Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
05PARIS4725
2005-07-06 16:09:00
UNCLASSIFIED
Embassy Paris
Cable title:  

USUNESCO: CONVENTION ON THE PROTECTION OF THE

Tags:  AORC KIPR UNESCO WIPO WSIS 
pdf how-to read a cable
This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.

061609Z Jul 05
UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 PARIS 004725 

SIPDIS

FROM USMISSION UNESCO PARIS
FOR IO/T - ROBERTS AND COWLEY, EB - PAUL ACETO
PLEASE PASS TO USPTO - M KLEPINGER

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: AORC KIPR UNESCO WIPO WSIS
SUBJECT: USUNESCO: CONVENTION ON THE PROTECTION OF THE
RIGHTS OF BROADCAST ORGANIZATIONS - PROPOSED BY INDIA

REF: PARIS 003245

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 PARIS 004725

SIPDIS

FROM USMISSION UNESCO PARIS
FOR IO/T - ROBERTS AND COWLEY, EB - PAUL ACETO
PLEASE PASS TO USPTO - M KLEPINGER

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: AORC KIPR UNESCO WIPO WSIS
SUBJECT: USUNESCO: CONVENTION ON THE PROTECTION OF THE
RIGHTS OF BROADCAST ORGANIZATIONS - PROPOSED BY INDIA

REF: PARIS 003245


1. This is an action cable. See action request in para. 7.


2. Summary: The U.S. Delegation to the Intergovernmental
Council of the Rome Convention meeting at UNESCO
headquarters on June 27-28, 2005 successfully advocated for
a report from the Council that indicates that the right
place for negotiations on a new treaty for protection of
broadcasting organizations is the World Intellectual
Property Organization (WIPO) - not UNESCO. The twelve-
member Council drafted an opinion for the Director General
(DG) of UNESCO that endorsed the continuation of such work
at WIPO and clearly discouraged duplication of negotiation
efforts at UNESCO. This issue came before the Council as
the result of a proposal by India (see REFTEL) to introduce
a convention on broadcasting at UNESCO. The USDEL effort
supported ongoing multilateral negotiations on this topic at
WIPO and was aimed at keeping Member States from using
UNESCO as a venue of convenience when their objectives are
not met in other international fora. End Summary.


3. The twelve-member Intergovernmental Council of the Rome
Convention met at UNESCO headquarters on June 27-28, 2005.
The Council had been requested by the 171st UNESCO Executive
Board to comment on a proposal by India to place a
convention on the protection of the rights of broadcast
organizations on the agenda of the next UNESCO General
Conference in October 2005. The U.S. is not a party to the
Rome Convention but took part as an Observer with a
delegation from USPTO, the U.S. Copyright Office, and the
U.S. Mission to UNESCO.


4. The UNESCO Executive Board request was included in the
agenda as item 10.1: "Proposal for a convention on
broadcasting and the new technologies (document
ILO/UNESCO/WIPO/ICR.19.8)." The Council expressed the
following opinion to the Director General of UNESCO (Draft
Final Report ILO/UNESCO/OMPI/ICR.19.9 Prov.):

"The Council examined the proposal of India, further to the
resolution of the Executive Board and at the request of its
Director-General. The Committee is concerned about
duplication of work if negotiations were to be launched at
UNESCO. All members of the Council who took the floor were
therefore not in favor of launching of such negotiations and
endorsed the continuation of efforts at WIPO. Three
observers agreed with the opinion of the Council members and
two observers supported the proposal of India. UNESCO was
encouraged to become more actively involved in such
negotiations at WIPO."


5. This result on the Indian proposal for a broadcasting
convention was in line with our objective to keep Member
States from introducing conventions at UNESCO that are
outside its mandate. During their interventions, all
Council members were in agreement that the venue for
discussions and negotiations on intellectual property
protection for broadcasting is WIPO not UNESCO. Most also
noted that they opposed any idea of opening the issue at
UNESCO because it would be a duplication of ongoing efforts
at WIPO. The EU had strong representation on the Council
and held the line on a common response on this issue.


6. Comment: It was obvious that India was not satisfied
with the outcome and will likely try to open the topic up
for further discussion and possible action when the DG makes
his follow-up report to the next Executive Board (September
2005) on their proposal for a convention on broadcasting at
UNESCO. End comment.


7. Action request. Given the importance of keeping this
issue off the table at UNESCO, it would be useful to have an
expert familiar with WIPO issues and negotiations at the
Executive Board session when this issue comes up in
September.
OLIVER