Intellectual Property Law-Making in Developing Countries in the New Century

2008 ◽  
Vol 46 (1) ◽  
pp. 1 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cameron J. Hutchison

The techniques used by courts to interpret statutes can be characterized as inconsistent, and at times, excessive. Current methodologies of statutory interpretation often reflect deeply normative views about the appropriate institutional role of the legislative and judicial branches of law-making, but this characterization of the debate is misleading. Rather, the problem lies with properly discerning legislative meaning and intent in full awareness of the limitations and possibilities of statutes as communicative devices. The author suggests a new methodology of statutory interpretation, whereby courts analogize the facts before them with certain paradigm cases. This methodology serves to constrain judicial discretion and enables courts to fill gaps in legislation in connection with novel cases.


2008 ◽  
Vol 9 (11) ◽  
pp. 1597-1624 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karen Kaiser

Although the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) is a technical intergovernmental organization with a limited mandate, it has been entrusted with a panoply of tasks. These include, inter alia, the international harmonization of intellectual property law, the administration of fee-based global intellectual property protection services, and the delivery of dispute resolution services to individuals. While the central role of WIPO in the continuous development of substantive intellectual property law has been questioned by developing countries, the administrative activities of WIPO have remained largely unscathed by critique and, therefore, have not attracted much attention. They revolve around the international filing, registration or recognition of industrial property rights, such as patents, industrial designs and trademarks, and provide an interesting perspective on the law of international institutions.


2009 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 340-362
Author(s):  
Chamundeeswari Kuppuswamy

This article addresses issues at the interface of public international law and international intellectual property law, and argues that developing countries interests’ will be better protected by the proposed amendment of Article. 31 of the TRIPS Agreement and by the ongoing efforts to elaborate a legal instrument for the protection of traditional knowledge, both of which extend and deepen the special and preferential treatment of developing countries. The issue of protection of traditional knowledge has not only made inroads into treaties (via the proposal to amend TRIPS to include disclosure of origin and prior informed consent—Article. 29 bis), but it has also introduced alternatives to foundational intellectual property law principles relating to term of protection and exclusive rights. The ongoing work programme of the World Intellectual Property Organisation’s Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge and Folklore committee shows potential for the formulation of an international instrument for the protection of traditional knowledge through recognition of the rights of indigenous peoples.


Author(s):  
Mark J. Davison ◽  
Ann L. Monotti ◽  
Leanne Wiseman

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document