Authentic leadership: The U.S. and the Treaty for the Print-Disabled
When the US, the champion of strong IP rights, steps up to leading for the benefit of the world that is authentic leadership.
October 15, 2013 at 04:00 AM
7 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
The United States has long been a leader in fostering for itself a strong intellectual property system and encouraging other nations to develop strong intellectual property systems. And it makes sense that we should — our nation has had a 230-plus year commitment to innovation. Our founding fathers enshrined IP rights in our Constitution, affirmative rights that in other countries are only granted grudgingly. IP is a right of the people — not an exception taken at the discretion of the government. Our commitment to innovation has served us well, producing the strongest innovation environment the world has ever seen.
But there is another side to US intellectual property leadership, evident in the dual roles of incentivizing innovators by giving them protection for their creations, while ultimately permitting widespread dissemination of those creations to enrich the public corpus and facilitate future innovation. Both roles are critical and, although the second is less attractive for innovators in the short-term, the benefits of the resulting increase in collective intelligence stemming from the dissemination of creative work is key to technological advancement.
The typical mechanisms for effectuating this latter role are to time-limit monopolies granted over intellectual property and to limit those monopolies to the appropriate subject matter (inventions, for example, that are novel and non-obvious). But there is another mechanism that, until recently, has not been given much attention — exceptions and limitations in narrow but appropriately circumscribed situations.
It was exactly this mechanism that the United States championed in 2009 when it proposed before the World Intellectual Property Organization what would become the “Treaty to Facilitate Access to Published Works for Persons who are Blind, Visually Impaired, or otherwise Print Disabled.” This Treaty, conceived, created and developed by the United States in collaboration with other countries from Europe to Central and South America to Africa, is the first-ever treaty of its kind. It provides access to copyrighted works to millions of print-disabled people throughout the world. The Treaty for the print-disabled was formally adopted on June 27 of this year.
What is remarkable about the work the United States undertook in leading the sponsorship and adoption of the Treaty is that the problem it addresses is demonstratively not a U.S. problem. Of the more than 314 million blind and visually impaired people in the world, 90 percent live in developing nations. And those who live in the U.S. already have access to a wealth of works in accessible formats. This is an example of U.S. leadership at its best — for the benefit of the world. This is authentic leadership.
It is also important to understand that the Treaty is more than gratuitous. Consider for example the inventions created by visually impaired innovators. In 1945, Ralph Teetor, a blind automotive engineer, invented cruise control, a standard feature on almost all automobiles today. Blind Saudi engineer Mohannad Jibreel Abudayyah has over 20 patents, including one over a submarine that can dive 5,265 meters below sea level. James Teh and Michael Curran, visually impaired inventors, developed a popular voice-to-speech system that “reads” any text a computer user touches with his or her mouse. These are only a few examples of the innovations that result from increased access to knowledge. What further breakthroughs will follow from the adoption of the Treaty? When you enable human potential for hundreds of millions of creative individuals, the upside is unlimited.
America should be proud of our country's global leadership. We are at our best when we encourage a healthy and value-promoting balance between protecting innovation and providing wide access to it. And when the US, the champion of strong IP rights, steps up to leading for the benefit of the world — that is authentic leadership.
The United States has long been a leader in fostering for itself a strong intellectual property system and encouraging other nations to develop strong intellectual property systems. And it makes sense that we should — our nation has had a 230-plus year commitment to innovation. Our founding fathers enshrined IP rights in our Constitution, affirmative rights that in other countries are only granted grudgingly. IP is a right of the people — not an exception taken at the discretion of the government. Our commitment to innovation has served us well, producing the strongest innovation environment the world has ever seen.
But there is another side to US intellectual property leadership, evident in the dual roles of incentivizing innovators by giving them protection for their creations, while ultimately permitting widespread dissemination of those creations to enrich the public corpus and facilitate future innovation. Both roles are critical and, although the second is less attractive for innovators in the short-term, the benefits of the resulting increase in collective intelligence stemming from the dissemination of creative work is key to technological advancement.
The typical mechanisms for effectuating this latter role are to time-limit monopolies granted over intellectual property and to limit those monopolies to the appropriate subject matter (inventions, for example, that are novel and non-obvious). But there is another mechanism that, until recently, has not been given much attention — exceptions and limitations in narrow but appropriately circumscribed situations.
It was exactly this mechanism that the United States championed in 2009 when it proposed before the World Intellectual Property Organization what would become the “Treaty to Facilitate Access to Published Works for Persons who are Blind, Visually Impaired, or otherwise Print Disabled.” This Treaty, conceived, created and developed by the United States in collaboration with other countries from Europe to Central and South America to Africa, is the first-ever treaty of its kind. It provides access to copyrighted works to millions of print-disabled people throughout the world. The Treaty for the print-disabled was formally adopted on June 27 of this year.
What is remarkable about the work the United States undertook in leading the sponsorship and adoption of the Treaty is that the problem it addresses is demonstratively not a U.S. problem. Of the more than 314 million blind and visually impaired people in the world, 90 percent live in developing nations. And those who live in the U.S. already have access to a wealth of works in accessible formats. This is an example of U.S. leadership at its best — for the benefit of the world. This is authentic leadership.
It is also important to understand that the Treaty is more than gratuitous. Consider for example the inventions created by visually impaired innovators. In 1945, Ralph Teetor, a blind automotive engineer, invented cruise control, a standard feature on almost all automobiles today. Blind Saudi engineer Mohannad Jibreel Abudayyah has over 20 patents, including one over a submarine that can dive 5,265 meters below sea level. James Teh and Michael Curran, visually impaired inventors, developed a popular voice-to-speech system that “reads” any text a computer user touches with his or her mouse. These are only a few examples of the innovations that result from increased access to knowledge. What further breakthroughs will follow from the adoption of the Treaty? When you enable human potential for hundreds of millions of creative individuals, the upside is unlimited.
America should be proud of our country's global leadership. We are at our best when we encourage a healthy and value-promoting balance between protecting innovation and providing wide access to it. And when the US, the champion of strong IP rights, steps up to leading for the benefit of the world — that is authentic leadership.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'A Warning Shot to Board Rooms': DOJ Decision to Fight $14B Tech Merger May Be Bad Omen for Industry
Exits Leave American Airlines, SiriusXM, Spotify Searching for New Legal Chiefs
2 minute read'Incredibly Complicated'? Antitrust Litigators Identify Pros and Cons of Proposed One Agency Act
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Uber Files RICO Suit Against Plaintiff-Side Firms Alleging Fraudulent Injury Claims
- 2The Law Firm Disrupted: Scrutinizing the Elephant More Than the Mouse
- 3Inherent Diminished Value Damages Unavailable to 3rd-Party Claimants, Court Says
- 4Pa. Defense Firm Sued by Client Over Ex-Eagles Player's $43.5M Med Mal Win
- 5Losses Mount at Morris Manning, but Departing Ex-Chair Stays Bullish About His Old Firm's Future
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250