[QD-Filosofia] Statement of the Free Software Foundations Europe
& Latin America to the 2005 WIPO general assemblies
Ricardo Andere de Mello
gandhi at quilombodigital.org
Sat Oct 1 23:04:49 CEST 2005
e cadê a versão espanhola/portuguesa...
vou repassar para a lista da fsfla.
[]s, gandhi
Rafael Evangelista wrote:
> Pela FSFLA não assina ninguém? E FSF e FSF India não assinam em conjunto?
>
>
> Ricardo Andere de Mello wrote:
>
>> [ http://fsfeurope.org/projects/wipo/statement-20050930.en.html ]
>>
>> Statement of the Free Software Foundations
>>
>> Free Software Foundation Europe
>>
>> Free Software Foundation Latin America
>>
>> towards the 2005 WIPO general
>> assemblies
>>
>> Mr. Chairman,
>>
>> on behalf of the Free Software Foundations Europe and Latin America,
>> let me express my congratulations to you and your colleagues on your
>> chairing this historic general assembly. The Free Software Foundations
>> are globally active centres of expertise acting in a network of sister
>> organisations based in India, Latin America, Europe and the United
>> States of America.
>>
>> Our area of expertise are the issues raised by a digitised society and
>> economy, questions which are addressed effectively by Free Software;
>> as defined by the freedom of unlimited use for any purpose, the
>> freedom to study, the freedom to modify and the freedom to
>> distribute..
>>
>> Through the Free Software Foundation Europe the FSFs participated in
>> all sessions of the Development Agenda IIM process and also followed
>> the broadcasting treaty negotiations with great interest. Our comments
>> relate to both activities.
>>
>> Mr Chairman,
>>
>> much has been said and written about the knowledge society that
>> humankind is about to enter. Looking at the regulatory initiatives,
>> one stumbles upon a paradox: While society is getting ready to unleash
>> human creativity as it has never done before, regulatory proposals
>> seek to create new barriers.
>>
>> The Broadcasting Treaty is a good example of such a new barrier for
>> which the potential benefits and costs seem unequally matched in
>> disfavor of humankind.
>>
>> The result of ignoring the wisdom of approaching crucial legal
>> regulation can be seen in another area: software patents have been
>> introduced without evaluation, and according to the findings of
>> several renowned institutions we now have to realise that they are
>> harmful to competition and stifle innovation. For your information:
>> these institutions include Massachussetts Institute of Technology
>> (MIT), the Boston University School of Law, Price Waterhouse Coopers,
>> US Federal Trade Commission and Deutsche Bank Research.
>>
>> The situation has degenerated to the point that a vice president of
>> IBM, Mr Wladawsky-Berger, likened software patents to weapons of mass
>> destruction in a New York Times interview.
>>
>> Similar experiences seem possible with the Broadcasting Treaty.
>>
>> Erecting additional barriers and raising all barriers by introduction
>> of criminal sanctions against commercial infringement at a time when
>> humankind is still struggling to fully understand the implications of
>> the digital age would be hasty and unwise.
>>
>> Mr. Chairman,
>>
>> the traditional toolset of WIPO revolves centrally around limited
>> monopolies, such as Copyrights, Patents or Trademarks. These have
>> often been treated on the basis that more is always better, an
>> approach that ignores both Liebigs law of the minimum as well as
>> Shelfords law of tolerance: Not only will increasing the dose of the
>> non-limiting factor have no positive effect, an overdose can be
>> toxic..
>>
>> Finding the proper balance between too little and too much is the
>> challenge that lies before any regulation. Given the fundamental
>> impact of all regulations made on WIPO level, wisdom would suggest a
>> conservative approach:
>>
>> New regulations should only be introduced if scientific evidence and
>> evidence from a public review period conclusively show it to have a
>> positive effect.
>>
>> Old regulations should be reviewed periodically as to whether they are
>> still up to the needs of the time, or whether they require
>> adjustment..
>>
>> In the light of the wisdom of Liebig and Shelford, agreeing to the
>> creation of a WIPO Research and Evaluation Office (WERO) would seem
>> trivial, so would the search for alternative means of fostering
>> creativity.
>>
>> As the secretariat and member states correctly pointed out repeatedly
>> in the past: WIPO exists to promote creativity. At the time of its
>> inception, most alternative means of fostering creativity were not yet
>> concieved, in particular those related to digitalisation. Now that
>> they exist, what would seem more natural for WIPO than exploring them?
>>
>> The discussions around the Development Agenda have proven to be most
>> difficult, also because of procedural discussions, which indeed took
>> the majority of the time spent in the IIM process. After these had
>> been largely resolved, substantive discussion took place, cut short by
>> the need to come to a formal outcome that could be presented to this
>> general assembly.
>>
>> Not continuing what was begun, or changing from a horse to a mule
>> midstream, as the honored Indian delegate so eloquently put it, would
>> be wasting the time and effort spent on this initiative by all sides,
>> North and South. For this reason we strongly support the notion of
>> letting the IIM process finish what it began.
>>
>> Mr Chairman,
>>
>> Thank you for your attention.
>>
>> Statement by Mr. Georg C.F. Greve <greve at fsfeurope.org>
>> Free Software Foundation Europe, President
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Quilombodigital-filosofia mailing list
> Quilombodigital-filosofia at listas.quilombodigital.org
> http://listas.quilombodigital.org/mailman/listinfo/quilombodigital-filosofia
>
--
Ricardo Andere de Mello
Presidente do Quilombo Digital
55 (11) 3271-7928 / 55 (11) 9917-7722
More information about the FSFLA-discusion
mailing list