Standards Of Intellectual Property Protection Research Articles

THE AGREEMENT ON TRADE-RELATED ASPECTS OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS (TRIPS)

he paper delves into the development and intricacies of international legal frameworks for intellectual property (IP) rights protection and commercialization, focusing on agreements like the Paris and Berne Conventions. It outlines the evolution from initial measures safeguarding industrial property to broader copyright and trademark protections, facilitated by entities such as the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) and the World Trade Organization (WTO). The Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) is highlighted for establishing minimum standards for IP protection and enforcement, integrating provisions for dispute resolution, and managing the balance between IP holders' interests and the public good. TRIPS' role in addressing challenges posed by differing national norms and its efforts to mitigate IP rights abuse through limitations and exceptions, known as the Three-Step Test, are emphasized. This analysis underscores the importance of a fair and balanced IP system that promotes global innovation and creativity, acknowledging the need for a harmonious integration of varied national laws within the global trade and IP protection landscape.

Review on: Public Perception of Biotechnology on Genetically Modified Crops, Bio Policy and Intellectual Property Rights

Public discussion about genetically modified crops is strongly heavily influenced by debates over their risks and benefits. Supporters of biotechnology point to its potential to reduce hunger, prevent malnutrition, treat diseases, and improve overall health and quality of life. However, there is considerable opposition to biotechnology. Some critics argue that it poses risks to human health and the environment, while others oppose it on moral and ethical grounds. The transfer of genes between different species is often criticized as "playing God" or breaking the "Law of Nature." Biosafety on (GM) crops is a rapidly growing field that includes scientific research, ethical issues, and policy and regulatory frameworks to assess and manage risks to human and animal health, including food and feed safety, as well as environmental risks related to modern biotechnology products. Bio-policy refers to the rules, norms, and ethical considerations that govern the development, production, and use of biotechnology products. These policies differ by country and can be influenced by international agreements and organizations. A key international agreement (TRIPS) Agreement, which sets global standards for intellectual property protection. The Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) Agreement requires governments to issue patents in technological sectors, including modern biotechnology, to protect innovations in this field. This ensures that biotechnological advancements, including GM crops, are protected under intellectual property laws, aiding their development and commercialization while addressing ethical and safety concerns.

Development and Promotion Strategies of Chinese Agricultural Products in the Context of International Trade: Based on the Perspective of Intellectual Property Protection

In today's globalized economy, the means of economic competition between countries has shifted from relying primarily on tariffs and quotas to relying on talent, intellectual property rights and technical standards. The decisiveness and influence of international intellectual property rights on international trade is becoming increasingly obvious. As a big agricultural country, China possesses a large number of special agricultural products and is also a big exporter of agricultural products, so the protection of intellectual property rights of Chinese agricultural products is particularly important. Since the promulgation of the Agreement on Intellectual Property Rights (IPR), the United States will be linked to international trade and intellectual property protection and as a reason to continuously improve the international intellectual property protection standards. At present, China's agricultural products in international trade there are still many difficulties, from the perspective of intellectual property rights, mainly manifested in the lack of protection of agricultural patents, agricultural products, geographical indications. This paper will start from the beginning, with intellectual property protection as the entry point, analyse in the new situation of international trade in China's agricultural products development and promotion strategy.

Trend on the protection of traditional knowledge associated with genetic resources within intellectual property chapters of Free Trade Agreements: the Peruvian experience

Abstract During negotiations of Free Trade Agreements, the bargaining power of developed countries has pushed developing countries to yield to higher standards of intellectual property protection in exchange of commercial benefits. However, there is evidence that developing countries can also seek and ensure the adoption of measures aimed at safeguarding their legitimate interests as a result of these negotiations. An example is Peru, which has sought to ensure the inclusion of provisions to require patent applicants to disclose the origin of the genetic resources and the associated traditional knowledge when they are used in the development of an invention, as well as the presentation of the evidence as to the prior informed consent from their legitimate owners and the corresponding equitable benefit-sharing. This article seeks to analyze whether the terms finally adopted have had a real impact on the protection of the Peruvian traditional knowledge associated with genetic resources.

Unintended Consequences: How Introducing a Manufacturing and Export Exemption to Supplementary Protection Certificates Would Weaken Global Standards of IP Protection and Result in Direct Losses to Europe's Research-Based Biopharmaceutical Industry

Background: In October 2015 the European Commission (EC) released its report Upgrading the Single Market: More Opportunities for People and Business, which includes a stated intention to explore an option for implementing a Supplementary Protection Certificate (SPC) manufacturing and export exemption, expected to boost economic growth and job creation within the generics and biosimilars industry. However, such an exemption’s impact on the innovative research-based biopharmaceutical industry and on the international level of intellectual property (IP) protection remains in question. Methodology: Using evidence from the existing literature, a sample of 30 top-selling drugs, and France and Sweden as the primary source for SPC status within the EU we construct an econometric model and estimate potential annual losses to the global and the European innovative research-based biopharmaceutical industries. Results: This study finds that implementation of an EU-wide SPC manufacturing and export exemption would potentially result in annual losses ranging between USD2.675 billion and up to USD5.35 billion to the global innovative biopharmaceutical industry, with approximately USD1.34 billion to USD2.27 billion of these attributed to the European innovative biopharmaceutical industry. Translating these losses to current levels of biopharmaceutical sector employment and R&D investment the effect of the introduction of an EU-wide SPC manufacturing and export exemption could be between 4,500-7,700 direct job losses (with an additional 19,000-32,000 indirect job losses) and a decrease of between EUR215 million to EUR364 million in R&D investment. Conclusion: In light of these findings, we conclude that a manufacturing and export exemption is likely to have a detrimental effect on the European research-based biopharmaceutical industry and is unlikely to provide a significant and sustained positive economic impact on the European generics industry.

Statement of Public Interest Principles for Copyright Protection under the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP)

The Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) aims to conclude a comprehensive agreement that promotes free trade and investment among Australia, China, India, Japan, New Zealand, South Korea and member states of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). As a hallmark of this proposed agreement, the RCEP Intellectual Property (IP) Chapter will set out a host of minimum standards for IP protection in the sixteen participating countries. We are deeply concerned about the copyright protection standards proposed for the RCEP IP Chapter. They may cause unintended effects of stifling creativity, free speech, and economic growth. We urge that the new rounds of RCEP negotiations reconsider those standards by applying the following three principles: 1. Integrate the public interest as a core value for copyright negotiations. 2. Increase transparency of negotiations for the public interest. 3. Institute changes in copyright provisions for the public interest. Guided by these three principles, RCEP negotiations would produce the largest mega-regional free trade agreement to procedurally and substantially protect the public interest in copyrighted works. The RCEP copyright provisions, therefore, stand to benefit nearly 50% of the world’s population, who live in the sixteen RCEP participating countries.

Free Trade Agreements With The United States: 8 Lessons For Prospective Parties From Australia’s Experience

Abstract This article identifies 8 key lessons for those States contemplating a free trade agreement with the United States (U.S.) arising from Australia’s experience. The standards of intellectual property protection under the Australia-U.S. Free Trade Agreement and their impact on pharmaceutical prices in Australia are a particular focus. Prospective parties must first conduct a national interest self-assessment which reviews the desired strength of intellectual property protection under national law and their preference for using flexibilities available to them under the existing international intellectual property rights framework. The United States negotiates free trade agreements in light of previous ones, negotiating outcomes obtained in other fora and the decisions of international trade tribunals. Negotiations typically occur behind closed doors, which is a process having adverse implications for transparent decision-making, public consultation periods and contributions from interested non-governmental actors. A concluded agreement will build on prior treaties and influence the course of future international arrangements. But the impact of a United States free trade agreement is not always clear, including because of a lack of reliable data, and the extent of national legal change is a contested issue given existing reform agendas and external influences. The United States seek to redesign national health care systems in its own image and had little success in Australia’s case. National legal systems need not be harmonised: although there can be some convergence in intellectual property rights regimes, significant differences may also remain. Negotiators must reconcile competing cultures, philosophies and perspectives between States for a free trade agreement to be worthwhile.

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY, HEALTH, REGIONALISM AND DEVELOPMENT: A THIRD WORLD’S PERSPECTIVE

The United Nations Sustainable Development Goals were adopted in September 2015 as a post 2015 development agenda. Goal 9 of the SDGs is to ‘build resilient infrastructure, promote inclusive and sustainable industrialization and foster innovation’. Much has been written on the connection between intellectual property and development. With respect to developing countries, arguments have been canvassed both for and against intellectual property in the pursuit of their development goals. The adoption of the TRIPS Agreement in 1994 heralded a new era of global intellectual property governance aimed at a substantial harmonisation of intellectual property protection standards across the globe. This continues to raise continuing concerns in relation to the extent to which IP could foster development and industrialisation in developing countries and whether the global IP regime is designed in a way that sufficiently protects the interest of the developing and least developed nations. The development rhetoric is assuming an increasing significance in Africa given the continent’s varying development challenges. This calls for some reflection on the interface between IP protection and the pursuit of sustainable human and economic development. The paper examines the link between intellectual property and health and how it relates to sustainable development in the African context.

A Re-Reflection to Protection Standards of International Intellectual Property In the Context of Climate-Friendly Technology Transfer

There is an unsettled debate regarding the role of intellectual property (IP) in the development and transfer of climate friendly technologies under the international climate negotiation. Such debate arises from distinct opinions on IP protection standards. It can worsen the solution of climate-friendly technology transfer to developing countries. This study aims to address the question of whether a premise for minimum protection standards exists in the international IP system combined with climate-friendly technology transfer. First, the basic problem of why international IP standards pose a threat to climate-friendly technology transfer is clarified. Second, three levels of arguments are applied to prove that the IP protection standard is not the only minimum requirement. The negative effects on the transfer of climate-friendly technology arise from ambiguous existing legal provisions and practices. Third, this study provides some suggestions for improvement for international IP standards accommodating the transfer of climate-friendly technology. DOI: 10.5901/ajis.2014.v3n6p173

Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights and Developing Countries

The Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual property rights protection (TRIPS) Agreement, signed in 1994 as a founding element of the WTO, represents the most important attempt to establish a global harmonization of Intellectual Property protection. The purpose of this paper is to give an overview of the international aspects of IPRs, with particular reference to the effects of the TRIPS Agreement, which has been described as “the most significant international undertaking on IPR in history”. This paper is mainly descriptive in character. It only attempts to give some aspects of TRIPS and effects in developing countries and which are some of the conventions that protect intellectual property (IP) in the trade system. TRIPS Agreement has three main components, which relate to standards of protection, enforcement and dispute settlement. It does not establish a universal IPR system, instead, it lays down a set of minimum standards for the legal protection of IP that WTO members are expected to comply with. Is TRIPS pro trade? Who will benefit and who will lose from its implementation? These are questions that arise from scholars of developed and developing countries. Finally some conclusions from developing countries perspective derive from the analysis. DOI: 10.5901/ajis.2014.v3n2p279

Harmonisation of IP Treaties - An Analytical Approach

The last few decades have seen a surge of new intellectual property (IP) treaties, part of a trend of “upward harmonization” aimed at making IP rights stronger around the world, and especially in developing countries. The most important of these treaties is the Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property (TRIPS) Agreement, which requires all members of the World Trade Organization (WTO) to adopt and enforce relatively high minimum standards of IP protection. Those who support upward harmonization argue that it will have positive effects on trade, foreign direct investment, and global innovation. Opponents contend that such harmonization could ossify the imperfect IP system of the North and impede development. The most acute criticisms of the trend have focused on the potential impact of TRIPS on health. Because TRIPS requires developing countries to provide patents on pharmaceuticals, it has the potential to limit the access of patients in those countries to less expensive generic versions of new medicines. The effects of the TRIPS Agreement, however, depend on empirical questions that have yet to receive much attention in the literature: Can TRIPS in fact oblige developing countries to “harmonize” their IP laws with those of developed countries? TRIPS transition periods for developing countries have mostly expired, new multilateral harmonization efforts have foundered, and conversations have shifted toward topics of implementation and enforcement.

Standards and the Incentives for Innovation

We model the economics of the effects of standards on incentives for innovative investment. We use survey data from industrial respondents to parameterize our model, allowing us to explain and predict effects of technology standards on investment in the development of technology and thereby assess the benefits and costs of technology standards in a market equilibrium setting. Having parameterized the model with the responses of industry to our survey, we can also describe the differences in effects of standards for different types of firms and for different types of industrial research, and we can simulate the effects of stronger or weaker intellectual property (IP) protection, using the industrial responses to answer the question of how the opposing effects from changes in IP protection on balance affect innovative investments. We find that the net effects of standards for IP protection are positive, increasing innovative investments and increasing their private and social value.

Intellectual Property and Human Rights: A Conceptual Analysis in the Light of Developing Countries

This paper examines some competing legal frameworks that governments, NGOs, and intergovernmental organizations are using to conceptualize the intersection of human rights and intellectual property. Among the two approaches examined, the first approach views the two areas of law as in fundamental conflict, with strong intellectual property protection standards in particular those of the TRIPS Agreement undermining a broad spectrum of human rights. The second approach sees both areas of law as concerned with the same basic question .This paper aims to critically analyze different provisions of the intellectual property and to search for the implications of them for the developing countries in line with the Human right. Finally an attempt is made to explore ways and means in mitigating or addressing the problems arising out of the TRIPS which are peculiar to the developing countries.

Harmonization and Its Discontents: A Case Study of TRIPS Implementation in India's Pharmaceutical Sector

The last few decades have seen a surge of new intellectual property (IP) treaties, part of a trend of “upward harmonization” aimed at making IP rights stronger around the world, and especially in developing countries. The most important of these treaties is the Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property (TRIPS) Agreement, which requires all members of the World Trade Organization (WTO) to adopt and enforce relatively high minimum standards of IP protection. Those who support upward harmonization argue that it will have positive effects on trade, foreign direct investment, and global innovation. Opponents contend that such harmonization could ossify the imperfect IP system of the North and impede development. The most acute criticisms of the trend have focused on the potential impact of TRIPS on health. Because TRIPS requires developing countries to provide patents on pharmaceuticals, it has the potential

The curious absence of human rights: Can the WIPO Development Agenda transform intellectual property negotiation?

This article examines international negotiation of global intellectual property protection standards. Developing countries favour more flexible international rules, while developed countries push for higher mandatory protection levels. Developing countries base their positions on primary principles of intellectual property law: its public purpose and its commitment to balancing costs and benefits. This negotiating stance has not been effective; developed states counter-argue that stronger protection achieves the same ends. The article examines the resulting circular discussions at the 2001-2003 WTO Doha negotiations on TRIPS and Public Health, and the WIPO Development Agenda talks since 2004. The contention is that the negotiation impasse stems from an inability to move beyond the cost-benefit tension inherent in the patent system. Intellectual property theory cannot provide a bottom line at which short-term costs of patent monopolies must be deemed unacceptable, regardless of anticipated longer-term benefits. Recently, developing countries have celebrated the WIPO Development Agenda as a “paradigm shift” in the approach to international IP protection. The author argues that the Development Agenda will not necessarily change anything, and that developing countries should introduce human rights standards into discussions if they want to move the debate forward. Human rights standards can be used as benchmarks to assess whether IP rules promote public benefit and achieve an acceptable balance between rights of patent-holders and the broader public interest. The article shows how the ICESCR can be used to support a human rights-based argument.

The reality behind the rhetoric: How European policies risk harming access to generic medicines in developing countries

The availability of affordable generic medicines has been critical to expanding access to treatment for HIV/AIDS and other diseases in developing countries. In recent years, access to generics has come under threat by the global enforcement of minimum standards for intellectual property protection as determined by the World Trade Organization, together with additional policy measures promoted by the European Commission and others. Data exclusivity, border control measures, counterfeit legislation, the undermining of judicial process and patent term extensions all threaten to limit the ability of developing countries to access affordable medicines. The potential harm caused by these policies is magnified by the fact that the global economic crisis is resulting in shortfalls of donor funding to fight HIV/AIDS and other infectious diseases.

The rise and rule of a trade-based strategy: Historical institutionalism and the international regulation of intellectual property

ABSTRACT One of the most dramatic instances of international market regulation in the twentieth century was the adoption of a multilateral, enforceable, intellectual property protection regime at the end of the Uruguay Round of trade negotiations in 1994. The Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property (TRIPS) ushered in a new era of high standards of intellectual property protection, requiring profound and costly domestic institutional changes in many, many countries. International market regulation has increasingly penetrated domestic regulatory environments in ways that have compromised domestic political bargains. Historical institutionalism can help to explain the emergence of a global regime for intellectual property protection as a product of institutional change in the US. Historical institutionalism provides a lens to examine the directly political (rather than technocratic or efficiency maximizing) processes establishing domestic and international power relations.

Challenging Trips-Plus Agreements: The Potential Utility of Non-Violation Disputes

A World Trade Organization (WTO) non-violation complaint is one where an agreement has not been breached, but the complainant alleges an expected benefit under the agreement has been abrogated. When the TRIPS Agreement came into force non-violation complaints were not available for TRIPS disputes. This position was to be reviewed. Non-violation complaints remain unavailable for TRIPS disputes. In the early days of TRIPS the exclusion of non-violation disputes seemed rational because of the unique nature of TRIPS, among WTO agreements. The TRIPS Agreement requires members to implement minimum standards of intellectual property protection in their national laws. Members therefore have to provide at least that level of protection. If they do not do so a violation complaint could be initiated. Consequently, it was not logical to look for any notion of expected benefit beyond the wording of the minimum standards. However, TRIPS permits members to have greater standards and many members have agreed to higher standards through free trade agreements. These TRIPS-plus standards have arguably undermined expected benefits that should flow from TRIPS, especially for users of intellectual property rights. This article discusses the utility of making non-violation disputes available for TRIPS disputes from the perspectives of both the users and owners of intellectual property rights. This analysis includes a discussion of whether TRIPS-plus free trade agreements undermine expected benefits of the TRIPS Agreement and should thus be the subject of a non-violation dispute. Oxford University Press 2009, all rights reserved, Oxford University Press.

Does One Size Fit All? A Comparative Study to Determine an Alternative to International Patent Harmonization

The Agreement for Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) was ratified by a majority of the countries of the world in 1994 as a precondition to membership in the World Trade Organization. Today, 153 of the countries of the world are parties to the TRIPS Agreement. The effect of the TRIPS Agreement was to create the first international substantive standards of patent harmonization, and to cause many countries to adopt intellectual property laws far stronger than they had in existence at the time. Today, the process of patent harmonization initiated with the TRIPS Agreement moves forward, through a combination of multilateral discussions for a Substantive Patent Law Treaty and bilateral treaties and negotiations incorporating stronger standards of intellectual property protection than those implemented under the TRIPS Agreement. Whether this process of international adoption of stronger patent standards is beneficial to all countries involved is a question that has dominated the international patent debate since the TRIPS Agreement. Many developing countries have protested having to adopt stronger patent protection measures, and public health and access to medicine concerns caused by the rising prices of patented pharmaceuticals dominate the discourse around the TRIPS Agreement. All of these factors beg the question: Does a 'one size fit all' policy of international patent harmonization make sense to all countries equally? From the experience of the United States, it appears that a strong patent system can be beneficial to the economic and industrial development of a country. However, the experiences of other countries have shown that stronger standards can even retard economic growth, instead of benefiting it. The purpose of this paper is to examine the economic and historic justifications of the worldwide shift towards stronger patent laws. In doing so, it also seeks to determine whether there is a case to be made for the alternative, a shift towards discrete levels of patent protection, where countries choose patent laws according to their economic, social and industrial needs, and not according to an externally dictated process of standardization. The first part of my paper examines the history of patent harmonization, and current efforts to extend the process of harmonization further. The second part asks whether there is a stronger argument for each country to take its own discrete stand on its patent laws instead of staying on the harmonization bandwagon. In doing this, it examines examples from the histories of some major developing countries, as well as the history of patent law in the developing country experience. It also analyses the economic benefits of patent harmonization versus a discrete patent system. The third part of this paper compares the patent systems of India and the United States, two countries with distinct approaches to the use of intellectual property, and determines the extent to which the unique features of each benefit them.

Intellectual property laws integrated with the national development policies in China

As a developing country, China has been pressured by the developed countries to increase the levels of intellectual property (IP) protection and to adopt IP rules that even go beyond the minimum international standards. IP regimes are established to promote advances in science and culture by rewarding creation and invention. However, developing countries do not necessarily appropriately share the benefits from the harmonization of IP protection standards over the world. Fortunately, not every developed country or international organization is concerned only with its own interest when evaluating the tendency of international IP protection policies. In fact, they have made many studies or findings in favor of the concerns and interests of developing countries. This paper investigates the conflicts between IP rights and human rights, as well as the validity of IP laws under constitutional arguments, with the purpose of providing new strategic policy arguments in China’s future amendments to IP laws, and related negotiations with developed countries.