Lessig on USG and WIPO Open Source mtg

[Dave Farber <dave () farber net>]

> Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 10:06:05 -0400
> From: "Mike O'Dell" <mo () ccr org>
> Subject: lessig on USG and WIPO Open Source mtg
> To: dave () farber net
>
>
> http://www.lessig.org/blog/archives/001436.shtml


the extremists in power

I don't even know how to begin this story, so stupid and extreme it is.

The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) was convinced by Jamie 
Love and others to hold a meeting about "open collaborative models to 
develop public goods." One of those models is, of course, open source and 
free software. Lobbyists for Microsoft and others apparently (according to 
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A23422-2003Aug20.html>this 
extraordinary story by Jonathan Krim) started lobbying the US government to 
get the meeting cancelled. No surprise there. Open source and free software 
is a competitor to MSFT's products. Lobbying is increasingly the way 
competition is waged in America.

But the astonishing part is the justification for the US opposing the 
meeting. According to the Post, Lois Boland, director of international 
relations for the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, said "that open-source 
software runs counter to the mission of WIPO, which is to promote 
intellectual-property rights." As she is quoted as saying, "To hold a 
meeting which has as its purpose to disclaim or waive such rights seems to 
us to be contrary to the goals of WIPO."

If Lois Boland said this, then she should be asked to resign. The level of 
ignorance built into that statement is astonishing, and the idea that a 
government official of her level would be so ignorant is an embarrassment. 
First, and most obviously, open-source software is based in 
intellectual-property rights. It can't exist (and free software can't have 
its effect) without it. Second, the goal of WIPO, and the goal of any 
government, should be to promote the right balance of intellectual-property 
rights, not simply to promote intellectual property rights. And finally, if 
an intellectual property right holder wants to "disclaim" or "waive" her 
rights, what business is it of WIPOs? Why should WIPO oppose a copyright or 
patent rights holder's choice to do with his or her rights what he or she 
wants?

These points are basic. They should be fundamental. That someone who 
doesn't understand them is at a high level of this government just shows 
how extreme IP policy in America has become.


-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as interesting-people () lists elistx com
To manage your subscription, go to
 http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/