distributed, so that money returns to them.
The Japanese, explicitly in a number of cases, are teaming companies with government-sponsored institutions and holding the results of that research, I guess, as trade secrets or something. They keep the information secret and then try to apply for patents on it prior to releasing it. I don't see any way that the United States could influence those aspects of the problem in those countries. Were you suggesting there was a way to do that?
MR. HUGHES: I am certainly not suggesting, and would not suggest, that we have any prospect of seeking any reversal of the E.U. Directive. I know that there was, in the meteorological data area, an effort to get the E.U. Directive amended to exempt meteorological data. Even that limited effort did not succeed.
What everyone in this room needs to understand is that, at the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), the question of database protection is on the table. It will continue to be on the table. The Europeans have a clear model. If we do not like that model, then we need to do our best to formulate a model that meets our principles as a society and that is persuasive with the Latin American, African, and Asian countries. That is where the question of an international regime will be decided, if there are a couple or two or three competing models from developed economies.
MS. PETERS: I would add that at the WIPO, I think it is much more likely that if the United States came up with a misappropriation-type model that met the needs here, then more countries would line up behind us than behind the Europeans.
MR. HUGHES: In the absence of the United States doing anything, those undecideds are ripe for the picking or ripe for persuasion by the European Union. That is a danger that we have to face. As long as everyone is cognizant of that, that is a danger that should have some impact on our domestic discussions.
MR. PERLMAN: I would just suggest that the problem that we are seeking a solution for, and that we will be seeking a solution for in the breakout sessions, depends on how you define the problem. If the problem is how we protect databases, then we have a wide variety of options to consider. If the problem is how to develop a balance between protection and use, then I would suggest that technological measures are not a solution but another problem, just as contractual remedies may also be another problem rather than a solution.