The first meeting of the newly-created WIPO Provisional Committee for Proposals Related to a Development Agenda (PCDA) started yesterday, and runs until February 24. The PCDA is tasked with reviewing the 50 or so proposals put forward by WIPO member countries and coming up with concrete action proposals for the September 2006 General Assembly. No easy task indeed.
And then there's the politically-charged atmosphere. The meeting began almost three hours late after intense negotiations to elect a Chair that was acceptable to all countries. But when talks finally got underway in the afternoon, and countries presented their new proposals, the real issue at stake here - how to create intellectual property laws that protect human rights like access to knowledge and medicine - took center stage.
Four new proposals are on the table, along with the yet-to-be discussed Africa Group's proposal. Chile's proposal is full of thoughtful insights about recent global trends that have extended exclusive rights, redrawn the traditional balance in global intellectual property law, and whittled away the public domain. Noting that Technological Protection Measures have been used to restrict access to public domain material, Chile asked WIPO to undertake a study of the benefits of a rich public domain and ways that it might be protected from such encroachments. (Deeplinks readers will remember that the U.S Copyright Office declined to grant EFF's 2003 proposal for a DMCA exemption that would have allowed consumers to access public domain movies on DVDs.)
Chile also asked WIPO to consider current global developments in alternative and complementary non-intellectual property-based approaches to fostering creativity and technological innovation, including an Access to Knowledge treaty (and of course, free and open source software and Creative Commons licenses).
Talks on the proposals put forward by the Africa Group, Group of Friends of Development, Colombia and the United States continue today. As usual, EFF will be blogging events together with a coalition of international NGOs. There's great summaries at Thiru Balasubramaniam's blog and at IP-Watch. The NGO coaltion's notes of day one are after the jump.
WIPO Provisional Committee on Proposal to Establish a WIPO Development Agenda
Day 1, February 20, 2006
Notes taken by:
Gwen Hinze, gwen at eff.org, Electronic Frontier Foundation [GH]
Thiru Balasubramaniam, thiru at cptech.org, Consumer Project on Technology [TB]
Teresa Hackett, Electronic Information for Libraries [TH]
[NOTE: This is not an official transcript. Any errors and ommissions are regretted.]
Copyright-Only Dedication (based on United States law)
The person or persons who have associated their work with this document
(the "Dedicator") hereby dedicate the entire copyright in the work of
authorship identified below (the "Work") to the public domain.
Dedicator makes this dedication for the benefit of the public at large
and to the detriment of Dedicator's heirs and successors. Dedicator
intends this dedication to be an overt act of relinquishment in
perpetuity of all present and future rights under copyright law, whether
vested or contingent, in the Work. Dedicator understands that such
relinquishment of all rights includes the relinquishment of all rights
to enforce (by lawsuit or otherwise) those copyrights in the Work.
Dedicator recognizes that, once placed in the public domain, the Work
may be freely reproduced, distributed, transmitted, used, modified,
built upon, or otherwise exploited by anyone for any purpose, commercial
or non-commercial, and in any way, including by methods that have not
yet been invented or conceived.
[GH NB: Meeting scheduled to start at 10 a.m. but actually started at 12:43 pm due to intense negotiations and considerable disagreement over election of Chair for Meeting. Two leading candidates were the Ambassador of Romania, put forward by the "Group B" developed countries and the Ambassador of Paraguay, Rigoberto Gauto Vielman, put forward by developing countries, who chaired last year's three IIM meetings. Ambassador Gauto was elected Chair after the Romanian Ambassador withdrew.]
Mr. Geoffrey Yu (WIPO Deputy-Director General):
Agenda Item 2: Election of Officers:
Nigeria: On behalf of the African Group, I have the honor to propose as Chair, Ambassador Rigoberto Gauto Vielman of Paraguay as Chairman, and the
Ambassaor of Krygzstan as Vice Chair.
[TB: He thanks the Romanian Ambassador for the "sagacity" shown by his decision to withdraw from the contest for Chair. This was quite a political contest as the Group B countries supported the Romanian Ambassador and the developing countries supported the Paraguayan Ambassador.]
Thailand; On behalf of Asian Group, seconds proposal for Ambassador Gauto of Paraguay as Chair, and the Ambassaor of Krygzstan as Vice Chair. Also thanks Ambassador of Romania for his co-operation in agreeing to withdraw.
Chair: By unanimity, the Chair is Ambassador Paraguay and the Vice-Chair is Ambassador of Kyrgzstan.
Ambassador Gauto takes the floor: Good morning. Thanks to Romanian Ambassador for his co-operation to withdraw from nomination in order to move this process forward. Chair notes that he met with the Romanian Ambassador this morning, and expressed view that most important issue is moving forward with process. Hopes to have tangible results for the GA for the good of this organization and intellectual property.
Committed to working in a very open-minded way, and a very committed way.
Will begin work at 3pm. With presentation of new proposals put forward, then invite substantive discussion of proposals.
Meeting closed at 12:57 pm
3:10 pm Restart
Chair: We'll begin this afternoon with a positive working spirit. I'd like to thank you all again for the trust you've displayed in me.
Would like to submit to your consideration before we deal with the substantive agenda, would like to see if we can authorize NGOs who have asked to be admitted on an ad hoc basis observer accreditation. Two NGOs:
Association of 3D (Geneva, Switzerland).
Authors Guild (USA)
Can we accept this request? No objections. These two organizations will be invited to join in our meeting with us.
Agenda PCDA/1/1 Prov.
Would like to ask if this agenda meets with your approval, as stands. No objections. Adopted.
According to consultations with regional groups, agreed will have full 5 day meeting with no interruptions. And as per IIM, will have report, submitted to delegations for approval, communicated to delegates. Will have full discussion.
Ask for countries who have presented proposals to introduce:
Friends of Development (now a group of 15 - including Uruguay)
Nigeria on behalf of African Group (Ambassador of Nigeria):
[TB: Swizerland is trying to signal Chair making "time out hand signals"]
Chair: Switzerland has point of order.
Switzerland: Can regional groups have opportunity to make general statements before start substantive discussion of proposals?
Chair: certainly, regional groups can take floor at any time that they would like to do so. I wonder what would be the point behind this. Do you have a statement?
Switzerland: yes, would like to present statement on behalf of Group B. Congratulations to Chair on election.
There have been several new proposals submitted since the African Group's proposal. We are certain that they will enrich our discussion. Recogrnize that today is deadline for making all proposals. Look forward to engaging in consideration and debate on all proposals.
We hope that all proposals will get equal time, equal treatment. We want a full open and transparent and inclusive framework for debate, after all proposals introduced.
Chair: would like to apologize to Africa Group for having interrupted. I plan to work closely with all regional groups to ensure that no misuunderstandings. I apologize for not having asked if there were statements from regional coordinators.
Croatia (on behalf Central European and Baltic States):
Looking forward to further progress
If we want to achieve tangible outcomes in time for General Assembly. Should draw on work from IIMs. Many helpful proposals put forward so far. Number of proposals put forward may created ambiguity. Would welcome efforts to identify common themes.
Open on question of how long to meet for next meeting.
IP is part of the toolbox for economic and social and cultural development.
Part of its importance and relationship with development recognized by all members. We recognize that IP is part of the solution for development.
WIPO as one part of the UN has only one part to play. Technical assistance and capacity building are still core part of WIPO's work. WIPO's work in helping to implement IP as mechanism for economic development is very important to our countries.Welcome all Member States' proposals, including those received today.
Given WIPO's recent budgetary difficulties, would support proposals that can be met within existing budget. Therefore not supportive of creation of new bodies within WIPO.
The PCDA agenda should not jeopordize the normal functioning of WIPO and its various bodies.
Chair: very interesting statement, thank you.
Austria (on behalf of the European Community and its 25 Member states and the acceding states of Bulgaria and Romania):
The European Community welcomes decision of WIPO GA at 2005 session to establish and complete discussion of proposals on proposal to establish a WIPO Devlt Agenda.
We share the premise that development related issues can be integrated into WIPO. Believe that this can be done within existing WIPO Convention and 1974 agreement with United Nations, recognizing WIPO's mandate to facilitate development. This can best be done by strengthening relationships with other international bodies,
The three IIM meetings have enabled Member States to have a constructive debate on IP and development.
We need to make concrete proposals by concentrating on proposals that are "ripe for harvest".
This will help engender trust and cooperation and will ensure that this will result in an international IPR regime that increases encouragement for FDI, stimulates economic growth and provides benefits to all.
Thailand (on behalf of the Asian Group):
Group welcomes commencement of PCDA as way forward.
The importance of public policy objectives in MDG e.g. public health, biodiversity, access to medicines, access to educational materials,
To ensure that norm-setting activities of WIPO consistent with public policy objectives recognized by group. The Group believes that the IP system should be balanced to the difference circumstances of member states and supports development impact assesments.
We support mainstreaming of the development agenda into WIPO norm-setting activities
Urges careful structuring of debate at plenary session. Wish to seek move beyond general discussion of IP to come forward with concrete proposals of action to take to General Assembly.
Kyrgyzstan (on behalf of Central Asian states):
Our group, which includes countries in transition, believes that these problems should be given a lot of attention in WIPO. We believe that in working on proposals need to work on work and we favour creating new bodies that will increase intellectual potential. Of course, working within existing budgetary constraints.
We have followed the discussion and we're pleased to note that after three meetings in 2005 the debate in this important forum can go forward at the PDCA. Under the impulse of new technologies, we note that they have role to play in the improvement in the quality of life of people through gaining knowledge
IP systems protect and foster innovation. When used properly, ensure that creative activities are recognized by all as having postive qualities.
It is in the interest of all Member States to enable this in order to grow and develop. The situation is unique in different countries so we must base our discussion on a principle keeping in mind that each country has its own priorities and will participate in those areas where it is has priorities.
We welcome the proposals by Chile, Colombia and the U.S. Submitted in a constructive spirit. We hope that we can find common ground in the substance of these proposals, and not focus on what divides us.
We support the intervention of the Asia group represented by Thailand.
United States of America:
Associates itself with Group B statement. Welcomes GA's decision to create this body. We support the Monterey Consensus 2002. Needs to be both a private and public contribution.
WIPO's mission (Article 3) is to promote the protection of IP throughout the world and cooperating with international organizations where appropriate.
Since joining UN in 1974 WIPO has excelled in its mission.
These activies have transformed the storehouse of knowledge
WIPO's very mission promotes economic development because it involves dissemination of ideas and information. It is dynamic, responding to rapidly changing economic and social envvironment.
We do not support a one size fits all approach that fits the lowest common demoninator. As agreed in Monterey consensus, each country is responsible for own laws and development. Don't believe that IP is inconsistent with development.
We are happy to discuss how IP and development can be expanded and we will put forward additional ideas as to how WIPO can advance development goals.
Chair: thanks to all regional coordinators for statements and support of this meeting. US has rasied an important point. Any other group?
Pakistan (G-77 and China): We will make an intervention shortly.
India (Deputy Permanent Representative Mohinder Singh Grover): Our delegation associates itself with Asian Group statement. WIPO should have a development agenda. I recall the statement by India at the 41st GA and it was heartening that there was agreement to continue discussions.
We have effectively demonstrated to the worldwide community that we care about public interest issues.
Socio and economic development is complex task significantly dependent on the protection on IP rights.
The special needs of developing countries need to be addressed in an appropriate manner.
The 3 sessions have generated some noteworthy proposals on what would constitue a DA.
Our task now is to finalize and concretize a DA.
Issues such as easy and affordable A2K, analysing the social impact of IPR includng partnerships and training, faciliating the transfer of technologies inter alia should be given focused attention as main concerns of development.
Would like to emphasize that new norms of technological development affect all areas of development and society.
There should NOT be a one-sized fits all approach since Member States have different states of developpment.
Let us agree a DA for WIPO to ensure the welfare of WIPO MS on an equal footing.
African Group (Nigerian Ambassador):
Thanks WIPO for solid working document. Assures WIPO of its full co-operation.
In order to realize the various MDGs in our countries, we need to implement development friendly policies.
Section A of our paper identified international development proposals that still need implementation eg NEPAD, UNESCO, UNCTAD.
Believes that GFoD proposal is compatible with Africa Group.
Section B note use of IP as a veritable tool for Africa.
Section C: our core proposals.
Technical assistance should be technically oriented and demand driven. Should also be given to educational institutions, not just national IP offices.
Cites UK IP Commission report. AS countries that need technology most, to what extent is technology transfer relevant to capactity to innovate and develop. Called for relaxation of existing patent laws. Should also look at Article 66 of TRIPS on this basis.
Many African countries rely on "informal" sector, important for economy. To accommmodate this, need to look at alternative IP and other systems to encourage creatiity and innovation. Recognized in recent OECD report [ck]
Ways to bridge digital divide should be pursued within appropriate frameworks eg WSIS, World Solidarity Fund, also WIPOnet. Welcome US proposal for partnerhsip program.
Presenting a set of recommendations for PCDA.
UK Commission on the Intellectual Property Rights (UK CIPR) and paper by Sisule Musungu (South Center).
There must be a clear and consistent rationale for IP protection.
Must be an assessment of costs and benefits.
IP should not be divorced from development.
IP architecture must cover tangible and intangible assets 9TK, folklore, Genetic resources)
Access to knowedge must be protected.
Pakistan (G-77 and China):
Confident that will make substantive progress on important task of this committee - dealing with unfinshed business of last three IIMs.
We must deliver on this mandate. We believe that the DA discussions form an important milestone. Development was key focus of Summit in New York. WIPO, as a member of the UN family, has an obligation to mainstream development into the core of its activities.
We have yet to complete the first exchange of proposals.
Hope to continue discussions in more results-oriented approach.
The Doha Declaration at the 2nd South Summit in Qatar, "
While develomping countries are commmitted to imposing their obligations, there are costs in doing so, and important not to foist one approach on all. Must retain national flexibility
Mainstreaming development dimension into WIPO core activities is important.
Must leave policy space for countries in implmentation to allow them to pursue national development objectives.
During our discussions last year, access to pharmacueticals, textbooks, and educational software were mentioned in the context of IP. All areas where flexbilities need to be created or realized.
As the largest and most populous stakeholder in this discussion, willing to co-operate and work with all countries in this process.
Chair: I would like to hear proposals by Chile, Colombia and United States. So that we can have general overview before we begin deeper discussion. Would like to know if we can other delegations first? Morocco, you have the floor.
Warm congratulations to Chair on election. Express appreciating to Kamil Idris to particular importance he gives to economic, social development within IPR system. Thanks IB for excellent efforts in providing docs for meeting.
We support proposal of Africa Group introduced by Nigeria; Also recognizes contribution of Arab countries.
This debate should take into account the views of all stakeholders, in particular, the African Group which Morocco belongs to.
We have a holistic approach and the African proposal reflects the concerns of many developing countries. This is marked by solidarity and the willingness to work together. Our proposal discusses technology transfer, flexibility in developing and implementing IP mechanisms, brain drain, ICT to name a few concerns.
Targetted aims and matches vision of what we see as role of IPR. Necessary for actitivies of WIPO to be consistent with existing efforts, MDGs. NEPAD and others.
Want speeding up of reform. Seeking participative approach. Morocco has understood comments of G-77 and China at June 2005 Summit, tha tWIPO should mainstream devlt dimension. Role of WIPo shouldn't be limited to technical assistance. Should try to understand issues arising out of
access to knowledge and information
We must go beyond Munich comminuique of March 2005.
WIPO needs to go beyond capacity building, Understand links between economic and social development and IP. In a world based on knowledge based economy my delegation must insist on increased access to ICTs and IP to bridge digital divide,
We hope to be able to participate in inclusive, participatory process.
Chair: I propose a 10 minute break. Colombia, do you have a statemetn?
Colombia: Point of Clarification: are you seeking to discuss all proposals on table as a package, then discussio on each?
Chair: My intention was to have a general presentation from those delegations that submitted proposals, but I know that the general statements are also important.
Zambia: Wishes to pay tribute to WIPO for convening meeting and provision of documentation.Also notes record growth in Asia region PCT filings.
Supports statement of Pakistan on behalf of G-77 and China.
Steps need to be taken to address serious development problems existing in Africa.
Proposal put forward by Africa Group last July. All believe in important role that IPR can play in encouraging development in all African countries, including LDCs. My hope is that WIPO will have no trouble in accepting the Africa Group proposal.
Ghana: Want to emphasize important role of IP in development. Fully associates itself with statement of behalf of Africa Group. Reserves right to intervene substatntively later.
Argentina (Ambassador Alberto Dumont): Presenting PCDA/1/5 on behalf of the FOD.
GFoD would like to support statement made by Pakistan on behalf of G-77 and China.
REview of history of DA since GA's decision in Octboer 2004. Debate enriched by participation of many parties, including civil society and industry.
At the last General Assembly members decided to set up a Provisional Committee to achieve tangible, productive outcomes. Provide recommendations and report to the GA in 2006.
This committee wil have to use all tools available to it to ensure that we formulate specific, concrete proposals within timeframe.
The mandate requires that our debate be substantive. We have identified 50 specific proposals initiated since the beginning of this process in 2004. There are common threads running through the proposals.
Fact that there are high number of proposals on table does not mean that there is not substantial agreement.
There is an agreement that WIPO has a responsibility to promote development as part of its mandate as a specialized agency of the United Nations.
Statement by EC and its 25 memeber states and acceding states, notes that WIPO has specific mandate to facilitate development.
We have identified 6 common threads. Our document describes these 6 themes
See pages 4-6 of our documents:
- constant evaluation of costs
2) Mechanisms, procedures, rules of the organization-a member driven process underway to undertake independeant and objective research and studies as well as evaluation, including evaluation of development impacts of iprs?
3) Technical assistance - area of extreme importance to DCs and LDCs. Need to improvie co-ordination, ensure integrity and quality of programs
4) Constitutional mandate of WIPO with agreement with UN to facilitate transfer of technology
5) Growing importance of access to knowledge of protecting and promoting access to the cultural heritage and need to maintain robust public domain through exceptions and limitations. Various measures to ensure this for instance include a Treaty on Access to knowledge.
6) Policy space that is commensurate with the needs of developing countries.
Would like to thank Chair, and Chile, and all those who have made submissions.
Ambassador Mario Martis (Chile): PCDA/1/2. This document contains three different proposals. We believe these fall within WIPO's existing mandate and capacities.
1) Appraisal of the public domain. Based on notion that things are created from other things - not out of nothing. Public domain important source of creativity.
The public domain could be unnecessarily affected through TPMs. A rich public domain is a key factor for growth. Easy access to the public domain is essential, as is protection against from any sort of misappropriation.
Global trend towards increasing exclusive rights and restricting materaial in public domain. Eg. copyright term extension
TPMs can be obstacles towards accessing the public domain.
Taken one by one, these developments might be justified, but taken together, these developments have resulteing in privatization of information.
So far, protection of the public domain has fallen to private organizations - civil society NGOs and libraries.Now it is up to governements to take on this important role.
Create a worldwide database for the public domain or material under which protection has lapsed.
2) Importance of complementary systems to and in intellectual property.
IP is not only tool to foster innovation.
WIPO should undertake study of relationship between development and alternative mechanisms for fostering creation and innovation.
For example we have seen discussions on a treaty on a2k and a treaty on medical research and development.
Already present in many countries are viable, functioning, alternative systems, such as creative commons licences, free and open source software licences.
Concrete proposal: create an electronic forum for discussion of these issues, for a limited, finite period of time.If sufficient interest and critical mass after period of time, could then create a new forum to continue work.
3) A study assessing what are the appropriate levels of IP protection based on different levels of development. The study does not need to involve all countries.
Could assess various aspects of IP, including costs of implementation of rights. Many studies already exist in relation to GDP. Perhaps could focus on what percentage of GDP spent on implementation of IPR.
Colombia: PCDA/1/3 This proposal would involve treaties between private companies and developoing countries to ensure access to patent search databases.
We have limited resources in carrying out patent searches. This reduces our capacity to examine prior art. WIPO should ensure access to patent databases; this would ensure stronger patents.
All within an environment of more effective patents. We are looking to increase certainty for our users. For evaluation of patents, examination of prior art through national databases is key resource. Aim of proposal is to strengthen capacity of developing countries to grant effective patent. This will approve quality of patents we grant. This can be achieved through agreements between private companies and WIPO for access to private databasess for a limited duration with no cost to national offices.
United States of America (Michael Shapiro):
US was extremely gratified by response to its original proposal for
WIPO partnership program. Now presenting an elaboration of those issues:
1) IP's role in development
2) WIPO's role in development
3) Baseline surveys for economic growth
4) Global economic conribution of creative and innovative industries
5) Technology and economic growth: challenges and opportunites
6) Counterfeiting and intellectual property piracy: development's antonym
For each of the set of proposals, specific proposals will be made. Premise is that IPR facilitates development, but IPR alone can't do so.IPR protection is only one factor. There are other factors, including having an educated work-force, an effective national innovation system and a pro-competitive environment.
WIPO has important role to play in enforcing and assisting with IPR but each member state responsible for its own development. EFfective IP assistance can't be top down.
Proposal One: Calls for potential partnership program to aggressively reach out and find partners for providing assistance
Proposal Two: Quantatative and qualitative stock-taking of current WIPO development cooperation activies with a longer-term view of developing a statement of core polices and objectives in the area of cooperation and development activities.
This proposal builds on the 300 page (now 561 page) document on assistance provided by WIPO in IIM3 in July 2005.
Proposal Three: WIPO should play a leading role in baseline national surveys for economic groth by helping Member States interested in conducting such targeted surveys to develop survey methodlogies. Members should establsih best prctices relating to enhaning domestic environments for the development of cerative industries and attracting foreing investment and technologies through strong intellectual property protection.
Proposal Four: Calls on WIPO to conduce studies, including patent-based feasibility studies. Based on WTO program of providing information on contribution of copyright industries, which US was pleased to support.
Proposal Five: The WIPO Standing Committee on Information Technologies (SCIT) could be a forum for discussion focused on the importance of IP related aspects of ICT and its role in economic and cultural development. Specific attention shoudl be focued on assisting Member States to identify practical strategies to use IP/ICT for econimioc, social and cultural development.
Proposal Six: The WIPO Advisory Committee on Enforcument should discuss and analyze the relationship between the rates of counterfeiting and piracy of ip and technology transfer, foreign direct investment and economic growth. The WIPO Secretariae could assist in the collection of data on piracy rates.
Calls on WIPO Secretariat to collect and make available data on piracy rates within countries.
South Africa: Associates itslf with statements made by Africa Goup, Pakistan, and GFoD.
Current IP regimes premised on incorrect assumption that all countries start from same basis of development.Not true in Africa; includes many LDCs.
WIPO should assist in identifying flexibilities to enable creation of exceptions and limitations to access knowledge and medicines.
GFoD and Chilean proposal require empirical analysis. This analysis can assist in reform.
Challenge of reform is understanding and provideing protection for informal sector in Africa. Informal sector is rich in culture and intellectual property.
WIPO should help African countries protect African traditional informal sector through some sui generis regime.
SMEs are essential for development. Development-friendly patent structures could be devised.
World Bank study shows that LDC countries should strengthen educational sectors rather than upgrade patent regime.
Utility model of patent system would create more incentives for SMEs in Africa. Lower barrier - for instance, lower standard for invention. Particularly useful for countries seeking to expand mechanical production capacity.
Benin: The Republic of Benin is an LDC and we are grateful for the intervention of Nigeria.
LDCS have called for fund to be established for LDCs. I hope that the meeting achieves results commensurate with our expectations.
First steps of patent protection were taken in Sudan in 1979. But, due to the civil war, deprived of benefits that patent system should have delivered.
We carried out an assessment of IP in Sudan last year under the ageis of the WIPO. This showed no "big fingerprints" of IP law in Sudan and SMEs were unable to protect their patents and had no reletionship with the patent office.
Many researchers are working in science but most are not protected.
In preparation of the entry of Sudan to the WTO, the department of patent protection carried out a project, but there are many stteps to be taken. Otherwise the reform will be just wishes. We have tried to modernise the patent system e.g. a website. We need databases
, a library, etc. but "one hand does not clap".
Kenya: It is important that the needs od developing countries form part of the development agenda. The MDGs should be part of the international agenda. IP can play an important role in innovation and enhancing growth in developing countries.
Use of flexibilities in international instruments are key to national development in DCs.
For technical assistance, there is a need to strengthen the scope to enable developing countries to acquire the infrastructure and to make full use of IP as national economic development.
The informal sector in Africa provides opportunites for employment. Need to accomodate it. The African proposal is complementary to the GFOD proposal. We welcome the Chilean proposal.
Chair: It's 6:05 pm. I suggest we interrupt our work now and ask for any general statements now. We can finish these tomorrow morning before we move to substantive discussion.
Austria: EU Member States meet tomorrow at 8:30 AM in room B.
Switzerland: Group B meets at 9:30 am in room B tomorrow morning.
eIFL: announciing event tomorrow lunchtime at 1:15-2:45 pm. Four presentations. Everyone invited to attend.
Chair: we start at 10 am tomorrow sharp. Meeting adjourned. [6:14 pm]