scholarly journals The Revitalisation of the Object and Purpose of the TRIPS Agreement

2021 ◽  
pp. 267-294
Author(s):  
Christophe Geiger ◽  
Luc Desaunettes-Barbero
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Trips Agreement ◽  
Plain Packaging ◽  
Trade Law ◽  
The Awakening ◽  
International Trade Law ◽  
Appellate Body

The limited role the objectives and principles of the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS Agreement) (Arts 7 and 8) have played so far in the interpretation and implementation of its substantive provisions has often been criticised. The WTO Panel and Appellate Body Reports in the ‘Australia—Plain Packaging’ dispute are likely to change this situation for the future as, for the first time, the World Trade Organization (WTO) dispute settlement bodies fully engaged with Arts 7 and 8 to interpret Art 20 relative to the use of trade marks. Reliance on these provisions led the Panel and the Appellate Body to conclude that there are legitimate reasons for which Members may encumber trade mark use. The awakening of these two long dormant provisions could have a fundamental impact in offering the possibility of a more flexible reading of TRIPS. It could indeed secure the adaptability of intellectual property rights to the evolution of economic, technological and social circumstances by guaranteeing a more balanced interpretation of the limitations and exceptions included in the Agreement, for example, as advocated several years ago by a group of international IP scholars in the ‘Declaration on a balanced interpretation of the three-step test’. Furthermore, the use of these two provisions could serve as a gateway for the taking into account of ethical imperatives, supported by international human rights in the interpretation of the TRIPS norms, such as, for example, public health imperatives, crucial in the context of pandemics. Such a reading has been advocated in the past and the ‘Plain Packaging’ reports might lead to a more frequent and welcome reliance on human rights arguments in the context of international trade law.

How to Reconcile Human Rights, Trade Law, Intellectual Property, Investment and Health Law?

2019 ◽  
pp. 69-102 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ernst-Ulrich Petersmann
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Health Law ◽  
Technical Barriers To Trade ◽  
Tobacco Products ◽  
Plain Packaging ◽  
Trade Law ◽  
Health Rights

This article on the legal findings of the four WTO panel reports of June 2018 on Australia’s tobacco plain packaging (TPP) measures begins with a discussion of the ‘systemic interpretation’ challenges (section I) and ‘legitimacy challenges’ of WTO panel interpretations of trade rules that affect also related disputes over intellectual property rights, health rights, investment regulations and human rights (section II). Section III summarizes the main Panel findings that the TPP measures are apt to, and do make a meaningful contribution to Australia’s objective of reducing the use of, and exposure to, tobacco products; the claimants have not demonstrated that the TPP measures are ‘more trade-restrictive than necessary to fulfil a legitimate objective’ in violation of Article 2.2 of the WTO Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT). Section IV summarizes the Panel findings that the complainants did not demonstrate that the TPP measures were inconsistent with the WTO Agreement on Trade-Related Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS). Section V concludes.

scholarly journals Nanotechnology Development and Transference in the International Trade Law and the Intellectual Property Rights

2016 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 155
Author(s):  
Shila Taheri
Keyword(s):  
International Trade ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Critical Issue ◽  
Trade Law ◽  
International Trade Law ◽  
Legal Challenges ◽  
Research Findings ◽  
Nanotechnology Development

The preset essay analyzes the nanotechnology development and transference in the international trade law and the intellectual property rights by implementing descriptive analytic method. The research findings show that determining the role and position and the function of intellectual property systems within the modern nanotechnology intellectual property at the international scenery and analyzing the plans and codifying policies and special protective programs in terms of development and enhancement of intellectual property in this technology and comprehensive approaches in support of the international intellectual property and change and correction of the organizational offices of nano patents registration is a critical issue. Codifying coordinated regulations for University research centers to ensure the unity of the researchers, lack of definite and fixed output for commercializing, study of the increasing mass of the number of registered patents, rise of the complexity of the patents (interdisciplinary patents) that lead to the limitations for the innovators in obtaining intellectual property rights, lack of the cooperation of the developing countries because of the obstacles of registering patents and being bereft of the benefits of nano because of the high expenses of registering the patents and the administration guarantee of the international documents are among the legal challenges of the intellectual property in nanotechnology.

scholarly journals Medical Patents and the Right to Health – From Monopoly Control to Open Access Innovation and Provision of Medicines

2019 ◽  
Vol 61 (1) ◽  
pp. 153-182
Author(s):  
Philippe Cullet ◽  
Hu Yuanquiong
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Patent Protection ◽  
Access To Medicines ◽  
Right To Health ◽  
Trips Agreement ◽  
Human Right ◽  
The Right

The coming into force of the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) in the mid-1990s led to a massive strengthening of intellectual property rights in the global South. This was particularly controversial concerning restrictions on access to medicines and set the stage for spirited debates concerning the impacts of medical patents on the realisation of the right to health in the context of the HIV/AIDS crisis. Efforts to reconcile the right to health and medical patents led to a minor amendment of the TRIPS Agreement that has hardly had any impact on the ground while further strengthening of patent protection was obtained, for instance, through bilateral agreements. In the human rights field, attempts to strengthen the protection afforded by the right to health have been partly diluted by efforts to strengthen the claims of inventors under human rights law. At this juncture, two main elements need to be taken forward. The first is to revisit our understanding of the human right to health to ensure, for instance, that there is no compromise in the liberal promise of universality, in particular access to medicines for every person who needs them. The second element is the need to rethink the way in which legal incentives are given to innovate. In a context where patents are the only recognised legal incentive to innovate in the medical field, this discourages the development of medicines for diseases that may affect mostly poor patients, since companies need to recoup their investments. Further, it militates against giving attention to other systems of medicine whose innovations can usually not be protected under the patent system, even where treatments are effective. Keywords: TRIPS Agreement, Access to Medicines, Right to Health, ICESCR

Beyond Unbridled Optimism and Fear: Indigenous Peoples, Intellectual Property, Human Rights and the Globalisation of Traditional Knowledge and Expressions of Folklore: Part II

2014 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-37
Author(s):  
Caroline Joan S. Picart ◽  
Caroline Joan S. Picart ◽  
Marlowe Fox
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Traditional Knowledge ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Biological Diversity ◽  
Convention On Biological Diversity ◽  
Nagoya Protocol ◽  
Trade Law ◽  
International Trade Law ◽  
Traditional Cultural Expressions

Abstract In Part I of this two-part article, we explained why western assumptions built into intellectual property law make this area of law a problematic tool, as a way of protecting traditional knowledge (tk) and expressions of folklore (EoF) or traditional cultural expressions (tce) of indigenous peoples. Part II of this article aims to: 1) provide a brief review of the Convention on Biological Diversity (cbd) and the Nagoya Protocol, and examine the evolution of the intellectual property rights of indigenous peoples from the Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property (trips Agreement) to the cbd to the Nagoya Protocol; and 2) examine possible core principles, inducted (rather than deduced) from actual practices already in place in the areas of patents, copyrights, and trademarks in relation to protecting tk and EoF. These explorations could allow for discussions regarding indigenous peoples, human rights and international trade law to become less adversarial.

Beyond Unbridled Optimism and Fear: Indigenous Peoples, Intellectual Property, Human Rights and the Globalisation of Traditional Knowledge and Expressions of Folklore: Part I

2013 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 319-339 ◽  
Author(s):  
Caroline Joan S. Picart ◽  
Caroline Joan S. Picart ◽  
Marlowe Fox
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Traditional Knowledge ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Property Law ◽  
Cultural Expression ◽  
Intellectual Property Law ◽  
Traditional Cultural Expressions

Abstract This article is the first part of a two-part piece, which considers the intellectual property rights of indigenous peoples. After establishing pragmatic working definitions of who “indigenous peoples” are and what folklore (or “traditional cultural expression”) is, as compared with, but dialectically related to, “traditional knowledge,” this article does the following: 1) explains why western assumptions built into intellectual property law make this area of law a problematic tool for protecting traditional knowledge (TK) and expressions of folklore (EoF) or traditional cultural expressions (TCE) of indigenous peoples; and 2) creates a general sketch of human rights related legal instruments that could be and have been harnessed, with varying degrees of success, in the protection of the intellectual property of indigenous peoples.

scholarly journals Criminal Enforcement and International Intellectual Property Law

2014 ◽  
pp. 134-153
Author(s):  
Siddharth Partap Singh
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
Trips Agreement ◽  
Property Law ◽  
Intellectual Property Law ◽  
Global Consensus ◽  
Standard Set

There is a global consensus that domain of Intellectual Property should be subjected to criminal enforcement in order to secure the rights of owners of such Intellectual Property Rights. The TRIPS Agreement was, to some extent, successful in crystallizing the consensus as regards the criminal measures to be taken by States in the event of the infringement of Intellectual Property Rights through article 61. However, the standard set by the provision by minimal, to say the least. The advent of Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement has broader obligations, while also addressing some unsettled issues that have surfaced in disputes such as the China-IPRs case.

scholarly journals Pelindungan Hak Paten atas Pengetahuan Obat Tradisional Melalui Pasal 26 UU No. 13 Tahun 2016 tentang Paten (Protection of Patent Rights on Traditional Medicine Knowledge Through Article 26 of Law No. 13 of 2016 Concerning Patents)

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-65
Author(s):  
Trias Palupi Kurnianingrum
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Traditional Medicine ◽  
Traditional Knowledge ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Trips Agreement ◽  
Patent Law ◽  
Benefit Sharing ◽  
Traditional Medicines ◽  
Patent Rights

Patent as a branch of Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) serves to protect inventions on the field of technology, one of them being medicine. The rise on the number of cases on the theft of genetic resources and traditional knowledge on the field of medicine for commercialization purposes shows that the protection of patent rights on traditional medicine knowledge is still not optimal. This article is the result of a normative juridical research which is supported by an empirical data, examines the protection of patent rights on traditional medicine knowledge and the implementation of Article 26 of Law No. 13 of 2016 on Patents (Patent Law year 2016). In the research results, it was mentioned that even though the TRIPs Agreement did not accommodate the traditional knowledge, the presence of Patent Law year 2016 complemented the Indonesian government's efforts to save the knowledge of traditional medicines from biopiracy and misappropriation. It is necessary to regulate the disclosure obligation in TRIPs agreement and further mechanism regarding benefit sharing and granting access to traditional medicines knowledge. AbstrakPaten merupakan salah satu cabang Hak Kekayaan Intelektual yang berfungsi untuk melindungi invensi di bidang teknologi, salah satunya obat-obatan. Maraknya kasus pencurian sumber daya genetik dan pengetahuan tradisional di bidang obat-obatan untuk tujuan komersialisasi menunjukkan bahwa pelindungan hak paten atas pengetahuan obat tradisional masih belum maksimal. Artikel ini merupakan hasil penelitian yuridis normatif yang didukung dengan data empiris, membahas mengenai pelindungan hak paten atas pengetahuan obat tradisional dan implementasi Pasal 26 Undang-Undang Nomor 13 Tahun 2016 tentang Paten (UU Paten 2016). Di dalam hasil penelitian, disebutkan meskipun Perjanjian Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs) belum mengakomodasi pengetahuan tradisional namun hadirnya UU Paten 2016 melengkapi usaha pemerintah Indonesia dalam menyelamatkan pengetahuan obat tradisional dari biopiracy dan misappropriation. Perlu pengaturan kewajiban disclosure di dalam Perjanjian TRIPs dan mekanisme lebih lanjut mengenai benefit sharing dan pemberian akses atas pengetahuan obat tradisional.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document