Keep Us Strong WikiLeaks logo

Currently released so far... 251287 / 251,287

Articles

Browse latest releases

Browse by creation date

Browse by origin

A B C D F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W Y Z

Browse by tag

A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z

Browse by classification

Community resources

courage is contagious

Viewing cable 05DUBLIN365, IRISH SUPPORTS U.S. POSITIONS FOR APRIL WIPO

If you are new to these pages, please read an introduction on the structure of a cable as well as how to discuss them with others. See also the FAQs
Reference ID Created Released Classification Origin
05DUBLIN365 2005-03-24 14:23 2011-08-30 01:44 UNCLASSIFIED Embassy Dublin
This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.
UNCLAS DUBLIN 000365 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: ETRD KIPR EAID KPAO OIIP WIPO
SUBJECT: IRISH SUPPORTS U.S. POSITIONS FOR APRIL WIPO 
SESSION ON IP AND DEVELOPMENT 
 
REF: STATE 47851 
 
1.  On March 24, Post delivered reftel talking points to 
Jacob Rajan, Head of the Patents Section in the Intellectual 
Property Unit of the Department of Enterprise, Trade, and 
Employment (DETE).  Rajan had represented Ireland at the 
March 21-21 Munich meetings of the Working Group of 
Industrialized Nations on Intellectual Property (IP) and 
Development.  Rajan said that Ireland generally supported the 
U.S. submission for the April 11-13 WIPO Intersessional 
Intergovernmental Meeting (IIM) on IP and Development. 
Ireland also looked favorably upon the paper that the UK 
planned to submit, which, in Rajan's view, did not differ 
substantively from the U.S. proposal. 
 
2.  Rajan specified that Ireland opposed the Brazilian 
recommendation to amend the WIPO Convention to integrate 
development issues into all WIPO activities.  Although 
Ireland favored constructive engagement with Brazil and 
like-minded countries on links between development and IP, 
the GOI disagreed with Brazil's proposal to establish a 
separate body within WIPO to address development issues. 
Rajan observed that WIPO's Permanent Committee for 
Intellectual Property and Development was an available forum 
to discuss such issues.  He added that Ireland's views were 
consistent with the consensus that emerged from the Munich 
discussions.  Since the U.S. submission expressed that 
consensus, the GOI did not plan to submit a paper for 
consideration at the IIM.  Emboffs urged that Irish 
representatives at least participate actively in the IIM 
discussions. 
BENTON