưng cùng lúc các chính quyền liên tiếp đã có một sự chuẩn bị dài hơi và đã có rất nhiều tiến bộ để bù đắp lại nhược điểm này ». Vị trí nào trong cuộc chiến công nghệ và thương mại Mỹ-Trung ? Theo báo cáo gần đây nhất của Tổ Chức Sở Hữu Trí Tuệ Thế Giới WIPO, Trung Quốc và Mỹ là hai quốc gia đang dẫn đầu về phát triển trí tuệ nhân tạo, Nhật Bản đứng hạng 4, sau Hàn Quốc và chỉ hơn có Ấn Độ trong nhóm « Top Five ». Bên cạnh đó công nghệ tiên tiến của Nhật Bản lệ thuộc một phần lớn vào chip điện tử do Đài Loan sản xuất, vào kim loại hiếm mà đến nay Trung Quốc vẫn là nguồn cung cấp số 1 trên thế giới, chiếm từ 80 và có khi là đến hơn 95 % thị phần toàn cầu. Như giáo sư Monfort vừa nói 20 % xuất khẩu và nhập khẩu của Nhật Bản tùy thuộc vào một khách hàng duy nhất là Trung Quốc. Năm 2022, chỉ riêng các khoản giao dịch trên mạng internet, khách hàng Trung Quốc mua vào gần 14,5 tỷ đô la hàng made in Japan.Chiến lược bành trướng của Bắc Kinh ở Biển Đông, Hoa Đông và eo biển Đài Loan và nhất là cuộc cuộc tranh hùng giữa Hoa Kỳ và Trung Quốc trong nhiều lĩnh vực, từ quân sự, ngoại giao đến kinh tế và công nghệ là một yếu tố bất lợi cho Nhật. Những yếu tố này góp phần tăng tốc chính sách « tách rời khỏi Trung Quốc » của Tokyo : Sau tập đoàn Mitsubishi Motors đến lượt hãng xe Honda thông báo giảm nhân sự tại các nhà máy ở Hoa Lục.Năm 2020 rồi 2022 bộ Kinh Tế và Thương Mại, Công Nghiệp Nhật Bản đã có hẳn một chính sách hỗ trợ doanh nghiệp dời cơ sở khỏi Trung Quốc sang Đông Nam Á hay trở về nguyên quán. Nghịch lý ở đây là dù rất gắn kết và phụ thuộc vào lẫn nhau, quan hệ giữa Tokyo và Bắc Kinh thường xuyên căng thẳng vì những hồ sơ thương mại và công nghệ.   

Speaker: Professor Ruth Okediji, Jeremiah Smith Jr., Professor of Law, Harvard Law School and Co-Director of the Berkman Klein CenterAbstract: The conclusion of the Agreement on Trade Related Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) in 1994 sparked a quiet revolution in the global IP system by directing unprecedented scrutiny to the maldistribution of innovation benefits among countries and communities, including Indigenous Peoples' traditional knowledge. The unauthorized access, use, and commercialization of biological resources raised specific questions about the malleability of acquisitive processes for patents, designs, and trademarks, and galvanized soft and hard law instruments recognizing interests in traditional knowledge and genetic resources that are in tension with dominant IP justifications. This lecture examines the recently concluded WIPO genetic resources treaty - the first formal attempt to overlay Indigenous people's concerns on the system of global IP rights and administration. The lecture will explore prospects for structural change in IP governance based on the treaty's design and highlight its implications for IP harmonization that differ starkly from the vision codified in the TRIPS Agreement. Those implications threaten prospects for the equitable allocation of benefits between Indigenous People's knowledge and other stakeholders in the international IP regime.Biography: Ruth L. Okediji is the Jeremiah Smith. Jr, Professor of Law at Harvard Law School and Co-Director of the Berkman Klein Center. A renowned scholar in international intellectual property (IP) law and a foremost authority on the role of intellectual property in social and economic development, Professor Okediji has advised inter-governmental organizations, regional economic communities, and national governments on a range of matters related to technology, innovation policy, and development. Her widely cited scholarship on IP and development has influenced government policies in sub-Saharan Africa, the Caribbean, Latin America, and South America. Her ideas have helped shape national strategies for the implementation of the WTO's Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS Agreement). She works closely with several United Nations agencies, research centers, and international organizations on the human development effects of international IP policy, including access to knowledge, access to essential medicines and issues related to indigenous innovation systems.For more information see:https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/seminars-and-events/cipil-seminarsThis entry provides an audio source for iTunes.

Speaker: Professor Ruth Okediji, Jeremiah Smith Jr., Professor of Law, Harvard Law School and Co-Director of the Berkman Klein CenterAbstract: The conclusion of the Agreement on Trade Related Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) in 1994 sparked a quiet revolution in the global IP system by directing unprecedented scrutiny to the maldistribution of innovation benefits among countries and communities, including Indigenous Peoples' traditional knowledge. The unauthorized access, use, and commercialization of biological resources raised specific questions about the malleability of acquisitive processes for patents, designs, and trademarks, and galvanized soft and hard law instruments recognizing interests in traditional knowledge and genetic resources that are in tension with dominant IP justifications. This lecture examines the recently concluded WIPO genetic resources treaty - the first formal attempt to overlay Indigenous people's concerns on the system of global IP rights and administration. The lecture will explore prospects for structural change in IP governance based on the treaty's design and highlight its implications for IP harmonization that differ starkly from the vision codified in the TRIPS Agreement. Those implications threaten prospects for the equitable allocation of benefits between Indigenous People's knowledge and other stakeholders in the international IP regime.Biography: Ruth L. Okediji is the Jeremiah Smith. Jr, Professor of Law at Harvard Law School and Co-Director of the Berkman Klein Center. A renowned scholar in international intellectual property (IP) law and a foremost authority on the role of intellectual property in social and economic development, Professor Okediji has advised inter-governmental organizations, regional economic communities, and national governments on a range of matters related to technology, innovation policy, and development. Her widely cited scholarship on IP and development has influenced government policies in sub-Saharan Africa, the Caribbean, Latin America, and South America. Her ideas have helped shape national strategies for the implementation of the WTO's Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS Agreement). She works closely with several United Nations agencies, research centers, and international organizations on the human development effects of international IP policy, including access to knowledge, access to essential medicines and issues related to indigenous innovation systems.For more information see:https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/seminars-and-events/cipil-seminarsThis entry provides an audio source for iTunes.

空間やシチュエーションによりジェスチャーやアクションと手話を判別する要素も含まれ、ゲームの没入感を損なわない配慮も感じられます。

Tonight on The Bow,we talk about Innovation In Nigeria. The wealth of Nigerias creativity is shown in the innovative nature of young Nigerians. As we work towards achieving the UN SDGs,we must use intellectual property ,designs,ideas with full permission.Thank you to WIPO & the entire UN Nigeria. --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/the-bow/support

Join hosts J.D. Barker, Christine Daigle, Kevin Tumlinson, and Jena Brown as they discuss the week's entertainment news, including Random House Publishing Group acquiring Boom! Studios, WIPO launching a toolkit for authors and publishers, and TikTok's AI Chatbot called Genie. Then, stick around for a chat with Peter James! Peter James is a UK No.1 bestselling author, best known for his Detective Superintendent Roy Grace series, now a hit ITV drama starring John Simm as the troubled Brighton copper.  Much loved by crime and thriller fans for his fast-paced page-turners full of unexpected plot twists, sinister characters, and accurate portrayal of modern day policing, he has won over 40 awards for his work including the WHSmith Best Crime Author of All Time Award and Crime Writers' Association Diamond Dagger. In 2024, it was announced that he is the creator of Her Majesty Queen Camilla's favourite fictional detective.  To date, Peter has written an impressive total of 20 Sunday Times No. 1s, sold over 23 million copies worldwide and been translated into 38 languages. Her Majesty Queen Camilla has announced that Detective Superintendent Roy Grace is her favourite fictional detective. His books are also often adapted for the stage, with his six stage shows grossing over £17 million at the box office – the most recent being Wish You Were Dead. --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/writersink/support

VLOG July 15 Verdict day on Menendez and/or Guo? Book(s) ready https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0D7X51R2D Crypto: Binance Oct 7 suit, Tornado Cash Storm trial delayed. WIPO corruption scoop https://www.innercitypress.com/ungate1cwipoicp071524.html as UNSG @AntonioGuterres silent 16 hours on Butler PA shooting

I'm a bit biased but I've always found that global patent trends shows where any sort of technology is going. GenerativeAI is no different. Let's take a quick look at WIPO's 2024 GenAI report: https://www.wipo.int/web-publications/patent-landscape-report-generative-artificial-intelligence-genai/en/key-findings-and-insights.html#generativeai #genai #artificialintelligence #machinelearning ——————Follow me: https://www.instagram.com/wesjh_/X (fka Twitter): https://twitter.com/wesjh_  @chubbies, @chubbiesshortsSubscribe to the podcast!Apple: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/wes-henderson-podcast/id1570344602Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/2WPDYKlvgoYbZWLPMMSxHa?si=O3ZEC-lORS2FLAs0e_xx6wSupport the Channel with my affiliate links!https://havenathletic.com/WES-HENDERSON. Code WES-HENDERSONShop Lululemon: https://creatoriq.cc/3sKggwzhttps://www.patreon.com/weshendersonBest active eyewear and triathlon gear in the game! Visit ROKA! https://www.avantlink.com/click.php?tt=cl&merchant_id=cca349d7-b121-43c4-a8a4-56bc2f084318&website_id=04d4bb09-ade8-466e-8f50-d02b5ef94363&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.roka.com%2F Thorne: Most science backed, and clinically validated supplements on the market - Get 20% off your first order with my link: https://thor.ne/qOtrs My choice for CBD - cbdMD - 15% OFF - https://cbdmd.t7c9v8.net/ZkMEkBadass Coffee Company - NVR Rest - Use ‘WES' to get 10% off - https://nvrrest.com/Shop on Amazon! https://www.amazon.com/?&_encoding=UTF8&tag=wesjh-20&linkCode=ur2&linkId=70b15611910ce468775b76425895bbae&camp=1789&creative=9325To get your own Eight Sleep mattress or pod pro cover use the following link and code 'WES' for $100 Off at checkout: https://eight-sleep.ioym.net/qnANPb

In this insightful conversation, Dr Ricardo Baptista Leite, the CEO of HealthAI and Chair of the Unite Parliamentarians Network for Global Health, shares his remarkable journey and vision for leveraging AI to advance global health equity. From his early passion for public service to his roles in parliament, medical practice, and leading initiatives, Dr Leite discusses the inflection points that shaped his career. He delves into the work of HealthAI, a global agency focused on responsible AI in healthcare, and the Unite network, which unites parliamentarians worldwide to promote science-based policymaking. Dr Leite also highlights the AI for Good Global Initiative, a collaborative effort between the WHO, ITU, and WIPO, emphasizing the importance of an inclusive, global approach to AI regulations and fostering innovation while ensuring no one is left behind. 00:08- About Dr Ricardo Baptista Leite Ricardo has a marvelous background and contribution across many dimensions, particularly in healthcare.  He has worked in Parliament and as a physician as well.  He was part of the COVID emergency and worked in the COVID emergency rooms. --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/tbcy/support

In this episode of the Knobbe IP+ podcast, Knobbe Martens partner Mauricio Uribe speaks with World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Legal Officer Oscar Alberto Suárez Bohorquez on the recently announced WIPO Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) program for resolving disputes in video games and esports. Mauricio and Oscar discuss the ways in which WIPO's ADR program is tailored to the ever-evolving industries of video games and esports and how WIPO's new program is positioned to assist organizations throughout the world with regard to business and legal issues in the esports and gaming industries.   Listen to the episode here or read the full transcript here.

A new treaty was adopted by the World Intellectual Property Organization about using knowledge and resources from indigenous people. This may have an effect on drug patents, where the initial knowledge of the drug comes from indigenous cultures, and the plants they use to treat ailments.  Listen to this episode to learn more about the treaty and how it affects disclosure requirements when you file a patent application. ----------------- Connect with Adam Diament E-mail: adiament@nolanheimann.com Website: https://www.nolanheimann.com/legal-team/adam-diament Phone/Text: (424)281-0162 YouTube Channel LinkedIn  

Die Themen in den Wissensnachrichten: +++ Tiefseefische verwachsen nach der Paarung miteinander +++Ameisen lernen schneller mit Koffein +++ Exoplanet mit milden Temperaturen entdeckt +++**********Weiterführende Quellen zu dieser Folge:Synergistic Innovations Enabled the Radiation of Anglerfishes in the Deep Open Ocean. Current Biology, 23.05.2024Acute exposure to caffeine improves foraging in an invasive ant, iScience, 23.5. 2024Gliese 12 b, a temperate Earth-sized planet at 12 parsecs discovered with TESS and CHEOPS. Monthly Notes of the Royal Astronomical Society, 23.05.2024Diplomatic Conference to Conclude an International Legal Instrument Relating to Intellectual Property, Genetic Resources and Traditional Knowledge Associated with Genetic Resources, WIPO, 24.5. 2024Mass mortality of diadematoid sea urchins in the Red Sea and Western Indian Ocean, Current Biology, 23.5.2024Alle Quellen findet ihr hier.**********Ihr könnt uns auch auf diesen Kanälen folgen: Tiktok und Instagram.

Chapter 7 delves into the complexities of international intellectual property (IP) law, exploring the framework of international treaties and conventions, the challenges associated with cross-border enforcement, the roles played by global organizations like the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), and provides case studies that illustrate these dynamics in action. International Treaties and Conventions International treaties and conventions provide a foundational framework for the protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights across national borders. These agreements aim to harmonize the protection of intellectual property worldwide, making it easier for countries to cooperate and for rights holders to secure and enforce their rights internationally. Key International Treaties include: The Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property (1883): One of the first intellectual property treaties, establishing important principles such as national treatment, right of priority, and independence of patents granted in different countries. The Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works (1886): Establishes protections for creators of literary and artistic works, ensuring they receive rights in all signatory countries as they do in their own. The Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) (1970): Streamlines the filing of patents in multiple countries by allowing for a single "international" patent application. The Madrid System for the International Registration of Marks: Facilitates the registration of trademarks in multiple jurisdictions around the world through a single application. The Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) (1994): Administered by the World Trade Organization (WTO), TRIPS sets down minimum standards for many forms of intellectual property regulation that WTO members must comply with. Cross-border Enforcement Challenges Enforcing IP rights across national borders presents significant challenges. Differences in national laws, the resources available for enforcement, and the political and economic climate can all impact the effectiveness of IP protection internationally. Challenges include: Variability in Legal Frameworks: Even with international treaties, countries implement and interpret intellectual property laws differently, leading to inconsistencies that can complicate enforcement. Jurisdictional Issues: Determining which country's laws apply, and where legal action should be taken, can be complex and hinder the efficiency of enforcement actions. Counterfeiting and Piracy: These issues are particularly rampant in countries with less stringent enforcement of IP laws, making it difficult for rights holders to protect their interests. Role of WIPO and Other International Organizations WIPO plays a critical role in the international intellectual property system. As a specialized agency of the United Nations, WIPO facilitates international cooperation in the creation and protection of intellectual property. It administers several international treaties, offers dispute resolution services, and helps developing countries build their capacity to use intellectual property for economic development. Other significant organizations include: World Trade Organization (WTO): Manages the TRIPS agreement which affects how intellectual property is handled in trade agreements between member states. European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and similar regional bodies: Manage trademarks and designs within their respective regions, facilitating simpler processes for registration and enforcement across multiple countries. Case Studies of International IP Disputes Apple Inc. vs. Samsung Electronics Co.: This series of ongoing legal battles across multiple countries highlights issues with patent infringement and showcases how multinational companies protect their IP across different legal systems. --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/law-school/message Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/law-school/support

International Intellectual Property Law Chapter 7 delves into the complexities of international intellectual property (IP) law, exploring the framework of international treaties and conventions, the challenges associated with cross-border enforcement, the roles played by global organizations like the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), and provides case studies that illustrate these dynamics in action. International Treaties and Conventions International treaties and conventions provide a foundational framework for the protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights across national borders. These agreements aim to harmonize the protection of intellectual property worldwide, making it easier for countries to cooperate and for rights holders to secure and enforce their rights internationally. Key International Treaties include: The Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property (1883): One of the first intellectual property treaties, establishing important principles such as national treatment, right of priority, and independence of patents granted in different countries. The Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works (1886): Establishes protections for creators of literary and artistic works, ensuring they receive rights in all signatory countries as they do in their own. The Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) (1970): Streamlines the filing of patents in multiple countries by allowing for a single "international" patent application. The Madrid System for the International Registration of Marks: Facilitates the registration of trademarks in multiple jurisdictions around the world through a single application. The Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) (1994): Administered by the World Trade Organization (WTO), TRIPS sets down minimum standards for many forms of intellectual property regulation that WTO members must comply with. Cross-border Enforcement Challenges Enforcing IP rights across national borders presents significant challenges. Differences in national laws, the resources available for enforcement, and the political and economic climate can all impact the effectiveness of IP protection internationally. Challenges include: Variability in Legal Frameworks: Even with international treaties, countries implement and interpret intellectual property laws differently, leading to inconsistencies that can complicate enforcement. Jurisdictional Issues: Determining which country's laws apply, and where legal action should be taken, can be complex and hinder the efficiency of enforcement actions. Counterfeiting and Piracy: These issues are particularly rampant in countries with less stringent enforcement of IP laws, making it difficult for rights holders to protect their interests. Role of WIPO and Other International Organizations WIPO plays a critical role in the international intellectual property system. As a specialized agency of the United Nations, WIPO facilitates international cooperation in the creation and protection of intellectual property. It administers several international treaties, offers dispute resolution services, and helps developing countries build their capacity to use intellectual property for economic development. Other significant organizations include: World Trade Organization (WTO): Manages the TRIPS agreement which affects how intellectual property is handled in trade agreements between member states. European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and similar regional bodies: Manage trademarks and designs within their respective regions, facilitating simpler processes for registration and enforcement across multiple countries. Case Studies of International IP Disputes Apple Inc. vs. Samsung Electronics Co.: This series of ongoing legal battles across multiple countries highlights issues with patent infringement and showcases how multinational companies protect their IP across different legal systems. --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/law-school/message Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/law-school/support

This Day in Legal History: WIPO EstablishedOn April 26, 1970, a significant advancement in the protection and management of intellectual property took place with the establishment of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). This marked the enforcement of the Convention Establishing WIPO, making it one of the specialized agencies under the United Nations focused on intellectual property (IP) issues. WIPO's primary mission is to promote and protect intellectual property across different countries by fostering international cooperation. As of now, 184 countries are signatories to the convention, showcasing a global commitment to the principles laid out by WIPO.WIPO plays a crucial role in the development of a balanced and accessible international IP system, which benefits both creators and the public, thereby contributing to economic, social, and cultural development worldwide. The organization administers 26 international treaties, including the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property and the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works. These treaties serve as the backbone for international IP law, standardizing the protection of IP across borders and promoting creative activity globally.WIPO also assists countries in developing their IP strategies and provides a platform for dispute resolution concerning IP. Through its various programs, WIPO enhances the ability of countries to utilize IP for economic development. Additionally, WIPO's efforts include tackling the challenges of IP in relation to new technologies, which continually reshape the boundaries of law and creativity.The creation of WIPO in 1970 was a response to the growing significance of intellectual property in the age of technological and artistic innovation, recognizing the need for a systematic approach to IP issues that transcended national borders. Today, WIPO continues to evolve as it addresses emerging issues in intellectual property influenced by the digital age and globalization, underscoring its ongoing relevance in international legal and economic landscapes.The Supreme Court is currently deliberating on Donald Trump's assertion of immunity from prosecution regarding charges that he illegally tried to remain in power. During a hearing, there was notable skepticism from the justices towards Trump's broad claims of immunity relating to his efforts to overturn the election results of 2020. Chief Justice John Roberts suggested possibly remanding the case back to lower courts for a more detailed examination of the allegations, indicating that the appeals court had not sufficiently scrutinized the specifics of the actions and documents in question.Justice Brett Kavanaugh expressed concerns about the potential long-term implications of making presidents vulnerable to prosecution for their official acts, fearing it could cyclically affect future presidents. Meanwhile, the liberal justices questioned the absence of constitutional immunity for presidents, highlighting the risk of a president acting without fear of legal consequences. Justice Amy Coney Barrett also challenged the idea that former presidents could only be prosecuted post-impeachment.The case underscores the urgency from Special Counsel Jack Smith, who is pressed by time constraints to try Trump before the upcoming election, given that a trial and subsequent conviction could adversely affect Trump's electoral prospects. Trump, facing multiple prosecutions, has argued for absolute immunity for actions taken while in office, which include his conduct leading up to and on January 6th.There are fundamental questions that must be addressed about the scope of presidential power and its limits, which are central to the case's legal and constitutional stakes.Supreme Court Wary of Trump Immunity But May Keep Trial on HoldThe Biden administration's Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program, a key component of the Inflation Reduction Act aimed at reducing the costs of certain Medicare Part D drugs by 2026, has attracted significant legal attention. Numerous former government officials, scholars, and patient advocacy groups have filed amicus briefs supporting the administration in response to legal challenges from the pharmaceutical industry, which contests the constitutionality of the program.These challenges involve several constitutional claims by the pharmaceutical companies, including violations of compelled speech under the First Amendment, the takings clause and due process under the Fifth Amendment, and excessive fines under the Eighth Amendment. The industry argues that the program unlawfully compels them to sell their products at government-dictated prices without just compensation.However, a notable decision by Chief Judge Colm F. Connolly dismissed AstraZeneca's due process claims, asserting that the manufacturer did not have a constitutional property interest jeopardized by the program. This decision aligns with several key legal precedents cited in various amicus briefs that reinforce the government's position.The case also touches on broader implications for governmental regulatory powers and the limits of constitutional protections for businesses under economic regulation frameworks. Legal experts and scholars have argued that the claims raised by the pharmaceutical industry stretch constitutional interpretations to protect against price negotiation practices that have been historically upheld as constitutional.The legal battle also involves a debate over the First Amendment, with the government asserting that the program does not compel speech from drug manufacturers. Judges and legal experts have scrutinized these claims, emphasizing the potential impact of accepting such an interpretation on a wide range of regulatory activities.While the majority of amicus briefs support the government, a few filed on behalf of the pharmaceutical industry focus on concerns about stifling drug innovation and the severe financial penalties imposed for non-compliance with the program's pricing mandates.The ongoing legal proceedings at the district court level, though less common for amicus filings than higher courts, play a crucial role in shaping the preliminary legal landscape before potentially reaching the Supreme Court. The involvement of high-level legal expertise in the form of amicus briefs underscores the significant stakes and complex legal issues at play, reflecting the profound implications of the outcome on the healthcare sector and regulatory practices.Wave of Amicus Briefs Back Drug Price Plan at Trial Court StageThe EPA's recent final rule under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), commonly known as the Superfund law, designates two PFAS chemicals—perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid (PFOS)—as hazardous substances. This designation is expected to significantly impact companies responsible for contaminated sites, potentially leading to the reevaluation and cleanup of sites previously considered resolved.The rule aims to address sites contaminated with PFOA and PFOS, which are part of a group of chemicals known as "forever chemicals" due to their persistence in the environment. Currently, only a small fraction of National Priorities List (NPL) sites have been identified as contaminated with these substances, but this number is expected to rise as more comprehensive testing is implemented. The EPA's action follows increasing evidence of the health risks associated with high concentrations of these chemicals, including potential links to cancer and other serious health issues.Companies and other entities responsible for releases of these chemicals will face new reporting requirements if they release one pound or more of PFOA or PFOS within a 24-hour period. These reports will contribute to the Toxics Release Inventory and are part of broader efforts to increase transparency and regulatory oversight regarding PFAS releases into the environment.The designation of PFOA and PFOS as hazardous substances under CERCLA is likely to lead to significant legal and financial implications for responsible parties due to the costly nature of cleanup efforts and potential litigation. Moreover, the rule's implications extend beyond immediate cleanup efforts, potentially impacting water utilities and prompting them to seek remediation and accountability from polluters as stricter limits on PFAS in tap water are set to take effect.This regulatory change reflects a growing recognition of the serious environmental and health impacts of PFAS chemicals, and it aligns with broader environmental justice efforts to address pollution exposure disparities among racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic groups. The long-term challenges of managing PFAS contamination will involve complex legal, environmental, and public health considerations, particularly as affected communities and regulatory agencies navigate the implications of these pervasive pollutants.New PFAS Designation Expected to Spark Rise in Superfund SitesHarvey Weinstein's 2020 conviction for sexual assault and rape was overturned by New York's highest court on April 25, 2024. The court, in a closely contested 4-3 decision, cited critical errors by the trial judge, particularly in allowing testimony about alleged assaults that were not directly related to the charges Weinstein faced. This decision has reignited discussions about the challenges in prosecuting powerful figures and has been met with dismay by many, including actress Ashley Judd, who viewed it as an institutional betrayal.The Manhattan District Attorney's office, led by Alvin Bragg, has indicated plans to retry the case, underscoring their ongoing commitment to addressing sexual assault. The overturned conviction, which had been a significant victory for the #MeToo movement, involved allegations by Miriam Haley and Jessica Mann that dated back to 2006 and 2013, respectively.Weinstein's legal team celebrated the decision as a triumph for justice, noting Weinstein's relief and resilience despite his ongoing incarceration. He remains imprisoned on a separate 16-year sentence in California for similar charges, which stands unaffected by the New York ruling.This case has had broad implications, influencing legislation and public awareness about sexual misconduct. New York, among other states, has passed laws allowing civil lawsuits for sexual misconduct outside the typical statutes of limitations, reflecting a legislative response to #MeToo. The case's developments continue to be closely watched, with potential impacts on both legal precedents and societal norms concerning accountability for sexual violence.Harvey Weinstein's rape conviction is overturned by top New York court | ReutersThe defamation lawsuit filed by Jack and Leslie Flynn against CNN, which involved claims of being wrongfully associated with the QAnon conspiracy theory, has been dismissed by a judge. The case revolved around a CNN segment that showed the Flynns at a barbecue raising their hands while Michael Flynn, the former National Security Advisor, recited a phrase linked to QAnon. The Flynns argued that this portrayal falsely labeled them as QAnon followers, which they considered defamatory.CNN countered that the phrase "where we go one, we go all" used by Michael Flynn during the event is widely recognized as associated with QAnon, and that the Flynns were visible participants in the event. The court, upon review, determined that the term "QAnon followers" as used in the context of the CNN segment is a non-defamatory opinion, not a statement of fact. The judge ruled that opinions, especially when based on disclosed, non-defamatory facts, do not constitute defamation.Furthermore, the court highlighted that the portrayal of the Flynns in the segment was based on their actual appearance and participation in an event alongside Michael Flynn, which is not disputed by the Flynns. The dismissal reflects judicial recognition of the challenges in proving defamation when the statements in question are based on interpreted opinions rather than explicit facts. The decision underscores the importance of context in defamation cases, particularly when public figures and political movements are involved. This case also reflects ongoing legal debates about the limits of free speech and the scope of media responsibility in reporting on controversial public figures and events.Flynn Family's SLAPP Suit Against CNN Slapped Down By Judge | TechdirtThis week's closing theme is by Ludwig van Beethoven.For this week's closing piece of classical music, where we will once again delve into the towering genius of Ludwig van Beethoven and his monumental Piano Sonata No. 29 in B-flat major, Op. 106, known as the "Hammerklavier." Composed in 1819, the "Hammerklavier" Sonata stands as one of the pinnacles of Beethoven's creative output and showcases his profound depth in musical structure and expressive range.This sonata is particularly renowned for its technical difficulty and ambitious scope, pushing the boundaries of the piano sonata form of the time. Beethoven's late period, during which he composed the "Hammerklavier," is marked by an increased use of complex structures and an exploration of new musical ideas, and this sonata is a testament to his innovative spirit.This week, we will focus specifically on the second movement of this sonata, the Scherzo: Assai vivace. In stark contrast to the grandiose and deeply serious first movement, the Scherzo bursts with energy and playfulness. Its rapid tempo and lively rhythms present a dazzling display of technical prowess and artistic flair. This movement is a brilliant example of Beethoven's ability to juxtapose contrasting moods within a single piece, providing a refreshing and exhilarating counterpart to the sonata's more introspective segments.The Scherzo is structured around a lively theme that leaps and dances across the keyboard, filled with syncopated rhythms and sudden dynamic changes that challenge even the most skilled pianists. It embodies a sense of joy and almost mischievous playfulness, showcasing Beethoven's mastery in transforming musical ideas into a vivid emotional narrative.As we close this week's episode with the Scherzo from Beethoven's "Hammerklavier" Sonata, let the vivacity and brilliance of this music inspire you. It serves not only as a showcase of Beethoven's technical mastery but also his undiminished spirit and the enduring power of his music to evoke a wide range of profound emotions. Enjoy the spirited journey through one of the most challenging yet rewarding pieces in the piano repertoire.Without further ado, Beethoven's Piano Sonata no. 29 “Hammerklavier”, Op. 106 - II. Scherzo - Assai vivace. Get full access to Minimum Competence - Daily Legal News Podcast at www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Today is World Intellectual Property (IP) Day. Established by the World Intellectual Property Organization— or WIPO—in 2000, World IP Day serves to raise awareness of the positive role of IP—including copyright, designs, patents, and trademarks—in society and in the daily lives of consumers, and to celebrate IP as a driver of innovation, creativity, and economic development. WIPO selected April 26 for World IP Day as it was on this day in 1970 that the Convention Establishing WIPO entered into force.Each year, World IP Day focuses on a specific theme. This year, it looks at the ways in which IP is advancing the United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals—or SDGs. The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, adopted by all UN Member States in 2015, provides a shared blueprint for peace and prosperity for people and the planet, now and into the future. At its heart are the 17 SDGs, which are an urgent call for action by all countries—developed and developing—in a global partnership. They recognize that ending poverty and other deprivations must go hand-in-hand with strategies that improve health and education, reduce inequality, and spur economic growth – all while tackling climate change and working to preserve our oceans and forests.Titled, “IP and the SDGs: Building our common future with innovation and creativity,” World IP Day 2024 looks at how we need to re-think how we live, work, and play, if we are to build a common future and achieve the SDGs. It is an opportunity to explore how IP encourages and amplifies the innovative and creative solutions that are so crucial to building our common future, and how inventors, creators, and entrepreneurs can benefit from IP to achieve their own goals while also heling improve people's lives and safeguard our planet in line with the SDGs.Our guest today is Edward Kwakwa, Assistant Director General, Global Challenges and Partnerships Sector, at WIPO. The Global Challenges and Partnerships Sector covers issues relating to traditional knowledge, traditional cultural expressions, and genetic resources. It also leads WIPO's efforts to work with other UN agencies and international organizations on cross-cutting global issues; builds on and expands partnerships with stakeholders, including those from international, business, and civil society sectors; and builds bridges with new stakeholders.ADG Kwakwa served as General Counsel at WIPO from 2004 until September 2016. He holds an LL.B. degree from the University of Ghana, an LL.M. from Queen's University in Canada, and an LL.M. and a J.S.D. from Yale Law School in the United States. Before joining WIPO, he practiced with the law firm of O'Melveny and Myers in Washington, D.C., worked as International Legal Adviser at the Commission on Global Governance in Geneva, Switzerland, as Senior Legal Adviser at the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, and as Legal Affairs Officer at the World Trade Organization.  Resources: About Edward Kwakwa About World IP Day WIPO's Global Challenges and Partnerships Sector The United Nation's SDGs

Justina, Bart, and John are back! In this episode of 'The Fog of Truth', the hosts engage in a vibrant discussion about the Oscar-nominated short films. As they anticipate the Oscar celebration broadcast, they share their individual experiences and projects, including attending South by Southwest and working on book drafts. The debate opens with remarks on the absence of American-made documentaries in the best feature documentary category, celebrating international contributions instead. They meticulously review each short documentary nominee, providing insights into their themes, distribution, and impacts on audiences. The films discussed include 'The ABCs of Book Banning', 'The Barber of Little Rock', 'Island in Between', 'The Last Repair Shop', and 'Na, Nai and Wipo'. Special attention is given to the importance of storytelling, the role of major distributors in supporting short films, and the impact of these documentaries on real-world issues such as book banning, community banking, and cultural identities. The hosts express their favorites and speculate on potential Oscar winners, emphasizing the power of documentaries to frame pressing societal issues compellingly. 00:00 Introduction and Catching Up 00:51 Oscar Features and Controversies 01:35 Oscar Nominated Short Films: A Discussion 19:50 The ABCs of Book Banning: A Deep Dive 24:30 Conclusion and Final Thoughts

It is fairly obvious that the dominant, i.e. Western mechanism for generating new knowledge is rather different from the traditional Indian mechanism, and this shows up in all sorts of ways. One is that Indian epistemology seems to be empirical and practical, based on observation; whereas the Western tradition seems to prefer grand theories that must then be proved by observation.Another difference is the Western idea that Intellectual Property is a private right that the State confers on an inventor or a creator. The Western gaze is fixed on the potential monetary gains from a monopoly over the use of the IP Right (for a fixed period of time, after which it is in the public domain): the argument is that it eventually helps everybody, while incentivizing the clever. The Indian concept is vastly different. It was assumed that a creator created, or an inventor invented, as a result of their innate nature, their god-given gifts. In a way they could not avoid being creative or inventive, which would be a negation of the blessing they had received from the Supreme Brahman. Therefore no further incentive was needed: benevolent patrons like kings or temples would take care of their basic needs, allowing them to give free rein to creativity and innovation.This seems to us today to be a radical idea, because we have been conditioned by the contemporary epistemological idea that incentives are a necessary condition for knowledge creation. Although this seems common-sensical, there is no real evidence that this is true. Petra Moser, then at MIT, discovered via comparing 19th century European countries that the presence of an IPR culture with incentives made little difference in the quantum of innovation, although it seemed to change the domains that were the most innovative.. In fact, there is at least one counter-example: that of Open Source in computing. It boggles the imagination that veritable armies of software developers would work for free, nights and weekends, in addition to their full-time jobs, and develop computing systems like Linux that are better than the corporate versions out there: the whole “Cathedral and Bazaar” story as articulated by Eric Raymond. Briefly, he argues that the chaotic ‘bazaar' of open source is inherently superior to the regimented but soul-less ‘cathedral' of the big tech firms.It is entirely possible that the old Indian epistemological model is efficient, but the prevailing model of WIPO, national Patent Offices, and all that paraphernalia massively benefits the Western model. As an example, the open-source model was predicted to make a big difference in biology, but that effort seems to have petered out after a promising start. Therefore we are stuck for the foreseeable future with the IP model, which means Indians need to excel at it.In passing, let us note that the brilliant Jagdish Chandra Bose was a pioneer in the wireless transmission of information, including the fundamental inventions that make cellular telephony possible. However, as a matter of principle, he refused to patent his inventions; Guglielmo Marconi did, and became rich and famous. India has traditionally been quite poor in the number of patents, trademarks, copyrights, geographical indications, semiconductor design layouts etc. that it produces annually. Meanwhile the number of Chinese patents has skyrocketed. Over the last few years, the number of Indian patents has grown as the result of focused efforts by the authorities, as well as the realization by inventors that IP rights can help startup firms dominate niche markets. India also produces a lot of creative works, including books, films, music and so on. The enforcement of copyright laws has been relatively poor, and writers and artistes often do not get fair compensation for their work. This is deplorable. Unfortunately, things will get a lot worse with generative AI. Most of us have heard of, and probably also tried out, the chatbots that have been the object of much attention and hype in the past year, such as chatGPT from OpenAI/Microsoft and Bard from Google. Whether these are truly useful is a good question, because they seduce us into thinking they are conscious, despite the fact that they are merely ‘stochastic parrots'. But I digress.The point is that the digital revolution has thrown the edifice of copyright law into disarray. At the forefront of this upheaval stands generative AI, a technology with the uncanny ability to mimic and extend human creative output. Consider two stark examples: the contentious case of J.K. Rowling and her copyright battle with a Harry Potter-inspired fanfic, and the recent Japanese law that grants broad exemptions for training large language models (LLMs). J.K. Rowling's spat with Anna M. Bricken, the author of a Harry Potter fanfic titled "Harry Potter and the Goblet of Wine," ignited a global debate about fair use and transformative creativity. Bricken's work reimagined the Potterverse with an adult lens, but Rowling, citing trademark infringement, sought to have it taken down. While the case eventually settled, it exposed a fundamental dilemma: can AI-generated works, even if derivative, be considered distinct enough from their source material to warrant copyright protection? The answer, shrouded in legal ambiguity, leaves creators navigating a tightrope walk between inspiration and infringement.On the other side of the globe, Japan enacted a law in 2022 that further muddies the waters. This controversial regulation grants LLMs and other AI systems an almost carte blanche to ingest and remix copyrighted material for training purposes without seeking permission or paying royalties. While proponents laud it as a catalyst for AI innovation, critics warn of widespread copyright infringement and a potential future where authorship becomes a nebulous concept. The Japanese law, echoing anxieties around J.K. Rowling's case, raises unsettling questions: who owns the creative spark when AI fuels the fire?For India, a nation at the precipice of the AI revolution, these developments raise crucial questions. With a burgeoning AI industry and a large creative sector, India must tread carefully. Adapting existing copyright laws to encompass the nuances of AI-generated works is paramount. Robust fair use guidelines that incentivize transformative creativity while safeguarding original authorship are urgently needed. Furthermore, fostering ethical AI development practices that respect intellectual property rights is crucial.The debate surrounding AI and copyright is not merely a legal tussle; it's a battle for the very definition of creativity. In this fight, India has the opportunity to carve a path that balances innovation with artistic integrity. By acknowledging the complexities of AI while upholding the cornerstone principles of copyright, India can become a global leader in navigating the uncharted territory of digital authorship. The future of creativity, fueled by both human imagination and AI's boundless potential, hangs in the balance, and India has the chance to shape its trajectory.Disclaimer: The last few paragraphs above were written by Google Bard, and lightly edited. A chatbot can produce coherent text, but it may be, and often is, completely wrong (‘hallucinations'). Now who owns the copyright to this text? Traditionally, it would be owned by me and Firstpost, but what is the right answer now? Would we be responsible for any errors introduced by the AI?On the other hand, the ‘mining' of text, audio/video and images to train generative AI is an increasingly contentious issue. As an example, the New York Times sued OpenAI and Microsoft, arguing that they weren't being paid anywhere near the fair market value of their text that the tech companies mined. This sounds familiar to Indians, because Westerners have been ‘digesting' Indian ideas for a long time. Some of the most egregious examples were patents on basmati, turmeric and neem, which are absurd considering that these have been in use in India for millennia. The fact that these were documented in texts (‘prior art') enabled successful challenges against them.An even more alarming fact is the capture and ‘digestion' (a highly evocative term from Rajiv Malhotra, who has warned of the dangers of AI for years) of Indian personal and medical data. Unlike China, which carefully firewalls away its data from Western Big Tech, and indeed, does not even allow them to function in their country, Indian personal data is being freely mined by US Big Tech. India's Data Privacy laws, being debated now, need to be considered defensive weapons.Paradoxically, there is also the concern that Indic knowledge will, for all intents and purposes, disappear from the domain of discourse. Since the chatbots are trained on the uncurated Internet, they are infected by the Anglosphere prejudices and bigotry therein, not to mention deliberate misinformation and ‘toolkits' that are propagated. Since most Indic concepts are either not very visible, or denigrated, on the Internet (eg Wikipedia), chatbots are not even aware of them. For instance, a doctor friend and I published an essay in Open magazine comparing allopathy to generative AI, because both are stochastic (ie. based on statistics). We mentioned Ayurveda positively several times, because it has a theory of disease that makes it more likely to work with causation rather than correlation.However, when the article summarized by chatGPT, there was no mention whatsoever of the word ‘Ayurveda'. It is as though such a concept does not exist, which may in fact be true in the sense that it is deprecated in the training data that the chatbot was trained on.One solution is to create Indian foundational models that can then become competent in specific domains of interest: for example an Arthashastra chatbot. These can also be trained, if sufficient data sets are created, on Indian languages as well, which could incidentally support real-time machine translation as well. Thus there can be an offensive as well as a defensive strategy to enable Indic knowledge systems to thrive.India is at a point of crisis, but also of opportunity. If India were to harness some of the leading-edge technologies of today, it might once again become a global leader in knowledge generation, as it was a millennium ago with its great universities. 1680 words, Jan 10, 2024 This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit rajeevsrinivasan.substack.com

Speaker: Professor Ida Madieha Abdul Ghani Azmi, IIUM Kuala Lumpur, MalaysiaBiography: Ida Madieha bt. Abdul Ghani Azmi obtained her LLB from IIUM, LLM from University of Cambridge and Ph.D from University of London (1995). Dr. Ida has authored and presented extensively on various issues on Intellectual Property and Cyberlaw. She is currently a Professor at the Ahmad Ibrahim Kulliyyah of Laws and the former Dean of Center for Postgraduate Studies, IIUM. She was the lead consultant for the Drafting of National Guidelines on Intellectual Property and Competition (2017-2018). She served as the Consultant to WIPO for the Drafting of IP Modules for MyIPO Malaysia (2017), the IP Policy for Kathmandu University (2016) and IP Curriculum and Syllabus in Bangladesh (2014). She has assisted WIPO on to design Database of Copyright law and Policy for ASEAN countries (2022) Model Curriculum on Copyright for Arts and Culture Schools in Developing Countries (UG and PG) (2022) and serve as a resource person for WIPO Training programmes. She currently serves as the consultant to the drafting of the Malaysian Cybersecurity Bill, which is awaiting to be tabled to the Parliament. Dr Ida served as a member of the Board of the Malaysian Intellectual Property Office (MyIPO) (2004-2008), (2018-2020). She was the former Deputy Director of the Malaysian Copyright Tribunal (2014-2016). She acts as a Domain Name Panelist with the Kuala Lumpur Arbitration Centre and Asian International Arbitration Centre. In the past, Dr Ida served as a resource person for the Intellectual Property Training Centre, ILKAB and the WTO Regional Trade Policy Program for Asia Pacific. She has served as the External Reviewer for the Multimedia University Law Faculty (2017-2018)(2019-2021) and Guest Editor, Pertanika Journal of Social Science and Humanities.Abstract: Many countries, including Malaysia, are embarking on ambitious plans to take full advantage of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and emerging technologies in transforming their economy. Given that the deployment of AI necessitates a supportive and comprehensive legal framework, the legal status of AI as an artificial person comes into picture. Where an AI technology is considered as mere tool for human consumption, there is no issue as to whether they should be recognised as separate legal entities accountable to their own rights and responsibilities. Yet, this is where the storm is brewing. With the ability of AI platforms to match human abilities on certain activities, in addition to the astronomical resources being poured into the development of human-like sentient AI, there is a fresh call for the legal status of AI to be revisited. This talk begins with an examination of the ontological status of personhood in contemporary discourse. The talk then moves to explore the discussion on ‘personhood' within Muslim scholar's discourse. Core to the issue is in what context would rights and obligations arising from AI activities and transactions be recognised under the Shariah. As Shariah is the golden thread that binds most Muslim countries, the articulation of the Shariah perspective would be beneficial to these countries aiming to build their entire economy based on AI products and services.For more information see: https://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk/seminars-and-events/cipil-seminars

This week on The Leaders Lab Podcast, we talk about something we haven't discussed on the show before - and that's how AI is changing not just the business world, but our lives in general. Joining us to tackle this very timely topic is an investor in the applications of powerful emerging technologies; someone who believes these technologies are transforming our world - and our place in it; someone who champions our collective responsibility in shaping our societal, financial, and environmental future.Our guest this week has lectured on these topics at University College London, Wharton Business School, and WIPO to name a few. Learn more about him below…ABOUT OUR GUESTDaniel Doll-Steinberg started his career in London and New York in the early days of the global derivatives technology industry. He created one of the first digital rights management businesses, which helped transform the software and entertainment industries. In 2016, he was introduced to Blockchain and saw it accelerating AI in remodeling our economy. He co-founded the Atari Token Project to build a metaverse-based new economy platform with Atari, an Ethereum founder, and several gaming legends. He is founding partner at active innovation fund EdenBase.Daniel was appointed an expert advising both the UK Government and EU Commission, including during the crucial period following the 2007 financial crash, specializing in disruption, education, and the future of work. Daniel has also recently written his book 'Unsupervised: Navigating and Influencing a World Controlled by New Technologies'.You can learn more about him and his work here:https://linkedin.com/in/daniel-doll-steinbergABOUT OUR HOSTKen Eslick is an Entrepreneur, Author, Podcaster, Tony Robbins Trainer, Life Coach, Husband of 35+ Years, and Grandfather. Ken currently spends his time as the President & Founder of The Leaders Lab where he and his team focus on Senior Leadership Acquisition. They get founders the next level C-Suite Leaders they need to go from being an Inc. Magazine 5000 fastest growing company to $100,000,000 + in revenue. You can learn more about Ken and his team at Theleaderslab.coListen to more episodes on Mission Matters:https://missionmatters.com/author/ken-eslick/

EPISODE 1696: In this special KEEN ON from the DLD AI Summit in Munich, Andrew talks to the songwriter, music producer and musician Niclas Molinder about the opportunities and threats that AI presents to the creative community Niclas Molinder is a songwriter, music producer and musician who now also is running several organisations to innovate the music industry's data and rights management with the music creators in focus. After 20 years of songwriting and producing for artists as Miley Cyrus, Lady Gaga, Mary J Blige and The Jonas Brothers, as well as running his own publishing company RedFly Music – the Swedish entrepreneur decided to be part of solving the value gap in the music industry. In 2014, Niclas Molinder founded SessionStudio, the world's first independent global hub for authoritative pre registration music metadata sourced from creators together with Max Martin, Björn Ulvaeus of ABBA and Avicii originator Ash Pournouri. Molinder's vision is to create and set a standard for how music creators and their representatives internationally are identified with their roles in song so everyone can get credited and correctly compensated when their music is used. He also founded Music Rights Awareness Foundation in 2016 together with Max Martin and Björn Ulvaeus – an apolitical foundation that works to increase knowledge of music rights worldwide, adjusted to the future industry. Music Rights Awareness Foundation is together with the UN agency WIPO behind the unique rights awareness platform CLIP. With the support of creators, other stakeholders and governments across the globe, it will form a truly open and inclusive community. It will work together to improve networks and infrastructure supporting the growth of creative industries everywhere. CLIP aim to raise awareness and increase knowledge of creators' rights and related management practices, ensuring recognition and fair reward for all creators regardless of their geographical, cultural or economic conditions. Named as one of the "100 most connected men" by GQ magazine, Andrew Keen is amongst the world's best known broadcasters and commentators. In addition to presenting KEEN ON, he is the host of the long-running How To Fix Democracy show. He is also the author of four prescient books about digital technology: CULT OF THE AMATEUR, DIGITAL VERTIGO, THE INTERNET IS NOT THE ANSWER and HOW TO FIX THE FUTURE. Andrew lives in San Francisco, is married to Cassandra Knight, Google's VP of Litigation & Discovery, and has two grown children. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Today, innovation is key to driving business growth and competitive advantage, with intellectual property or IP sitting at the very heart of this strategy. In recent years we've witnessed some remarkable strides across the globe in bridging the gender gap in the IP sector. Yet, according to the World Intellectual Property Organization, only 16 percent of international patent applications are filed by women inventors. At this rate, the WIPO doesn't expect to achieve gender parity before 2064. That's almost 40 years into the future. So, while progress is being made, clearly much more must be done to quickly close this gap as well as a similar gap in career opportunities for minorities.    Tarianna Stewart – our featured guest in the latest episode of the Ideas to Innovation Season 2 podcast from Clarivate – ventured into her IP career by accident. “I happened to learn about IP during my Ph.D. program and thought, ‘this seems interesting… maybe a little bit better than working in the lab.'” Now an experienced biomedical scientist and accomplished IP professional at the technology unit of New York University in New York City, Tarianna has smart advice for women and people of color who seek to follow in her footsteps and pursue careers in IP and innovation. In our podcast discussion, she recalls how she “fell in love with the tech transfer space,” and offers a ‘been-there-done-that' perspective on what she believes it will take to foster a more inclusive IP and innovation landscape for the benefit of all involved. 

‘Hacking for Cash' is a new ASPI podcast series exploring state sponsored campaigns of cyber espionage for commercial gain. Throughout the series we talk to experts who were close to the negotiations that led to a 2015 agreement between the United States and China to refrain from supporting and engaging in ‘hacking for cash', as well as a G20 leaders' commitment to stamp out cyber-enabled intellectual property (IP) theft. The series features conversations with cybersecurity experts on state-sponsored hackers and how they operate, and with industry leaders about risk and resilience. We also talk with IP experts about how the US and China protect trade secrets, and with national cybersecurity and counter-intelligence agencies about how companies and universities can protect their crown jewels. In this third episode of the series, Teesta Prakash, Analyst at ASPI, speaks to Dr Francis Gurry, former Director General at the World Intellectual Property Organisation. They discuss the role WIPO plays in IP protection, the historical context of IP theft, and how the digital transformation has changed the way IP is protected. Teesta also speaks to Nigel Cory and Elizabeth Chien, and they unpack both US and Chinese perspectives on IP protection, theft, and prosecution. Music: "Lounge It" by Maarten Schellekens, licensed with permission from the Independent Music Licensing Collective - imlcollective.uk

Join us on GSD Presents as Gina De Echeona, Founder & CEO of Emprende Conmigo, delves into the power of #strategic #leadership as a competitive advantage. Gain insights into mastering the competitive edge through effective leadership and #innovation.

If you've worked in ICU for very long, you'll recognise the scenario where a patient who is weaning from mechanical ventilation goes into pulmonary oedema.  This syndrome is referred to as weaning induced pulmonary oedema, or WIPO. Dr Rui Shi currently works as an intensivist in the surgical ICU of the First Affiliated Hospital at Sun Yet Sen University in China. Rui has a strong interest in haemodynamic monitoring in critical care in which she has done a PhD, and she joins Todd to talk about this fascinating clinical problem. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Katie and Steve speak with WIPO economists Alexander Cuntz and Matthias Sahli about their recent article, Intermediary liability and trade in follow-on innovation, published in the Journal of Cultural Economics in February 2023. Their research looks at how intermediaries in the art market altered their behavior after the Second Circuit's decision in Cariou v. Prince, which was seen as greatly expanding permissible fair use in appropriation art. THIS PODCAST WAS RECORDED BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT'S DECISION IN THE WARHOL CASE, WHICH PULLED BACK ON THE TRANSFORMATIVE USE ANALYSIS FOR COPYRIGHT FAIR USE.   Notes for this episode: http://artlawpodcast.com/2023/07/05/do-market-players-react-to-court-decisions-impacting-art/   Follow the Art Law Podcast Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/artlawpodcast/ TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@artlawpodcast

By 1998 the US had passed its Digital Millennium Copyright Act. And partly because the US generates so much copyrightable material, and partly just because it's the US and is a little pushy on the world stage, the DMCA became the de facto way of handling copyright protections on the internet around the world.But what is it? Why did we need the DMCA or the WIPO copyright treaty at all?Let's help you Know a Little more about the DMCAFeaturing Tom Merritt.Full episode transcript available here. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

When we think about IP systems, we often think of national or regional IP Offices (IPOs) and policies. Yet, IPOs heavily defer to, rely on, and follow the tracks of the World IP Organization, which remain the highest authority when it comes to developing balanced and effective IP systems supporting innovation and creativity. Cooperating closely with IPOs, over the last couple of years the World Intellectual Property Office (WIPO) has participated in the discussions and policymaking to address most of the recent and new challenges felt by IPOs – think pandemic, export control issues, supply chain disruption, and markets turmoil – and developed tools, programs, task forces, to support IPOs efforts and more importantly IP protection and innovation through these unprecedented times. How does WIPO envision its mission in 2023? What sort of initiatives does the organization carry out to ensure they stay in tune with innovators, businesses big and small, and the market at large? How much of a transformative force is WIPO for the IP world today?  To discuss WIPO's actions and priorities, our first guest is Marco Alemán, whose role is Assistant Director General IP and Innovation Ecosystems at WIPO, which he joined in 1999. During over 20 years at WIPO, Marco Alemán assumed several key roles including Director of the Patent Law Division. Prior to joining WIPO, Marco headed the Colombian Industrial Property Office. Our second guest is Lisa Jorgenson, who has been Deputy DG Patents & Tech at WIPO for 2 years. Over the past 30 years, Lisa has served in a variety of legal positions, including Executive Director of the American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) and Group Vice President, Intellectual Property and Licensing, of STMicroelectronics, where she spent over 24 years.Brand & New is a production of the International Trademark AssociationHosted by Audrey Dauvet - Contribution of M. Halle & S. Lagedamond - Music by JD BeatsFOR MORE INFORMATION, VISIT INTA.ORGTo go further: About Lisa Jorgenson: https://www.linkedin.com/in/lisa-jorgenson/About Marco M. Alemán: https://www.linkedin.com/in/marco-m-alemán/Also of interest:https://www.wipo.int/about-ip/en/frontier_technologies/news/2022/news_0001.htmlhttps://www.who.int/news/item/10-11-2022-who--wipo--wto-to-hold-technical-symposium-on-response--preparedness-to-future-pandemicshttps://www.wipo.int/en/green-technology-book/https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=3a24ca2a-7ba9-430c-a107-f3a91fe1cf50

CIPIL Spring Conference 2023: Intellectual Property Rights as Allied Rights: Bill Cornish and the Making of Today's Intellectual Property SystemIn 1981, Professor Bill Cornish published the first student textbook on “Intellectual Property”. The book was to prove hugely influential, as academic courses on the subject proliferated around the country. In turn, it spawned a host of imitators, all of whom stuck doggedly with the template Cornish had provided (of treating patents, copyright and trade marks together). However, now in its 9th edition, and curated and updated by Professors David Llewelyn and Tanya Aplin, the text has never been surpassed.One of the most significant aspects of the book was its very categorisation. Entitled “Intellectual Property: Patents, Copyright, Trade Marks and Allied Rights”, the textbook presented the distinct legal regimes as “allied” in important respects. Previously, practitioner texts had treated the fields of copyright, patent, trade marks and designs as deserving of separate treatment (in Copinger; Terrell; Kerly and Russell-Clarke; while, at the international level, the Paris and Berne Conventions had instilled a dichotomy between “industrial property”, on the one hand, and copyright and neighbouring rights on the other. Although it would be inaccurate to attribute the shift in thinking to the Cornish textbook (and certainly there were important precursors, not least establishment of WIPO in 1967), forty years on from the publication of Cornish's seminal text, “intellectual property” has been cemented as a foundational legal concept. The term is deployed in international treaties (e.g. TRIPs, but as a chapter in the vast majority of free trade agreements), in regional instruments (Article 17 of the EU Charter, the EU's Enforcement Directive), in national constitutions, in domestic legislation; the term is used to denominate governmental and non-governmental organisations, not least the World Intellectual Property Organisation, and the now numerous “intellectual property offices” around the world (including the UKIPO and EUIPO). In the UK, the notion of “intellectual property” serves to define the field of operation of distinct civil procedure rules, as well as the remedies available to litigators. Moreover, the concept figures in the names, and to define the operational fields of, professorial chairs (Bill was the Herchel Smith Professor of Intellectual Property between 1995 and 2004); institutes (such as CIPIL, which was conceived under Bill's watch and founded to coincide with Bill's retirement), journals (such as the E.I.P.R. and I.P.Q.) and scholarly organisations (such as A.T.R.I.P., to which Bill gave strong support during his career, including as president from 1985-7).Of course, the concept of “intellectual property” has not gone uncriticised, and its usefulness unchallenged. Some institutes and journals have, of late, abandoned the term: the Max Planck Institute is now an institute for “innovation and competition law”, and UCL has an “Institute of Brands and Innovation Law.” The UK Intellectual Property Office has recently been located within the new Department for Science, Innovation and Technology. At this conference, we bring together scholars and practitioners, many of whom had a first hand relationship with Bill, to consider critically the origin, history, and utility of the notion of “intellectual property”, and more generally of thinking of trade marks, patents and copyright as “allied rights.” Reflecting Bill's origins (in Australia), his cosmopolitanism (in particular his connection, as external academic member (from 1989) at the Max Planck Institute in Munich), and internationalism (as well as being President of A.T.R.I.P. from 1985-7 and Vice-President of A.L.A.I. from 1990), as well as the links he forged between university and practice (as a door tenant at 8 New Square), the conference will bring together a range of perspectives on the...

Refugee agency appeals for $137 million to help displaced in Horn of AfricaMozambique targets 720,000 in cholera vaccination drive: WHOPatent filings hit record high in 2022: WIPO

If there is a concern that is almost never factored in by most intellectual property (IP) practitioners when managing their asset portfolios, it may well be what happens to those assets in outer space! However, as the scientific community continues to explore and study outer space, it's likely that practitioners may soon experience a certain sense of urgency, the question not being if but when some research or manufacturing activities will be outsourced to outer space or when space resources will be mined. This will be a major commercial shift away from Earth into a space economy, projected to grow to US $1 trillion by 2040. So, who will have the right to claim and profit from these resources and related IP rights? Will there be a new “IP Gold Rush,” where companies create rights as soon as they can? Many industries, such as space tourism and manufacturing, will be impacted. Think for a moment about the ownership of the rights to images produced by space tourists, or manufacturing that will be moving to a gravity free environment. Beyond these examples, the key issues of who owns what and who can profit from IP assets created off planet become increasingly important as we continue to explore and commercialize outer space. In this podcast, we'll be discussing the current state of the IP law in space, the need to act at the national and international levels to develop a clear legal framework and to be prepared for what the future may hold for IP in the evolving space economy. Our guests today, who have been actively involved in the INTA Project Team on IP in Space, are experts in this area.Our first guest is Sheja Ehtesham, who is the Managing Partner at ALG India Law Offices LLP, an Intellectual Property firm in India. Ms. Ehtesham is ranked among the world's leading trademark law practitioners. Her practice focuses on IP enforcement and prosecution strategies. She works with her clients to devise global brand filing strategies that align with their business requirements and advises clients in strategizing negotiations. She has also successfully represented several clients in domain name dispute proceedings. Ms. Ehtesham has been an active INTA member for nearly 15 years.Our second guest is Clark Lackert, who is current Deputy General Counsel for the World Trade Centers Association. Prior to joining this association, Clark spent over 20 years as a partner in major international law firms, focused on trademark, copyright, domain name, licensing, and anticounterfeiting matters, with an expertise in the international area. Mr. Lackert is a domain name arbitrator for the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) and has been a consultant with the U.S. government on the implementation of the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs). He has lectured globally and is a prolific author.Brand & New is a production of the International Trademark AssociationHosted by Audrey Dauvet - Contribution of M. Halle & S. Lagedamond - Music by JD BeatsFOR MORE INFORMATION, VISIT INTA.ORGTo go further:- Sheja Ehtesham: https://www.linkedin.com/in/sheja-ehtesham/- Clark Lackert: https://www.linkedin.com/in/clarklackert/Also of interest:IP in Space, a Report from the IP in Space Project Team (INTA, December 2022)Trademarks in outer space: supporting the off-world economy (WIPO, December 2021)IP in Outer Space: The Next Frontier (INTA Bulletin, December 2021)Intellectual Property Protection in Outer Space: Conflict in Theory and Application in Practi

Myanmar: Rights expert urges Korea to play ‘enhanced leadership role'WHO updates list of ‘priority pathogens' including ‘Disease X'2021 global intellectual property filings reached new records: WIPO

For more information about the Standing Committee on Copyrights and Related Rights, see this SCCR website Sara:     Welcome to another episode of copyright chat. Today I have Winston Tabb joining me from Johns Hopkins University he's the University Librarian and a longtime expert adviser to the copyright and other legal matters committee to the IFLA […]

This episode is brought to you from the headquarters of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) in Geneva, Switzerland.  Julio Raffo and Elodie Carpentier, Head of the Innovation Economy Section of the Department for Economics and Data Analytics at WIPO, and postdoc research fellow at WIPO respectively, are my guests on the show today.  Join us for a discussion around WIPO's diverse range of projects, what their research has shown about the impacts of war, COVID, and climate change on the evolution of innovation, and what WIPO is doing to hasten the pace of the slowly closing gender gap in the innovation space!    In This Episode: [00:50] Introducing WIPO and today's guests, Julio and Elodie.  [02:17] The diverse range of projects that Julio is involved in as head of the Innovation Economy Section of the Department for Economics and Data Analytics at WIPO. [03:28] What Elodie's role as a postdoc research fellow at WIPO entails.  [06:13] Some key findings that are highlighted in the 2022 edition of the World Intellectual Property Report.  [09:55] Two possible explanations for the decrease in green patenting worldwide.  [11:25] The gender gap in the innovation space and why it is problematic.   [12:51] Action that WIPO is taking to help close the gender gap. [14:35] WIPO's approach to collecting information around gender disparities.  [17:15] An overview of the WIPO initiatives that promote gender equality and diversity in the innovation space.   [19:01] How WIPO measures changes in the gender gap.  [20:28] Topics of discussion that will be covered at the symposium that Julio has been invited to attend.    Find Julio:Email Find Elodie:Email

For more information about the Standing Committee on Copyrights and Related Rights, see this SCCR website Sara:     Welcome to another episode of copyright chat. Today I have Winston Tabb joining me from Johns Hopkins University he's the University Librarian and a longtime expert adviser to the copyright and other legal matters committee to the IFLA organization. Welcome. Winston: Thank you. Sara: It's so nice to see you and to see you on the verge I understand of your retirement? Winston: Yes. I think it's going to happen sometime. I just don't know exactly when because I had agreed to stay until my successor was in place. So the process is moving along. I heard a rumor the day will come soon. Sara:     Well, congratulations! And I know throughout your career you've had a lot of interest and expertise with international copyright issues, both with the copyright and other legal matters committee and with the World Intellectual Property Organization. And I wanted to take this opportunity to kind of pick your brain about that process of how we the United States and IFLA engage with the World Intellectual Property Organization. From what I've heard, it seems to move pretty slowly and it's a very political process. But, correct me if I'm wrong. Winston: Well, I think one of the first things to understand is what an unusual organization the World Intellectual Property Organization is. Within a particular subgroup, the Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights, which is the one with which we engage, I don't remember how many branches there are at WIPO, but that's the most important one for us. What I couldn't believe when I went to my first meeting and it still amazes me is that you can have an organization with, I think, 185 of so member-states and WIPO functions entirely by consensus. That is, there is never a vote taken in the sense that you would have your normal body where 51% of the people would be able to prevail if they can do that. So any one country, whether it's Russia or Ukraine, the largest or smallest country, can really bring things to a halt. And that's why it is so frustrating sometimes because the progress is so glacial. On the other hand, when you do have a victory in an environment like this, it's really a major one. So the most important thing that has happened, I believe that the 20 or so years that I've been engaged there is the adoption of the Marrakesh Treaty and it almost didn't happen and took quite a long time several false starts and starting over. But part of the reason that happens in actual fact is because of the necessity for having consensus. Sara: Yeah, that's a really good point. I mean, I think most people in the world, or I guess maybe not most, but many are aware of that treaty. And it seemed like a pretty smooth process from the outside. But can you give us an insider's view a little bit of how long this was pending and what happened with the treaty? Winston: Well, as I said, there were several false starts. So, I went to WIPO for the first time in 2003, which is the time when I was appointed to be the chair of IFLA's copyright committee. Of course, I was just amazed at how things worked and how they didn't. My very first meeting that I went to was of the cultural administration group. I think you're gonna be working with them, if I understand right. So, we're working on some kind of instrument that would deal with cultures and I was so fascinated to see, but sitting at the table were people from various minority groups. The Sami from the North and the Maori from New Zealand were actually part of the official groups. And it was a very substantive discussion. So I was expecting it to be like that when I went to other meetings such as to the meetings of the standing committee on copyright, but it was definitely not the case. The Standing Committee on Copyright it members of federal agencies only. The United States usually has people there led always by the Patent and Trademark Office because they are the executive branch, but also generally at least one person from the US Copyright Office. But I was really kind of amazed when we first started working on what came to be the Marrakesh Treaty to find that there had been a lot of efforts in the early 1990s to have such a treaty and they finally just completely collapsed. So, this was like a second start. And you never know exactly why something works the second time around. I don't think it was just because we all had t-shirts which we probably wore saying “stop the book famine.” But I think that really helped as a way of kind of characterizing what it would feel like to be blind, able to have access to books it was a book famine. That word famine really just captured people's attention. Nevertheless, it did take at least six or seven years. I can't even remember quite how long it went. At first everyone was kinda just nice about it. And then there's the publishing industry that began to realize this might actually happen. They began to be very, very oppositional—really oppose almost every aspect and were able quite often to get other national entities to agree with them. Probably the most negative force against this treaty and the one that I believe was most susceptible to the publishers was the European Union. So this is another thing that is very unusual about the SCCR, which is that when we're in session, it is possible for someone from Luxembourg to speak or from France in their national capacity. But really the authority speaking comes from the European Union representatives. Of course, in a way it represented  the bureaucrats who speak for that entire group. And the EU was just not willing to have any part of this until this moment that I will never forget in Marrakesh. We finally met and the negotiations were going on. But the EU was not moving. And I saw the then Director General do something that I never saw before or after which was essentially to call out the EU in the public session and basically say you are continuing the book famine. If we can't make some progress here after we've gathered, and made so much progress and get to the finish line, it's going to be on you. And you can just feel the moment when the publishers and their representatives to the EU understood that they were getting ready to come under a very black cloud, so to speak. So it was really one of those wonderful turning moments right in the middle of that week. And then things fairly quickly came to a close, but it was at least a 20 maybe even a 25-year process. So I try to think about what I think our first Copyright Treaty for libraries was only introduced in 2005 or 2006 I think we first began to shop it around. So if you're taking a long view and compare it to what happened with the blind, where we're doing okay. We have to take solace. Sara:  So it's interesting because you are pointing out that the only folks that really have a voice at these treaty discussions are official representatives. So how are the publishers then getting their voices heard? Is this through independent meetings? Do they come to the meeting as an observer? How are they involved? Winston: Yes. Well, they're involved in exactly the same way we are. So one thing I will say about the standing committee on copyright or related rights is very open to NGOs that wanted to come. Usually the very first agenda item after adoption of the agenda is the addition of new members. And so we've never had a problem about that. So we're often actually seat them side-by-side with the publishers that are all as usual people from the licensing agencies. I'm sorry. It's been so long since I was actually there. But we're all sitting there together, representatives from all the NGOs with our label in front of us. Almost always, member states are invited to speak first, and then if there's time, then we will be invited to speak. And I will say, I think we've been treated very fairly. When I put my light on saying I want to speak, I'm almost always the first or one of the very first people who is invited to make what we call an intervention. Sara:  Okay, so. they're there talking with the EU. They're also participating in the group discussions. That makes perfect sense. So, after Marrakesh, where do you see the SCCR headed? What is the next kind of issue that's on the horizon? Winston: Well, the very biggest issue that's on the horizon and the longest there is a broadcasting treaty. So there are basically right now two major issues before the SCCR. There are a few others that are kinda crept in, like the Russians wanting to have theater stage directors rights. But the two topics that are given, roughly four out of the five days, more or less evenly divided are the treaty on broadcasting and then the treaty for libraries, archives, and museums. That one has been under discussion. It was under discussion the first time I went, and it is still under discussion. Glacial progress is made. Then one of the things I need to be clear about another oddity or feature of the SCCR is that regime change really matters. So you can be moving along very nicely and suddenly a country's regime changes. This happened to us very explicitly with Brazil. We had two very, very strong supporters from the Brazilian copyright office working with us very closely who were advocating for us, and would often introduce articles or motions that were in our favor. And one day we were there and they had this panic came across their faces. We found out the regime had changed. They had been summoned home. And the next people who came from Brazil had no interest in library. So that's a whole other reason that it takes so long to get things done because you develop relations and then those people vanish. Another problem is that people who are there usually, not for the United States, for example, who really do come from our federal agencies, but most of the people representing countries there are the ambassador of that country to the United Nations in Geneva. And so they don't have any copyright expertise. There may be meetings that are going on across town, one of the other United Nations agencies, so they may have to divide their time. And of course, as is true with diplomats, they usually have a two or three-year posting. So it's been a constant reeducating for the people who are actually representing the countries and have the vote. So that's another factor that complicates what actually makes speed and possible. We're in the constant educational mode, which is enjoyable from one of view, because you are training people. But it's really sad when you see someone who's really been a strong, fervent supporter from one of the country's depart. And you know, you may not get a good replacement. And you have to start all over again. Sara: It's curious to me that the strong supporter doesn't then talk to their replacement. Because it seems to me that the education could be within the organization instead of from the other participants. Does that ever happen or is that pretty rare? Winston: It does happen and I  could name examples. I won't necessarily here, but there are countries where that has definitely happened. But again, these people are diplomats who aren't necessarily in copyright. They may have much more concerned about human rights, which is across the street, or international trade, which is down the road. So they don't necessarily think that this is even an important topic as compared to others that they would really highlight as putting up the top of the list for their successor. Sara: Well, that makes sense, but it's also seems like it's unfortunate for those folks who are invested. And when you're talking about libraries and archives, are you talking about the ongoing discussions about how we have, for instance, in the United States, exceptions for libraries and archives for preservation is that they issue because I understand Kenny Crews wrote a report years ago for WIPO, kind of outlining the world and how different countries have different laws on this topic. Winston: Yeah. Well, I would say there are three major things that have been wonderful for libraries during the time that I have been working at SCCR. The first one I already talked about was Marrakech. From beginning we're able to see the end of that. The second was that we were invited by the WIPO secretariat in 2003 or 2004, fairly early on in the time that I became engaged, we told them one of the things that was really, really difficult for all of us to know, actually, what were the conditions at all the member states. And WIPO is quite eager and willing to fund nonpartisan kind of activities. And so they asked us to suggest three or four people who might be able to undertake such a study. We put Kenny at the top of our list. I think at the time he was still a Columbia as the copyright librarian. He was engaged to undertake this work, but he did, and it was published. And he was invited to come and do a presentation for, I think a half-day and take questions from the member states about it. So it was the very first time I think there was ever one central place where you could go to see, well how many countries actually have an interlibrary loan provision. About a decade later, WIPO asked Kenny, if he would update that study, which he did. And it's on the SCCR website and has become very, very useful for all of us and providing data that we can actually use, both in our oral presentations that we make, but also in our meetings with the various regional groups. So if I could take another kind of a side note, one of the things I didn't mention, that's also an interesting factor of how we work as a group. Each region has a group, there's an African group, there's a Latin American, Caribbean group, and so on. There is also what's called group B. Which is really the European Union, Canada, the United States. So it's going to be the more developed countries or in a group. And then there's a small subset of the countries of the former Soviet Union and China as its own group, but indicates what we often do both before we get to Geneva, but also while we are there is to arrange meetings with these groups. So quite often at seven o'clock, on a Wednesday morning, we're going in and sitting down with all the representatives from the African countries and talking with them about not only what we want in general, but about what the situation is in those countries. And we've tried with some success to always have a librarian from one of those countries with us because people really prefer to hear someone from Algeria talking about what Africa needs more than they do about someone for the United States. So that's been a wonderful way of making inroads. But again, all of those groups have a one-year term for the chair. So you may have a year when you've got someone from Algeria who loves libraries. The next year? You may get someone from Togo, has no interest at all and doesn't even want to have the library group come and talk to them necessarily. So that's another thing that this constantly changing in interactions with people, because the people changed and then the roles change as well. But anyway, the whole study that was done by Kenny. I think that was one of the most useful things the SCCR has done, and that was our recommendation, but at their expense with something that is still very, very proud of. Sara: You mentioned also there's turnover of the Secretary General. And you also mentioned how instrumental the secretary at was in getting the Marrakesh Treaty past. Does it depend a lot on who that person is? Winston: Yes, it definitely does. And I think what happened with the Marrakesh treaty is that there's a 10-year term of the Director-General and that person's term was coming toward the end. And it's very unusual for that person to be reappointed. So he knew he's going home to Australia. And I think that really made it maybe easier from a practical sense to really press as he did. The good news for us is that we had as the most, the former chair of the standing committee on copyright, the copyright office of Singapore works. And when it came time to choose a new Director General, he was chosen out of several different applicants. So we now have at the top level, within the World Intellectual Property Organization, someone who is himself a copyright specialist, has direct experience of having lead the SCCR for a five-year term. He has continued to be very, very supportive of us. Sara: And what year is he now and his tenure term? Winston: I think it may be so hard to remember anything during COVID. I think it's the fourth year or maybe the fifth, something, something like that, but maybe four years. I think. He also has been very instrumental in helping us get one thing done. The last big thing that I'm really particularly proud of because it is tangible, and that is the preparation is something called the preservation toolkit. So during COVID when meetings weren't being held but there was still hoping there can be some progress. I did reach out to the director general as well as to the Assistant Secretary General who's working in the copyright arena to see if there wasn't something we can do in the preservation. Because that seemed to be something that everyone understood was a problem. But not every country you really has the authority to do copying even for preservation purposes. So what eventually happened was that they said, well, why don't we prepare a toolkit? And that term is extremely important because within the odd way in which WIPO works, a toolkit, didn't require the approval of all the member states. It didn't have to be discussed with the member states, doesn't have to be adopted by the member states. It's a tool that countries may use or not use. So that's why it was able to proceed. Something's better than nothing. I think in this environment. And I'm especially happy we did it because of some of the things that have happened in the course of the preparation of it. Things like the war, Ukraine, things like floods, things like fires, and the National Library of South Africa and the museum and Rio has really made it very clear that if you don't do some preemptive preservation, it's too late and it needs to be cross-border If it's truly gonna be preservation. So the secretary did commission representatives from each of our sectors, libraries, archives, and museum, to prepare this toolkit that has been prepared. And it is going to be presented on-site reading in Geneva at the very end of this month. I'm so sad I'm not able to go to this effect because it exactly coincides with my retirement dinner. So I really didn't have much of a choice about it, but by the end of September, this will have been released, introduced and then we, as librarians at our friends at the archives and museum world, can begin promoting it and using it. We hope that will at least be able to get preservation provisions in national law as well as kind of moving us, we hope toward international instrument at some point that really deals with the cross-border issues. Sara: That sounds like really important work, especially given as you mentioned, all the disasters we've been having. And we're going to have more with natural disasters and fires. And I mean, you name it right. Hurricanes. I think climate change is really threatening our collections and our collective memory institutions. Winston: We keep making the point that after the things are gone, they kept the preserved. It seems so obvious, but this need that you don't have to even prove at this point that something is deteriorating. You just need to be able to get copies of it somewhere that are safe. And that requires that it be at a different location. Maybe ideally multiple locations, even if it's just about to find out at some point, how many is enough? One thing I didn't really mention at the beginning, I should have, because it's a really important part of our collaboration. When we first began, it was libraries. And we actually drafted something we called TLAB the Treaty for Libraries Archives and Museums. And I was really happy working with archives and museums over time that we were able to get them engaged with us as well. So we now have a draft treaty called TLAB treaty for libraries, archives, and museums. And the three entities work very, very closely as we saw with the development of the presentation toolkit. But there was one representatives from each of the sectors that were very much involved in preparation of that. So that's a great step forward as well. I think that thinking about how libraries, archives, and museums are much more alike than they are different and we worked together, not separately or against one another. Sara: Yeah. And I think your point about the many copies is really important because it's not only that you've made the copy which is important, that's a first step. But then if that copy is held on-site and the site is destroyed, you still don't have the copy. So, the cross-border issue really seems central. And I hope that we're able to make some progress on that, too. Winston: I think that it's a fairly, fairly easy within SCCR contexts, it's kinda crazy to say, but I can imagine getting instrument that provides for the preservation. I think the hardest part is going to be about the access part. One of the things we keep saying there needs to be able to be access. You can't just have something that was copied in Algeria and it's being housed in the library in Paris, but can never be open. So, at some point, there has to be reasonable trigger event that would enable the preserve work to actually used. And there are people who still are arguing, yes, but when that happens, there needs to be a fee. And that's it, kinda battle that we'll have to find with the people who want to monetize everything, but at least it's a step in the right direction. And even if we could get, each country has its own preservation provision, that would be a step forward in the right direction too. I think we forget in the United States how it was lucky we really are never entirely satisfied or will we ever be? But when I think about provisions that we have an compared to a lot of our counterparts, including the European Union, we actually are much better off with mitigate them. I think that's true and I think it's part of the reason that this work at, at the international level is so important is to really show that these provisions are important and that these provisions help libraries, archives, museums, and our patrons right to gain access to materials. I think that's something that the United States can really lead on. Well, we keep just saying our information is borderless. I mean, this whole idea that goes back to an era when a book was one place and then it might be the next. Just like that now and I think again with the passage of time and seeing how the Internet has developed and so on. People knowing their hearts, if that really is true, they may not want to get that embedded in a way that is really useful at the national or international level. But there's no denying that we have to be thinking about things not at national level, international level, because of the way in which information is created and shared and stored today. Sara: Very true. Well, this has been a really fascinating conversation. I've learned a lot and I hope the listeners appreciate it too. And congratulations on your well-earned retirement. It sounds like you are going to continue to do wonderful things. I look forward to many, many more years of your engagement with international copyright. Winston: Thank you so much. I've really enjoyed it, bye.

Listener The Gregolas asked if I might explain The Illegal Number. What makes a number illegal? Can numbers actually be illegal? Isn't that absurd? YES! See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Ukraine war linked to ‘massive malnutrition crisis' affecting millions in other emergencies DR Congo violence against children must stop, demands UNICEF chief Digital innovation quadrupled from 2000 - 2020: WIPO report

Ukraine war linked to ‘massive malnutrition crisis' affecting millions in other emergencies DR Congo violence against children must stop, demands UNICEF chief Digital innovation quadrupled from 2000 - 2020: WIPO report