[lg policy] POLICY ON LANGUAGES AT World Intellectual Property Organization
hfsclpp at GMAIL.COM
Mon Aug 1 17:28:15 UTC 2011
DATE: JULY 26, 2011
Program and Budget Committee
Geneva, September 12 to 16, 2011
POLICY ON LANGUAGES AT WIPO
Document prepared by the Secretariat
1. In response to the desire expressed by Member States for extended
language coverage in the activities of the Organization, a first
contribution to the development of a comprehensive language policy for
WIPO was submitted to the 2010 Assemblies of the Member States in
documents A/48/11 and A/48/11 Add. The decisions subsequently adopted
are set out in document A/48/26 paragraph 250, subparagraphs (i) to
(x), and are annexed hereto.
2. Those decisions provided for extension of six-language coverage as
from January 1, 2011, for the Standing Committee on Copyright and
Related Rights (SCCR) and the Standing Committee on Trademarks (SCT).
Further extension of language coverage and related resource
adjustments were to be examined in the context of the Program and
Budget process for 2012/13. Furthermore, the Secretariat was invited
to increase the share of outsourced translation, in accordance with
WIPO procurement rules, in particular to developing countries/regions,
while ensuring that translation quality was up to standard.
Rationalization measures to control document and translation volumes
were also adopted.
3. Subsequently, the Secretariat provided information on resources
available under Program 27 at an informal session of the Program and
Budget Committee (PBC) in January 2011. The present document was
prepared by the Secretariat as a follow-up to the decisions of the
2010 Assemblies and the discussions at the informal sessions of the
PBC in January and June 2011.
4. The document is structured as follows: Section I is this
Introduction. Section II illustrates the proposed language policy in
respect of coverage by documentation category, together with a
timeline for implementation. Section III outlines the business model
envisaged for implementation of the language policy, while Section IV
gives an indication of additional workload, and sets out the
implementation strategy and resource requirements. Conclusions and
recommendations are presented in Section V.
For entire PDF go to:
N.b.: Listing on the lgpolicy-list is merely intended as a service to
and implies neither approval, confirmation nor agreement by the owner
or sponsor of the list as to the veracity of a message's contents.
Members who disagree with a message are encouraged to post a rebuttal,
and to write directly to the original sender of any offensive message.
A copy of this may be forwarded to this list as well. (H. Schiffman,
For more information about the lgpolicy-list, go to
This message came to you by way of the lgpolicy-list mailing list
lgpolicy-list at groups.sas.upenn.edu
To manage your subscription unsubscribe, or arrange digest format: https://groups.sas.upenn.edu/mailman/listinfo/lgpolicy-list
More information about the Lgpolicy-list