As Catherine explains, the intended treaty is meant to simplify and reduce administrative procedures for applicants, whether they are residents or non-residents, by providing harmonised rules. In this blogger's opinion, the rules in place in some countries for deciding what can be protected and what has been infringed are more complex and arbitrary than any quantity of bureaucratic red tape -- but Geneva this week is neither the time nor the place to resolve those issues.Do take the time to read Catherine's piece (which is bound to be followed up by further posts, if there's anything worth reporting) if you want to get the flavour of the 28th session of the Standing Committee, and/or if you are really excited by the truly unromantic bits of design law.
I've just spent the last two days in Geneva on behalf of MARQUES, an official observer to the SCT. Progress towards a treaty to harmonise design filing practice around the world is being made, albeit slowly.
ReplyDeleteIt seems to me that the guidance from the WIPO General Assembly is clear - they want to see a treaty proposal, and soon. If that's to happen, and happen in time, a degree of goodwill and flexibility is required on behalf of SCT members. What might also assist 6 years in to negotiations is for member states not to repeat the provisions of their national law, but rather to focus on whether or not they might be able to ratify the harmonising measures being put forward. The nature of harmonising measures is that not every member state's national law can be accommodated. But a widely ratified treaty would be greatly in the interests of users of the design filing system worldwide.