This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 GENEVA 001647 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: ECON KIPR WIPO
SUBJECT: WORLD INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ORGANIZATION (WIPO) 
INTERGOVERNMENTAL COMMITTEE ON INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND 
GENETIC RESOURCES, TRADITIONAL KNOWLEDGE AND FOLKLORE (IGC) 
 
 
SUMMARY 
 
¶1.  The Eighth Session of the World Intellectual Property 
Organization (WIPO) Intergovernmental Committee on 
Intellectual Property and Genetic Resources, Traditional 
Knowledge and Folklore (IGC) was held in Geneva, Switzerland 
from June 6-10, 2005.  The U.S. Delegation Consisted of 
Dominic Keating, Patent Attorney, USPTO; Michael Shapiro, 
Attorney-Advisor, USPTO; Peggy Bulger, Director, American 
Folklife Center, Library of Congress; Marla Poor, 
Attorney-Advisor, U.S. Copyright Office, Library of Congress; 
Ana Christina Villegas, Conservation Officer, U.S. Department 
of State; Leonard Hirsch, Senior Policy Advisor, Smithsonian 
Institution; Jon Santamauro, Intellectual Property Attache, 
U.S. Mission to the WTO, Geneva; and Lisa Carle, Counselor, 
Economic and Science Affairs, U.S. Permanent Mission to the 
United Nations Office and Other International Organizations, 
Geneva.  This was the last meeting of the IGC,s existing 
mandate. 
 
ELECTION OF OFFICERS 
 
¶2.  The Committee unanimously elected Ambassador Makarim 
Wibisona of Indonesia as Chair. 
 
ACCREDITATION OF CERTAIN NGOs 
 
¶3.  The Committee unanimously approved accreditation of the 
following organizations as ad hoc observers: Centre for the 
Management of IP in Health R&D (MIHR), Consumers 
International (CI), Indigenous Knowledge Systems of South 
Africa Trust (IKSSA Trust), Indigenous Peoples Council on 
Biocolonialism (IPCB), International Committee for Museums of 
Ethnography (ICME), Maasai Education Discovery (M.E.D), 
National Council of Otomi / Consejo de la nacion Otomi, Ogiek 
Peoples Development Program (OPDP), Peruvian Society for 
Environmental Law (SPDA), Associacao Paulista da Propriedade 
Intelectual (ASPI), The Fridtjof Nansen Institute (NFI) and 
the Graduate Institute for Development Studies (GREG). 
 
PARTICIPATON OF INDIGENOUS AND LOCAL COMMUNITIES 
 
¶4.  The Committee discussed a voluntary fund for the 
participation of indigenous and local communities, as 
described in document WIPO/GRTKF/IC/8/3.  Although there was 
broad, general support for the proposal, divergent views were 
expressed on specific aspects of it, including on whether the 
fund should be able to draw from the ordinary budget, the 
composition of the advisory board and the purpose of the 
fund.  It was agreed that a revised draft document 
WIPO/GRTKF/IC/8/3 would be prepared and published by June 17, 
¶2005.  Committee participants would be asked to provide 
written comments on the revised draft by July 15, 2005 and a 
third revision of the proposal would be prepared and 
published by the end of July for consideration by the next 
session of the General Assembly. 
 
TRADITIONAL CULTURAL EXPRESSIONS AND TRADITIONAL KNOWLEDGE 
 
¶5.  The IGC considered documents WIPO/GRTKF/IC/8/4 and 
WIPO/GRTKF/IC/8/5, including draft provisions contained in 
the annex of these documents in treaty-like form.  While 
Brazil and other delegations expressed support for the draft 
provisions as a basis for a legally-binding international 
treaty, the United States, Australia, Canada and Japan 
expressed concern, explaining that these provisions were not 
developed on the basis of the objectives and principles 
expressed by Members of the IGC, and that they were created 
by the Secretariat, without input from Member States.  As a 
result of extensive discussions and consultations on these 
documents, Members agreed to a draft decision that noted the 
divergent views on these documents without agreeing to 
continue to negotiate the provisions, as implied by the 
decision paragraphs of the documents.  In the plenary 
session, prior to the adoption of the decision, the 
representative of Nigeria asked the Chair for clarification 
on whether the draft provisions would be updated to reflect 
the views expressed by Members.  After the Chair explained 
his view that the documents may be updated, the United States 
cautioned the Chair against any interpretation of the draft 
decision, explaining that this may unravel a delicately 
balanced text.  The United States also explained that it was 
willing to adopt the decision only on the understanding that 
the decision paragraph would not be adopted and that the 
draft provisions would not be updated.  No other statements 
were made and the decision was adopted.  Following the 
meeting, the Secretariat confirmed that it did not intend to 
update the draft provisions. 
 
GENETIC RESOURCES 
 
¶6.  The Committee took note of documents WIPO/GRTKF/IC/8/9, 
WIPO/GRTKF/IC/8/10, WIPO/GRTKF/IC/8/11, WIPO/GRTKF/IC/8/12, 
WIPO/GRKTF/IC/8/13 AND WIPO/GRTKF/IC/8/14, and further took 
note of the diverse views expressed on this issue. 
 
FUTURE WORK 
 
¶7.  Although Brazil and other delegations had originally 
pushed to drop genetic resources from the agenda and to have 
a target date for any instrument(s) by the end of the next 
budgetary biennium, following extensive consultations, the 
Committee noted the broad support from Committee participants 
on the future work of the Committee and agreed to recommend 
to the General Assembly that the mandate of the Committee be 
extended to the next budgetary biennium to continue its work 
on traditional knowledge, traditional cultural 
expressions/folklore and genetic resources. 
 
NOTE 
 
¶8.  From the outset, Australia, Canada, the EU, Japan, New 
Zealand and Norway strongly voiced support for a positive 
recommendation to the General Assembly for a renewed IGC 
mandate.  Some developing country delegations called for an 
enhanced mandate, to accelerate work on a binding 
international legal instrument and Brazil wanted to remove 
genetic resources from the IGC mandate.  The United States 
highlighted the importance of reaching an agreement on the 
terms of reference for any new mandate prior to making any 
recommendation to the General Assembly on the IGC,s mandate, 
and questioned whether this would be possible to achieve at 
this session of the IGC.  The United States took the initial 
position that any new mandate should focus on national 
experiences and should not be accelerated or limited in 
subject matter.  Australia, Canada and Japan were of the view 
that the new mandate should not be accelerated or limited in 
subject matter.  The Africans were interested in continuing 
the work of the IGC, and may have convinced Brazil and other 
Latin American Countries to drop their demands related to the 
mandate, in order to facilitate a positive recommendation 
from the IGC to the General Assembly on the future mandate. 
 
¶9.  Furthermore, it appears that the African Group and other 
developing countries were forced to drop their demands for a 
negotiation on the draft traditional cultural expressions and 
traditional knowledge provisions in order to reach an 
agreement for a positive recommendation to the General 
Assembly on the future mandate. 
 
¶10.  It appears that Brazil wanted to remove genetic 
resources from the IGC,s mandate in order to create 
additional pressure that may help to elevate genetic 
resources in general, and a new disclosure requirement in the 
patent laws in particular, to a negotiating item in the Doha 
Trade round of the World Trade Organization (WTO), in the 
lead up to the Hong Kong Ministerial Conference scheduled to 
be held at the end of this year, while satisfying the desire 
of the Africa Group to continue work on TCE,s and TK.  This 
move may also have been designed to create pressure on the 
CBD Ad Hoc ABS Working Group, which is also considering new 
disclosure requirements. 
Moley