1. Strategic Dialogue on Coherence Between Multilateral, Regional and Bilateral Processes on Intellectual Property and a pro-Development Agenda on IPRs 20 November 2003 Founder's Hall, University of Miami “ Managing the Challenge of a Globalized Intellectual Property Regime” Assad omer

2. Main points Basic message Observation Propositions Challenges Proposals –Safeguards –Opportunities

3. Basic message Knowledge-based global economy Determinants to compete in innovation driven markets: the abilities to create new technology and to acquire and adapt technologies from both external and internal sources Challenge to establish and maintain effective access to this information and to devise mechanisms for deploying it effectively within the economy.

4. Observations Risks that access to these critical technologies be limited in an overly protectionist intellectual property environment (proliferation of legal monopolies and related barriers to entry making innovation costly and difficult) Competition in innovation based markets may be restricted by a progressive re-regulation (not properly balance incentive to innovate against the needs for dissemination of knowledge)

5. Propositions Higher levels of IP protection may produce specific incentive effects on local innovative capacity - FDI, licensing, and the purchasing of knowledge goods - –at the expense of free competition Lower levels of IP protection favour free competition –at the expense of legal incentives to innovate or create Effects on cost of innovation; follow-on applications; refusals to deal, barriers to entry –discourages firms from undertaking adaptations and improvements

6. Technological advances Under much less regulated and much more competitive conditions With easier and less costly access to essential scientific and technical inputs Competition in technology advances Availability of stock of knowledge: technology into public domain and public goods Access to the stock increases incentives to invest in innovation and R&D, by means of IPRs

7. To generate creative outputs all innovators borrow inputs from each other and from the public domain Example: Open Source Software:Linux and OS X Access and use of commons for public research purposes on favourable and affordable terms Does not mean without payment

8. Challenges To preserve an appropriate balance of public and private interests To promote competition for lowering barriers to entry, reducing transaction costs, and preserving access to inputs - especially scientific data and technical information - at acceptable costs What to do and how?

9. Proposals: Policy principles Access to technological information on a competitive basis and on fair and equitable terms and conditions Flexibility in the ways the standards be incorporated into their domestic legal systems Control anticompetitive practices by technology rights holders which unduly impede the transfer and dissemination of technology

10. To suspend further harmonization exercises Example of new European database protection right Why to harmonize while there is on-going reform in many areas of IP? Pursue policies that avoid free riding practices undermining the incentive to invest in new technologies everywhere A Moratorium on New International Intellectual Property Standards

11. Setting up of interministerial coordination committees at the national/regional levels Pool regional and global expertise as a permanent infrastructure to support the work of negotiators Formulate broad-based policies and practices to resist undesirable levels of protection Proposals: Supporting structures

12. Opportunities Numerous areas Strengthening Trade Secret, Trade Mark and Related Laws Using Laws Protecting Geographical Indications of Origin Search for alternative protection and promotion mechanisms Compensatory Liability Regimes to Protect Small- Scale Innovation

13. Preserving the Worldwide Research Commons for Scientific Data and Technical Information Strengthening Competition Laws and Policy Bargaining Around International Intellectual Property Standards Differentiating Intellectual Property Policies by GDP Per Capita Capacities