OHIM Set To Become Official Host For European Observatory...

These tasks should, in future, encompass:

• delivering independent data and assessments on the scope and scale of counterfeiting and piracy in the internal market;
• exchanging and promoting best practices in relation to public authorities;
• spreading of best private sector strategies;
• raising public awareness;
• evaluating the need for and designing European training programmes for authorities involved in the protection of intellectual property rights, in cooperation with other international and European institutions and agencies;
• carrying out research on technical tools to prevent counterfeiting and piracy; and
• fostering international cooperation and providing technical assistance to third country authorities.

The activities to achieve these tasks should encompass the following:

• organising meetings of the representatives assembled as the Observatory and of its working groups;
• organising meetings of other experts;
• cataloguing and organising seminars and training sessions on IPR infringements and methods to combat such infringements;
• carrying out studies on the scope and impact of counterfeiting and piracy and drawing up of annual reports on developments and trends and of sectoral reports analysing the situation in the different industry and product sectors;
• researching on technical tools to prevent counterfeiting and piracy;
• developing databases to store and analyse data on the scope and impact of IPR infringements, national case law on such infringements and existing training measures, and systems to enhance access of public authorities and private stakeholders to information and allowing for rapid exchange of information between them.

The proposal is said not to create any costs for the EU budget. Instead, it would allow for savings of around EUR 40,000 as certain costs that are currently borne by the EU budget would in future be borne by the OHIM’s budget. Or, with other words,the users aka. "customers" of the OHIM would pay for OHIM's enforcement component.

Article 4 of the Draft Regulation covers the participation in and the organisation of the meetings of the Observatory. It provides that the Office is to invite experts from public administrations, bodies and organisations dealing with the protection of intellectual property rights, from the private sector, the European Parliament and the Commission. The representatives from the private sector should cover economic sectors most concerned by counterfeiting. They should therefore include representatives from different industry sectors. Thus, right holders, Internet service providers and telecommunication companies should be represented. In addition, representatives of consumers should also be included.

Hence, whereas the proposal explicitly mentions "representatives of consumers", representatives of NGOs from the Civil Society appear to be excluded right from the beginning. I'm very much in doubt as to this being a wise approach.

Article 4 (5), furthermore, provides for the possibility to organise working group meetings of the Observatory. As Article 4 (4) sets out that the names of the representatives, the agenda and the minutes of the meetings shall be published on the Office's website, question may arias as to whether or not also working group sessions are covered by transparency provisions.

Therefore, the EU Commission might be well advised to revise the proposal in view of the transparency and openness of the deliberations of the anticipated European Observatory on Counterfeiting and Piracy.If this new body gets implemented just as another institutionalised conspiratorial meeting of rightholders, its general impact on society might be disappointingly small.

(Photo: (C) 2008 OHIM)