A/HRC/28/57 I. Introduction 1. Science and culture are not only of great importance to the knowledge economy;1 they are also fundamental to human dignity and autonomy. 2. In that area, two influential paradigms of international law — intellectual property and human rights — have evolved largely separately. 3. Recent developments, however, have rendered the interface of those two regimes more salient. Since the 1990s, a new wave of international intellectual property treaties has increased the tension between intellectual property and human rights standards. In 2000, the Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights adopted a resolution on intellectual property and human rights calling for the primacy of human rights over trade law (resolution 2000/7). Since then, public interest groups and developing countries have gradually aligned in an “access to knowledge” movement seeking to rebalance international intellectual property governance.2 Asserting that “humanity faces a global crisis in the governance of knowledge, technology and culture,” the 2005 Geneva Declaration on the Future of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) called for renewed attention to alternative policy approaches to promote innovation and creativity without the social costs of privatization.3 Increasing attention given to the rights of indigenous peoples has also provided impetus to approaching intellectual property policy from a human rights perspective.4 4. Significant uncertainty remains, nonetheless, on how to resolve the potential tensions between intellectual property laws and human rights. The right to science and culture — understood as encompassing the right to take part in cultural life, to enjoy the benefits of scientific progress and its applications, and the right to benefit from the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which a person is the author — offers a particularly promising framework for reconciliation.5 Both intellectual property systems and the right to science and culture obligate governments “to recognize and reward human creativity and innovation and, at the same time, to ensure public access to the fruits of those endeavours. Striking the appropriate balance between these two goals is the central challenge that both regimes share”.6 Moreover and importantly, both cultural participation and protection of authorship are human rights principles designed to work in tandem. 5. The Special Rapporteur organized an open consultation on 6 June 2014 to elicit the views of States and other stakeholders on the impact of intellectual property regimes on the enjoyment of the right to science and culture. She also convened experts’ meetings on 10 and 11 June 2014 in Geneva, Switzerland, and 28 October 2014 at New York University, United States of America (see annex). Numerous contributions were also received from States and stakeholders and are available online. The Special Rapporteur is grateful to all those who contributed. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Meaning an economy based on creating, evaluating and trading knowledge. Amy Kapczynski, “The Access to Knowledge Mobilization and the New Politics of Intellectual Property”, Yale Law Journal, No. 117 (January 2008), p. 804. Available from www.cptech.org/ip/wipo/futureofwipodeclaration.pdf. Laurence R. Helfer and Graeme W. Austin, Human Rights and Intellectual Property: Mapping the Global Interface (Cambridge University Press, 2011), pp. 33–64. Lea Shaver, “The Right to Science and Culture”, Wisconsin Law Review, No. 1 (2010), p. 121. Available from http://ssrn.com/abstract=1354788. Helfer and Austin, Human Rights and Intellectual Property, p. 507. 3