[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[TRADUCTION en français] Re: [ipr-ict] [ENGLISH synthesis] last messages: : Ousmane Bamba, Gaston Zongo, Ababacar Diop, Adamou Iro

Salut encore

Je suis d’accord que nous avons besoin de lois spéciales pour le cyberespace. Toutefois, nous devons faire attention à ce que nous entendons par «crime». En Amérique, les chercheurs sur les problèmes de sécurité et de cryptage ont été qualifiés de criminels, parce qu’ils ont mis à jour les faiblesses de certaines techniques commerciales de cryptage. Je crois fermement que l’Afrique a la possibilité de prendre le leadership en ce qui concerne la législation sur le droit de propriété intellectuelle, au lieu d'être tout simplement suiviste.

Venons-en aux juges qui doivent prendre des décisions sur des aspects techniques qu’ils ne maîtrisent pas : c’est pour cette raison que des «témoins experts» sont utilisés dans un certain nombre de domaines techniques. Quelque d’intéressant ressorti de nos expériences en Afrique du Sud dans un autre domaine (protection de l’environnement) : nous avons trouvé que nos politiciens sont très souvent ouverts à des propositions bien motivées, argumentées, présentées par des experts d’un domaine spécifique. Très souvent, ils se fient aux sources d’information et aux conseils qu’on leur prodigue pour faire de nouvelles lois. Si un groupe d’experts reconnus fait des recommandations sur le sujet, cela ne pourrait qu’aboutir à de bonnes prises de décisions.

Cela est peut-être hors un peu sujet, mais je voudrais soulever ici un point que nous ne devons pas oublier: En Afrique nous avons aussi un corpus important de «connaissances indigènes» (sur les plantes médicinales, animales, etc.) qui peut être considéré comme relevant du domaine public ici, alors qui est breveté à l’étranger (en particulier aux USA et en Europe). Il serait bien que l’Afrique d’une seule voix puisse faire du lobbying auprès de l’OMPI pour des sujets de cette nature

Salutations cordiales

Chavoux


Chavoux Luyt a écrit :

Hi again

I agree that we need special laws for cyberspace. However, we should
be carefull what we label "crime". In America, researchers on security
and encryption issues have been labeled as criminals, because they
demonstrated the weaknesses in some commercial encryption techniques.
I strongly believe that Africa is in a position to lead, rather than
follow, as far as IPR legislation is concerned.

As for judges needing to decide technical issues that they don't
understand: it is for this reason that "expert witnesses" are used in
a range of different technical fields. One interesting point from out
experiences in South Africa in a different field (Nature
Conservation). We have found that politicians are many times open to a
clearly motivated, well thought-out plan of action presented by a
group of experts in a specific field. Many times the politicians have
to rely on some source of information/advice anyways to make new laws.
If a major group of experts in the field supply this advice, it can
only lead to better decision-making.

Maybe a bit off topic, but something to keep in mind: in Africa we
also have a large body of "indigenous knowledge" (on medicinal plants,
animals etc.) that can be considered in the open domain here, but are
sometimes patented overseas (specifically America & Europe). It would
be nice if Africa could lobby the WIPO with one voice on issues like
these.

Regards
Chavoux

On 7/28/05, klohento@panos-ao.org <klohento@panos-ao.org> wrote:


This synthesis covers mails sent on
- 26 July by Ousmane Bamba, Gaston Zongo, Ababacar Diop, under the
thread "Fwd: participer au débat]Romaric Lucien BADOUSSI";
- but also the mails sent on 27 July by Adamou Iro and Gaston Zongo
(thread "Contribution")

26 July:
Ousmane Bamba sent a first mail, saying we need to create new laws for
cyberspace and that most judges don't master ICT issues and therefore
cannot well do their job when they face an ICT case (this mail was
translated). Ababacar Diop replied and said that, even though we don't
have jurisprudence on ICT issues in most countries, judges will be
obliged to do their job. Gaston Zongo replied and said that in most
cases, there is not a legal void, since the crime or theft committed,
remains a crime or theft, even if it has been done with ICT means or in
cyberspace. For him, justice finally succeeds in arresting
cybercriminals. He affirmed that in most cases, we do not need to create
new laws for cyberspace, even if the convergence of technologies (for
example), might indeed oblige us to do that. Ousmane Bamba replied and
asserted again that cyberspace needs its laws. He gave the example of
the French justice which has created new laws to face cyberspace or ICT
infringements, or sign international conventions on cybercrime. He
concluded we need to train our judges in ICT and oblige our MPs to
create adequate laws to face ICT cases. For him, Africa must not become
a digital paradise (for defrauders and criminals) in the coming years.

27 July
Adamou Iro said the debate was really interesting and that we should
send recommendations/our proposals to our regional institutions (ECOWAS
and the Economic and Monetary Union of West Africa (UEMOA) for example).
These institutions are currently working on the harmonization of legal
instruments. Gaston Zongo approved the idea but said that usually, it's
not easy to know to which division, these sort of information/documents
can be sent to. He proposed that the recommendations are also sent to
WATRA (West African Telecommunications Regulators Association). He
affirmed that since most countries signed WIPO treaties, it's essential
to involve IP national bureaux, even if they do not usually master ICT
issues.