Bureaucrats, staff, Administrators
8,157
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 1:
Line 1: − + Line 20:
Line 20: − + − + − + + + + Line 46:
Line 49: − + − + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + − + − + − == External links== − * [http://www.wipo.int//portal/index.html.en WIPO] − + − __NOTOC__+
no edit summary
{{CompanyInfo|
{{CompanyInfo|
| logo = WIPO_logo.jpg
| logo = WipoLogo.png
| type = Non-Profit
| type = Non-Profit
| industry =
| industry =
}}
}}
The '''World Intellectual Property Organization''' ('''WIPO''') it is a specialized United Nations agency tasked with the development of accessible and harmonious systems of Intellectual Property.<ref>[http://fsfe.org/projects/wipo/ Fsfe]</ref> It aims at rewarding creativity while stimulating unique economic developments, with a mind towards public interests.<ref>[http://www.asil.org/rio/wipo.html Reports on International Organizations]</ref>
The '''World Intellectual Property Organization''' ('''WIPO''') is a specialized agency of the United Nations dedicated in developing a balanced and effective [[Intellectual Property|intellectual property]] (IP) systems to foster creativity and innovation in order to help advance the economic, cultural a social development of all countries around the world.<ref>[http://www.wipo.int/about-wipo/en/ What is WIPO]</ref>
==History==
==History==
The WIPO Convention was signed in 1967, although the organization did not begin proper functioning until 1970.<ref>[http://www.asil.org/rio/wipo.html Reports on International Organizations]</ref> It was established by WIPO Convention with reference from its Member States. The main objective of WIPO was to enhance the protection of IP around the globe. This is carried out by cooperation amongst all member states as well as other international organizations. In 1974, it became a part of the United Nation.<ref>[http://www.patentlens.net/daisy/KeyOrgs/1236/418/420.html Patent Lens-Key Agreements and Organisations in Intellectual Property]</ref>In 1996, it entered into an agreement with the WTO (World Trade Organisation) thereby expanding its trade role.<ref>[http://www.patentlens.net/daisy/KeyOrgs/1236/418/420.html Patent Lens-Key Agreements and Organisations in Intellectual Property]</ref>
The WIPO Convention was signed in 1967, although the organization did not begin functioning until 1970.<ref>[http://www.asil.org/rio/wipo.html Reports on International Organizations]</ref> It was established by WIPO Convention with reference from its Member States. The main objective of WIPO was to enhance the protection of IP around the globe. This is carried out by cooperation amongst all member states as well as other international organizations. In 1974, it became a part of the United Nations.<ref>[http://www.patentlens.net/daisy/KeyOrgs/1236/418/420.html Patent Lens-Key Agreements and Organisations in Intellectual Property]</ref>In 1996, it entered into an agreement with the [[World Trade Organisation]], thereby expanding its trade role.<ref>[http://www.patentlens.net/daisy/KeyOrgs/1236/418/420.html Patent Lens-Key Agreements and Organisations in Intellectual Property]</ref>
==Organization==
===WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center===
The World Arbitration and Mediation Center (WIPO Center) was created in 1994 to offer alternative dispute resolution options to resolve international commercial disputes between private parties. The center was developed by experts in cross-border dispute settlement, arbitration, mediation and determination procedures. It headquarters is located in Geneva, Switzerland and an office in Singapore.<ref>[http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/center/background.html About WIPO Center]</ref>
===Organization===
The Secretariat of WIPO is based in Geneva. The Secretariat's duty is to implement decisions made by the WIPO, to administer the global IP registration systems, and to counsel WIPO members. It is also responsible for executing the plans and programs that help in achievement of WIPO’s aims. Activities and transactions of the organization are enacted by the Director together with the Member States.
The Secretariat of WIPO is based in Geneva. The Secretariat's duty is to implement decisions made by the WIPO, to administer the global IP registration systems, and to counsel WIPO members. It is also responsible for executing the plans and programs that help in achievement of WIPO’s aims. Activities and transactions of the organization are enacted by the Director together with the Member States.
This organization works with various stakeholders to achieve its goals. These stakeholders include non-governmental organizations, inter-governmental organizations and representatives of civil society. It also includes representatives of industry groups. The meetings are attended by more than 250 [[NGO]]s and [[IGO]]s.
This organization works with various stakeholders to achieve its goals. These stakeholders include non-governmental organizations, inter-governmental organizations and representatives of civil society. It also includes representatives of industry groups. The meetings are attended by more than 250 [[NGO]]s and [[IGO]]s.
==WIPO Program and Budget plan==
==WIPO Program and Budget Plan==
WIPO has to present a Program and Budget plan in every two years, containing performance measures, particulars of the objectives and budget planning of all the events of the organization. The document is sent to the Member States for their approval. The organization is self-financing, with a majority of funds being spent on Organization events. The remaining 10 percent is spent on revenue from the events of the contributing States. The wings of Internal Audit and Oversight Division together with an Audit Committee and External Auditor help in proper functions of WIPO. These help in smooth functions of the organization and help in carrying out the events.<ref>[http://www.asil.org/rio/wipo.html Reports on International Organizations]</ref>
WIPO has to present a program and budget plan every two years, containing performance measures, particulars of the objectives and budget planning for all the events of the organization. The document is sent to the Member States for their approval. The organization is self-financing, with a majority of funds being spent on organization events. The wings of Internal Audit and Oversight Division together with an Audit Committee and External Auditor help in proper functions of WIPO.<ref>[http://www.asil.org/rio/wipo.html Reports on International Organizations]</ref>
==Correspondence between WIPO and ICANN==
===Related to new gTLD program of ICANN===
* May 13th, 2011—WIPO’s observations on Discussion Draft of [[ICANN]]’s new [[gTLD]] program<ref>[http://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/amc/en/docs/icann130511.pdf WIPO’s observations on Discussion Draft of ICANN’s new gTLD program]</ref>
The Arbitration and Mediation Center of WIPO helps to administer and design the balanced IP systems throughout the world. The Center is a main resource center working with the [[UDRP]] i.e. Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy. There was no dearth of ideas to keep a balance between different positions and many of them have been included in the present format of Rights Protection Mechanisms of [[ICANN]]. Some observations of April 2011 Discussion Draft of the New [[gTLD]] Applicant Guidebook” are explained below:
'''Trademark Clearinghouse''': [[ICANN]] should view the expansion of fee based Clearinghouse with caution and should keep in mind the national and International [[IP]] norms while determining identifiers. Clarification must be made on outstanding matters like measures for fee apportionment, relation to determinations of trademark office, treatment of word and design marks and non-Latin scripts.
'''Uniform Rapid Suspension (URS)''': The [[URS]] format has demands in many fields. Some modalities like timelines have been tweaked, but there are many serious problems that are still unaddressed. To safeguard the URS format, [[ICANN]] must make sensible decisions and come up with a policy.
'''Post Delegation Dispute Resolution (PDDRP)''': WIPO’s suggestion of establishing a [[PDDRP|Post Delegation Dispute Resolution]] has been taken up by [[ICANN]]. However, the gains that are made as a result of registration activities breach t3rd party rights. Thus, there should be a positive collaboration with a long term view.
* 9th March, 2011--Observation of Arbitration and Mediation Center of WIPO on scorecard of GAC on protection of rights and [[ICANN]] Board’s corresponding questions<ref>[http://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/amc/en/docs/icann090311.pdf Observation of Arbitration and Mediation Center of WIPO on scorecard of GAC on protection of rights and ICANN Board’s corresponding questions]</ref>
'''Trademark Clearinghouse''': Expanding the Clearinghouse data scopes will make it difficult for [[ICANN]] to ensure proper safeguarding of clearinghouse operators and data. Data sources are very easily available and any expansion must avoid the loss of individuals and SMEs, who are not expected to use clearinghouse data or who are not aware of it. Increasing the scope of Clearinghouse date will lead to costly complexities.
'''Uniform Rapid Suspension (URS)''': The [[URS]] was always for prima facie, so operating as a substitute of the [[UDRP]] should be avoided. [[ICANN]] must clarify what should be the certification criteria to ground the examiners in trademark practice and law. [[ICANN]] must also clarify whether an examiner should be internal or external with respect to the provider. Track record of the providers in relevant jurisprudence training must be considered.
'''Post Delegation Dispute Resolution (PDDRP)''': The resolve of [[ICANN]] to limit [[PDDRP]]’s scope is a big task for this sort of [[RPM]]. The [[PDDRP]] provides a means to owners of the trademark so that they address the breach without much difficulty. They don’t need to go through costly, time consuming and repetitive mechanisms.
* 2nd December, 2010--WIPO’s comments of Proposed Final Applicant Guidebook of [[ICANN]]<ref>[http://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/amc/en/docs/icann021210.pdf WIPO’s comments of Proposed Final Applicant Guidebook of ICANN]</ref>
The Center noted that many observer organizations' representatives and delegations have expressed that intellectual property rights in [[DNS]] (Domain Name System) need protection, especially with respect to the DNS expansion which has been planned by the [[ICANN]]. Various delegations have raised this concern and they feel that [[ICANN]] should review and amend the [[UDRP]] i.e. Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy initiated by WIPO. The chair said that the WIPO Secretariat’s contribution in the field of Internet Domain Names was endorsed and supported by the Standing Committee on the Law of Trademarks, Industrial Designs and Geographical Indications (SCT). The chair also requested to submit a report on various developments at SCT’s next session.
* 21st July, 2010-- WIPO’s observation about [[ICANN]]’s Brussels meeting<ref>[http://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/amc/en/docs/icann210710.pdf WIPO’s observation about ICANN’s Brussels meeting]</ref>
It seemed that few participants were self-appointed and there were conflicts of interests. Such things arise at the cost of relevant expertise favoring subjective or incidental input. WIPO believes that for a stable and long term [[DNS]] framework, an informed and open dialogue is necessary; this must be supported by all the stakeholders. The dialogue’s credibility will rely on broader vision, institutional integrity and substantive relevance of the participants, no matter if they are a part of [[ICANN]]’s formal structures or not. The expansion plan of the [[DNS]] framework provides a great opportunity to enhance the responsibility of partnerships. WIPO will always be there to contribute for the expansion of [[DNS]] framework.
Some other cross over communications are:
* 16th June, 2010--WIPO’s observations on 4th Version of [[ICANN]]’s Draft Applicant Guidebook<ref>[http://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/amc/en/docs/icann160610.pdf WIPO’s observations on 4th Version of ICANN’s Draft Applicant Guidebook]</ref>
* 30th March, 2010—revision of [[ICANN]]’s Trademark Clearinghouse in February 2010<ref>[http://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/amc/en/docs/icann300310tmch.pdf revision of ICANN’s Trademark Clearinghouse in February 2010]</ref>
* 30th March, 2010-- [[ICANN]] Uniform Rapid Suspension (URS) Procedure of February 2010<ref>[http://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/amc/en/docs/icann300310urs.pdf ICANN Uniform Rapid Suspension (URS) Procedure of February 2010]</ref>
* 26th March, 2010—Revision of [[ICANN]]’s Trademark Post-Delegation Dispute Resolution Procedure (UDDRP)<ref>[http://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/amc/en/docs/icann260310pddrp.pdf Revision of ICANN’s Trademark Post-Delegation Dispute Resolution Procedure (UDDRP)]</ref>
* 26th January, 2010-- STI Report on Trademark Protection in New [[gTLD]]s approved by GNSO<ref>[http://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/amc/en/docs/icann260110.pdf STI Report on Trademark Protection in New gTLDs approved by GNSO]</ref>
* 20th November, 2009-- Trademark Post-Delegation Dispute Resolution Procedure proposed by [[ICANN]]-staff<ref>[http://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/amc/en/docs/icann201109.pdf Trademark Post-Delegation Dispute Resolution Procedure proposed by ICANN-staff]</ref>
* 18th June, 2009— Final Report of [[ICANN]]’s [[Implementation Recommendation Team]]<ref>[http://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/amc/en/docs/icann180609.pdf inal Report of ICANN’s Implementation Recommendation Team]</ref>
* 10th May, 2009—Draft Report of [[ICANN]]’s [[Implementation Recommendation Team]]<ref>[http://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/amc/en/docs/icann100509.pdf Draft Report of ICANN’s Implementation Recommendation Team]</ref>
===UDRP Discussions===
* July 15th, 2011-- WIPO’s Observation on [[ICANN]] Staff “Preliminary Issue Report on the Current State of the [[UDRP]]”<ref>[http://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/amc/en/docs/icann150711.pdf WIPO’s Observation on ICANN Staff “Preliminary Issue Report on the Current State of the UDRP”]</ref>
# [[ICANN Board]] assured of Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) stability
# The focus of registration abuse review should be on [[cybersquatting]] instead of [[UDRP]]
# In case of new processes make sure that they are driven by some experts and focused in the right direction
# Distinctions between processes/policies are complex, the issues which are listed do not fall within the [UDRP]]’s scope and are subject to determination of panel
# The Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) should perform its job freely
* May 6th, 2011--WIPO’s observations to [[ICANN]] on Policy Staff/[[GNSO]] Council “Current State of the UDRP Webinar”<ref>[http://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/amc/en/docs/icann060511.pdf WIPO’s observations to ICANN on Policy Staff/GNSO Council “Current State of the UDRP Webinar”]</ref>
# Domain Name Registrants, Trademark owners and Registration authorities have been offered effective solutions by the Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP)
# The [[UDRP]] has been a fair and flexible resolution system and has accommodated various evolving practices and norms
# As [[ICANN]] is thinking of expanding the [[DNS]] framework and there are some [[RPM]]s, which are in their testing phase; the time is wrong to modify the [[UDRP]]
# The modification process would end up diluting and overburdening the [[UDRP]]
# [[ICANN]] must address the basic questions about [[cybersquatting]]’s [[DNS]] and business beneficiaries before looking into mechanism for addressing this practice
* March 26th, 2010-- WIPO’s observations on “Registration Abuse Policies Working Group Initial Report”<ref>[http://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/amc/en/docs/icann050511.pdf WIPO’s observations on “Registration Abuse Policies Working Group Initial Report”]</ref>
# The [[UDRP]] has been included in the initial report of [[RAP WG]], but the idea behind it is not clear, especially with regards to the [[new gTLD Program|new gTLD program]]
# It seems that new [[gTLD]] program has already addressed the cybersquatting recommendations
# [[ICANN]] must focus more on mechanisms rather then amending the [[UDRP]], which will yield better results and will help in the long run
# The [[UDRP]]’s integrity depends more on the UDRP providers chosen by [[ICANN]]
== Legal Rights Objections: New gTLD Program==
WIPO was appointed the exclusive provider of dispute resolution services for trademark based “pre-delegation” Legal Rights Objections
under ICANN’s New gTLD Program. In summary, "Prior to ICANN’s approval of a New gTLD, third parties may file a formal objection to an application on several grounds, including, for trademark owners and Intergovernmental Organizations (IGOs), on the basis of a “Legal Rights Objection.”When such an objection is filed, an independent panel (comprised of one or three experts) will determine whether the applicant’s potential use of the applied-for gTLD would be likely to infringe (described below) the objector’s existing trademark, or IGO name or acronym."<ref>[http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/lro/ LRO, WIPO.int]Retrieved 25 March 2013</ref> WIPO received a total of 41 objections to administer.<ref>[http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/lro/cases/ Cases, LRO, WIPO.int] Retrieved 25 March 2013</ref>
==Number of UDRP Cases Filed with the WIPO Center==
Based on the latest statistics released by the WIPO Center, there were 2,764 cybersquatting cases filed involving 4,781 domain names in 2011. Since the implementation of the UDRP in 1999, there were 22,500 UDRP based cases filed involving 40,500 ccTLDs and gTLDs.<ref>
[http://www.domainnews.com/en/wipo-released-2011-cybersquatting-stats-2764-udrp-cases-covering-4781-domain-names-in-2011.html WIPO Released 2011 Cybersquatting Stats ! 2,764 UDRP cases covering 4,781 domain names in 2011]</ref>
==Overturned UDRP Cases==
Some of the more controversial UDRP cases handled by the WIPO Center involved 22 domain names including publicstorge.com, pulicstorage.com and puplicstorage.com which were transferred to Public Storage after the UDRP Panel found that the domain names were registered in bad faith by the respondents in the case-Texas International Property Associates (TIPA) also referred to as "Receivers".<ref>[http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/text.jsp?case=D2010-1782 Public Storage v. Texas International Property Associates]</ref><ref>[http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/case.jsp?case_id=18339 WIPO Case D2010-1053]</ref> The decision of the UDRP Panel to transfer the 22 domains from the Receiver to the legitimates owners of trademarks was overturned by Senior Judge Royal Furgeson of the Northern Texas District Court on January 10th, 2012. Judge Fergeson ordered [[Fabulous.com]] to disregard the decision of the UDRP Panel and to transfer back the domain names to the Receivers. He also ordered ICANN to stay and abate the UDRP proceedings and to file a notice of compliance to the court.<ref>[http://domainnamewire.com/2012/01/12/wow-judge-orders-udrp-transfers-including-apple-typo-to-be-reversed/ Wow: Judge orders UDRP transfers, including Apple typo, to be reversed]</ref> ICANN filed a motion to the court to vacate its ruling granting the Receiver’s Emergency Motion to Stay in December, 2011. ICANN argued that it has no authority to abate the UDRP Panel proceedings. The court denied ICANN's motion.<ref>
[http://bretbucket.s3.amazonaws.com/Order-ICANNStay.pdf ORDER DENYING NON-PARTY INTERNET CORPORATION FOR ASSIGNED NAMES AND NUMBERS’ MOTION TO VACATE]</ref>
==References==
==References==
{{reflist}}
<div style="column-count:2;-moz-column-count:2;-webkit-column-count:2">
{{reflist}}</div>
[[Category: Companies]]
[[Category: Organizations]]
[[Category: Acronym]]