US embassy cable - 05PARIS4725

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 PARIS 004725 
 
SIPDIS 
 
FROM USMISSION UNESCO PARIS 
FOR IO/T - ROBERTS AND COWLEY, EB - PAUL ACETO 
PLEASE PASS TO USPTO - M KLEPINGER 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: AORC, KIPR, UNESCO, WIPO, WSIS 
SUBJECT:  USUNESCO:  CONVENTION ON THE PROTECTION OF THE 
RIGHTS OF BROADCAST ORGANIZATIONS - PROPOSED BY INDIA 
 
REF: PARIS 003245 
 
1. This is an action cable.  See action request in para. 7. 
 
2. Summary:  The U.S. Delegation to the Intergovernmental 
Council of the Rome Convention meeting at UNESCO 
headquarters on June 27-28, 2005 successfully  advocated for 
a report from the Council that indicates that the right 
place for negotiations on a new treaty for protection of 
broadcasting organizations is the World Intellectual 
Property Organization (WIPO) - not UNESCO.  The twelve- 
member Council drafted an opinion for the Director General 
(DG) of UNESCO that endorsed the continuation of such work 
at WIPO and clearly discouraged duplication of negotiation 
efforts at UNESCO.   This issue came before the Council as 
the result of a proposal by India (see REFTEL) to introduce 
a convention on broadcasting at UNESCO.   The USDEL effort 
supported ongoing multilateral negotiations on this topic at 
WIPO and was aimed at keeping Member States from using 
UNESCO as a venue of convenience when their objectives are 
not met in other international fora.  End Summary. 
 
3.  The twelve-member Intergovernmental Council of the Rome 
Convention met at UNESCO headquarters on June 27-28, 2005. 
The Council had been requested by the 171st UNESCO Executive 
Board to comment on a proposal by India to place a 
convention on the protection of the rights of broadcast 
organizations on the agenda of the next UNESCO General 
Conference in October 2005.  The U.S. is not a party to the 
Rome Convention but took part as an Observer with a 
delegation from USPTO, the U.S. Copyright Office, and the 
U.S. Mission to UNESCO. 
 
4.  The UNESCO Executive Board request was included in the 
agenda as item 10.1: "Proposal for a convention on 
broadcasting and the new technologies (document 
ILO/UNESCO/WIPO/ICR.19.8)."  The Council expressed the 
following opinion to the Director General of UNESCO (Draft 
Final Report ILO/UNESCO/OMPI/ICR.19.9 Prov.): 
 
"The Council examined the proposal of India, further to the 
resolution of the Executive Board and at the request of its 
Director-General.  The Committee is concerned about 
duplication of work if negotiations were to be launched at 
UNESCO.  All members of the Council who took the floor were 
therefore not in favor of launching of such negotiations and 
endorsed the continuation of efforts at WIPO.  Three 
observers agreed with the opinion of the Council members and 
two observers supported the proposal of India.  UNESCO was 
encouraged to become more actively involved in such 
negotiations at WIPO." 
 
5.  This result on the Indian proposal for a broadcasting 
convention was in line with our objective to keep Member 
States from introducing conventions at UNESCO that are 
outside its mandate.  During their interventions, all 
Council members were in agreement that the venue for 
discussions and negotiations on intellectual property 
protection for broadcasting is WIPO not UNESCO.  Most also 
noted that they opposed any idea of opening the issue at 
UNESCO because it would be a duplication of ongoing efforts 
at WIPO.  The EU had strong representation on the Council 
and held the line on a common response on this issue. 
 
6. Comment:  It was obvious that India was not satisfied 
with the outcome and will  likely try to open the topic up 
for further discussion and possible action when the DG makes 
his follow-up report to the next Executive Board (September 
2005) on their proposal for a convention on broadcasting at 
UNESCO.  End comment. 
 
7. Action request.  Given the importance of keeping this 
issue off the table at UNESCO, it would be useful to have an 
expert familiar with WIPO issues and negotiations at the 
Executive Board session when this issue comes up in 
September. 
OLIVER