International Association for the Protection of Intellectual Property
 | |
| Type: | Non-Profit |
| Industry: | Intellectual Property |
| Founded: | 1897 |
| Headquarters: | AIPPI General Secretariat Tödistrasse 16 P.O. Box 8027 Zurich |
| Country: | Switzerland |
| Website: | www.aippi.org |
| Facebook: | AIPPI |
| Twitter: |  @AIPPI_ORG
|
| Key People | |
| Yoon Bae Kim, President John Bochnovic, Vice-President Stephan Freischem, Secretary General | |
International Association for the Protection of Intellectual Property (AIPPI) derived from its French name Association Internationale pour la Protection de la Propriété Intellectuelle is an international non-profit organization composed of professionals and entities in private, public and academics engaged in the filed of Intellectual Property (IP). The organizations primary objective is to develop and improve the global intellectual property protection of copyrights, designs, trademarks, trade names, patents and other intellectual property rights. The organization also aims to eradicate illegal and unfair business and trade practices. Since its establishment, AIPPI has adopted 700 Resolutions that were presented to International Governmental Organizations such as World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) in particular. Yoon-Bae Kim is the current president of the AIPPI and its' headquarters is located in Zurich, Switzerland.[1]
History edit
In 1983, the Paris Convention for Intellectual Property Rights was signed. Following this significant event was the establishment of AIPPI on May 8, 1897 in Brussels by scientists and practitioners in the field of Intellectual property. The organization conducted annual congress and reunions, however its activities were interrupted by the World War 1 in 1914. Eugen Blum, a Swiss Patent Attorney restored AIPPI in 1925 in Switzerland.[2]
Organizational Structure edit
AIPPI's membership is comprised of corporations and individuals in different professions such as engineers, judges, lawyers, patent lawyers, scientists and patent lawyers who are actively engaged and interested on issues related to intellectual property rights and protection. These members belong to one of the 64 National Groups or the only one Regional Group. Independent members from countries without an existing AIPPI Group are affiliated with the international organization. AIPPI has four primary international bodies which include:[3]
- General Assembly- delegated to handle the adoption and modification of statutes where all members has the right to participate
- Executive Committee-the principal decision making body which is composed of around 300 delegates from the different groups of AIPPI
- Council of Presidents-is composed of AIPPI group presidents and representatives of Independent members
- Bureau-is lead by the president of AIPPI together with the vice-president, the secretary general, the reporter general, treasurer general including their deputies and assistants who supervise the activities of the organization.
The organization is also composed of a General Secretariat and Staff with different committees including the Programme Committee, Finance Advisory Committee, Nominating Committee, Communications Committee and Membership Committee.
Members of the Bureau edit
- Yoon Bae Kim, President
- John Bochnovic, Vice President
- Stephan Freischem, Secretary General
- Thierry Calame, Reporter General
- Gunnar Baumgärtel, Treasurer General
- Laurent Thibon, Deputy Secretary General
- Nicola Dagg, Deputy Reporter General
- Sarah Matheson, Deputy Reporter General
- Sergio M. Ellmann, Assistant Secretary General
- Karen Abraham, Assistant Secretary General
- Renata Righetti, Assistant Secretary General
- John Osha, Assistant Reporter General
- John Osha, Assistant Reporter General
- Sara Ulfsdotter, Assistant Reporter General
ICANN Involvement edit
AIPPI members are actively involve in sharing their comments and recommendations regarding the activities and policies of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers. On June 8, 2001, AIPPI commented that the WIPO2 Report was a success because ICANN decided to adopt and implement the Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy to regulate the generic top level domain name (gTLD). AIPPI made the following comments and suggestions:[4]
- Cases filed under the UDRP should be limited where a clear abuse of registration happened and maintain simple system of rules and regulations.
- Regulations related to the Domain Name System (DNS) should not be use to change intellectual property laws worldwide just to provide additional rights to property owners.
- Regarding the issue on International Non-proprietary Names, AIPPI pointed out that protection should only be extended when an increased number of abusive registration requires solution. In addition, the organization also expressed that it does not support restrictions on domain names for INNs.
- AIPPI does not also support total restriction on domain name registration for International Governmental Organizations.
- On issues related to personal names, AIPPI believed that the current UDRP system should remain and individuals can file a case against an entity if he or she can establish proofs that the name is also a trademark.
- AIPPI did not support any measure to implement protections related to names of places and countries but supported extending the UDRP to protect trade names.
- The organization suggested that the current information on the Whois data base should remain in the record and suggested that intellectual property owners and enforcement agencies should have access to the data base.
On March 15, 2000, AIPPI welcomed the European Commissions proposal to create the .eu top level domain name to serve the needs of European businesses and consumers. In lieu of of this proposal, the organization suggested that the ICANN UDRP should be used by the .eu TLD to protect trademark owners from cyber criminals. It also supported the implementation on second level domains for the .eu TLD. AIPPI believed that it will reduce problems between competing trademark owners. Overall the organization emphasized that need for a sufficient mechanism to protect the intellectual property rights holders for possible abuse.[5]