WIPO Broadcast Treaty funeral process

A very well written Broadcast Treaty background article from Jamie Love of Cptech targeted at a wide audience. James Love's communication is an insightful affirmation of my earlier thought: The BCT is dead but - It sounds absurd at first sight - these NGO's involved cannot really need a dead BCT they tried to kill, bold face highlighting from me:

If WIPO can find an exit strategy from this marathon negotiation, it will have to do something else. Chile has asked the SCCR to consider a treaty that provides for minimum safeguards (limitations and exceptions to rights) for uses of copyrighted works, particularly for libraries, schools and the handicapped, and 16 countries have called for a broader treaty on access to knowledge -- quite different directions than the current treaty proposal.

Lol. Reminds me of Ghana. Funerals there become great parties. Now the US delegation and their death certificate:

At a minimum, we believe this means agreement on the scope of protection providing broadcasters with what they need to protect against signal piracy while not undermining the rights of the underlying content holders or the public interest.

that is they want to kill the previous approach and focus on signals which is a good sign and in resignated tone:
Since the beginning of our discussions at WIPO on this issue of protection for broadcasters, the United States has scaled back its ambition for the treaty as reflected by the withdrawal of its own proposal which proposed, ... protection for netcasting organizations. The United States believes that flexibility in this process is required of all member states in order to achieve an agreement that will enjoy consensus. However, an agreement without identifiable benefits for broadcasting and cablecasting organizations will be a pointless exercise, ...