Search results

Trade in counterfeit products has been expanding continuously. The emergence of the internet, the process of globalisation as well as the increase of digitalisation have enabled counterfeit products to infiltrate legitimate supply chains, causing harm not only to national economies but also to holders of intellectual property rights (IPR). In this chapter, we analyse the possible solutions that holders of IP rights and their legal representatives have in their fight against the online sale of counterfeit products. To elaborate on this issue, first, we explain the legislation on an international level for IPR protection and its specific characteristics. We explain the conventions on the protection of IPR that are governed by the World Intellectual Protection Organisation (WIPO) and the provisions of the TRIPS (Trade-Related Intellectual Property Rights) Agreement governed by the World Trade Organisation (WTO). We also analyse the national legislative procedure of protecting and enforcing IPR in North Macedonia to explain a possible solution to fight online counterfeit trade. As a case study of this chapter, we explain the work of the Online Enforcement Programme of REACT as a not-for-profit organisation with over 30 years of experience in the fight against counterfeit trade and the challenges that they have in fighting against the online sale of counterfeit products. Since IP law is territorial in its nature as a conclusion, we suggest that a more centralised approach is needed in the fight against the online sale of counterfeit products.

Several countries, such as South Africa and India, believe that intellectual property rights (IPRs), including patents, impede the efficient increase in vaccine production to inoculate the global population as they scramble to recover from the COVID-19 pandemic. Their proposal at the World Trade Organization (WTO) to waive these pharmaceutical patents has been met with resistance from a few developed countries, who believe that the abrogation of IPRs is unnecessary, even during a pandemic. The purpose of this paper is to discuss the impact of a potential waiver of medical patents at the WTO versus the status quo of IPR laws in the global economy.

This study examines key arguments from economic and moral standpoints regarding the provisions of the Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) agreement and other related international agreements and their validity based on the premise of the internalisation of positive externalities posed by vaccines.

The effectiveness of the TRIPS agreement in securing medical access is weak on account of the ability of profit-making multinationals to secure IP rights and on account of the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a multilateral agreement that supports patent evergreening and a period of protection on test data which challenges the access to medicines and the fundamental human right to health.

This study examines international IPRs through the lens of human rights and proposes a new system that balances the two.

Although a large number of Arab countries are members of the World Trade Organisation and the Agreement on Trade‐Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights, most of these countries were unable to structure a national intellectual property protection regime which takes into consideration their development plans. The purpose of this paper is to shed light on the history of Arab countries' participation in multilateral trade and intellectual property negotiations and calls for the maximum utilisation by these countries of the intellectual property policy space available to them under international law.

The paper draws from the texts of international agreements and from the available literature on intellectual property. The paper also makes use of various international reports and studies on intellectual property and development.

The paper argues that due to the minimal participation and involvement by Arab countries in international trade and intellectual property negotiations, officials in these countries lacked deep knowledge and understanding about the technical and legal issues engulfing the regulation and implementation of intellectual property. The paper finds that those countries mostly active in negotiations were more able to capitalise on the system and to benefit from the available policy space in terms of national development. Finally, the paper provides recommendations aimed towards enhancing the policy space and utilising intellectual property for development purposes.

These findings are important for policy makers, officials and those interested in understanding the relation between intellectual property protection and development and how developing and Arab countries would be able to maximize the benefits from the international protection regime.

The purpose of this study is to contribute towards the debate about global access to COVID-19 vaccines, therapeutics and diagnostics.

The global scramble for COVID-19 vaccine and other related pharmaceutical products have once again exposed the limitations of the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS). High-income countries are claiming a lion’s share of the first available batches of the COVID-19 vaccine in total disregard of the consequences such approach would have on the low-income countries that lack both the manufacturing wherewithal and the financial resources to purchase the vaccine and other products needed to combat the pandemic. This paper reviews the existing TRIPS Flexibilities and analyses their limitations with respect to equitable access of pharmaceutical products in times of health emergencies. This paper then considers the unique challenges that have been brought to the fore by the COVID-19 pandemic. Finally, this paper analytically explores some options that have been proposed so far that the World Trade Organization (WTO) or governments can take in the immediate to near term to facilitate equitable access to COVID-19 pharmaceutical products and technologies. This research is non-empirical, desk-based research. It is, therefore, based on the literature review of existing body of work that is relevant to the topic under discussion. Mindful of the epistemological challenges that are always associated with desk-based research, part of the methodology of this work is to seek support from related empirical studies based on different philosophical underpinnings but that confirm the working hypothesis of this research.

This paper finds that there is still a need for a comprehensive reform of TRIPS Agreement to streamline the voluntary licencing system which is an important tool for low-income countries’ access to affordable pharmaceuticals. However, for purposes of dealing with COVID-19, WTO members should consider establishing pooled Licencing Facilities and procurement strategies via already existing political, economic or regional trade groupings.

This research is original. All sources have been acknowledged. This research synthesises different research papers and applies different viewpoints to the debate on the impact of the TRIPS Agreement on equitable access to COVID-19 vaccines, therapeutics and diagnostics.

Since the arrival of the World Trade Organization (WTO) in 1995 a number of side agreements have also been negotiated that seek further rationalization of the emerging global economy. Prominent among these is the agreement on trade‐related intellectual property rights (TRIPS). Enforcement of the TRIPS agreement would involve the multilateral trade sanctions mechanism of the WTO. By contrast, proponents advocating a parallel international agreement guaranteeing adequate protections for workers – trade‐related international labor standards (TRILS) – have not met with success. This paper examines how traditional justificatory arguments for the property rights might apply to the question of workers’ rights in the international economy. It is found that such arguments apply quite well to the right of access to a “decent living”. It is then investigated how a TRILS agreement administered and enforced by the WTO's disputes settlements mechanism might advance these rights.

The COVID-19 pandemic has devastated economies and public health systems across the globe, increasing the anticipation for the creation of an effective vaccine. With this comes the reinforcement of debates between the right to health and pharmaceutical patent rights. The purpose of this study is to illustrate how the Philippines could attempt to balance the right to health with pharmaceutical patent rights in the introduction of a potential COVID-19 vaccine into the country.

This will be accomplished through an examination of the flexibilities allowed by international agreements and domestic patent laws.

With the economic and health challenges brought about by the COVID-19 pandemic, the Philippine Government will have a strong justification to pursue parallel importation and compulsory licencing under the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights. This is exacerbated by the bold leadership of President Duterte, whose administration has so far shown a propensity to decide in favor of the right to health at the expense of other rights in dealing with the pandemic.

While this paper focuses on the Philippines, it has a potential application in the least developed and developing countries which aim to gain access to a prospective COVID-19 vaccine. Moreover, while this study discusses the harmonization of laws on the right to health and patent laws as a solution to the COVID-19 pandemic and the lack of access to vaccines, it also calls for solutions that go beyond the application of the law.

In this chapter I put forward a framework to help us understand the underlying sources of national policy failures regarding intellectual property rights (IPR) protection, the need for international coordination, and how the coordination should be done. I also analyze whether global harmonization of IPR standards is necessary or sufficient for achieving globally welfare-maximizing policies. Then I move on to analyze the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS), which is a mighty effort to coordinate IPR policies across member countries of the World Trade Organization (WTO). I discuss what TRIPS was supposed to do and what it has actually achieved, with reference to my theoretical framework. I explain that it is desirable for IPR to be included in world trade talks and be negotiated along with other trade issues. I offer analyses on the extensions of the basic model by introducing political economy and trade barriers, as well as allowing countries to discriminate against foreign firms. Finally, I comment on further potential extensions such as introduction of foreign direct investment (FDI) or licensing, parallel imports, cumulative innovations, subject matter of protection and costs of implementation. The main thrust of the basic model is that, provided that there is free trade and non-discrimination of foreign firms, there exist positive cross-border externalities as a country strengthens its IPR protection, since it raises the profits of foreign firms and the welfare of foreign consumers without causing any deadweight loss on foreign soil. This implies that national governments tend to provide too little IPR protection compared with the global optimum. The model also implies that a country with higher innovative capability and larger domestic market would provide stronger IPR. Thus, it is natural for the South to protect IPR less than the North in the absence of international coordination. These basic results largely continue to hold under various extensions.

The paper aims to examine whether the panel and parties of China – Intellectual Property Rights could have applied the general principle of necessity developed under Article XX of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade and Article XIV of the General Agreement on Trade in Services. This paper specifically seeks to examine applicability of the general principle of necessity in the World Trade Organization (WTO) tribunal's analysis of the provisions of the Berne Convention, which is incorporated by Article 9 of the Trade‐related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) Agreement.

The paper performs a series of documentary/archival research and case studies of the jurisprudence and interpretative methods of the WTO adjudicative bodies.

The general principle of necessity in WTO jurisprudence is applicable when a measure taken by a WTO member is inconsistent with WTO provisions, the measure is highly relevant to the sovereignty of the WTO member, the WTO member seeks to justify the measure by applying one of the exceptions articulated in the WTO Agreements, and the relevant language of necessity exists in the exception provisions. If these requirements are met, the general principle of necessity would be applicable to other provision of WTO Agreements, including Article 17 of the Berne Convention incorporated by Article 9 of the TRIPS Agreement, provided that the parties of the dispute raise the defense in their arguments.

By examining the application of the general principle of necessity and its relevance to sovereignty in one of the most recent disputes in the WTO, this paper analyzes a decision that could have considerable impacts on the jurisprudence of future disputes regarding enforcement of intellectual property rights in the WTO regime.

The purpose of this paper is to analyse the interface between the Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights Agreement (TRIPS) and the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), to determine measures available to the global community to resolve the conflict between them, in order to prevent the rapid loss of biodiversity despite the diverse interests of nations.

Within the framework of sustainability, this paper adopts a socio‐legal approach by undertaking a content analysis of the relevant treaties and juristic writings that sheds light on the existing matrix of interaction between the two legal instruments.

The findings reveal that there is an urgent need to review all the instruments, particularly in the area of trade, intellectual property and conservation of biodiversity that causally influence the people's freedoms and capabilities in the said areas. To overcome the range of these surmountable barriers, a comprehensive approach to development is required, i.e. an all‐encompassing functional relation amalgamating distinct development concerns in relevant spheres, especially in economic matters.

The paper explores the changes that need to be incorporated in the TRIPS and CBD in order to develop an appropriate normative framework with regards to property in genetic material.

The research provides amicable solutions that can be explored particularly by the providers of genetic resources, in order to overcome the monumental challenges during the joint implementation of TRIPS and the CBD.

The comprehensive review undertaken in this paper enables the stakeholders to explore measures that enable sustainable development without jeopardizing Earth's biodiversity.

In the last two decades the subject of intellectual property rights (IPR) took on major significance as an element of global trade regulation and commercial policy. Implementation of the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) at the World Trade Organization (WTO) in 1995 obliged member countries, over various transition periods, to adopt and enforce minimum standards of protection for patents, copyrights, trademarks, trade secrets, and related policies. This mandate forced legislative and administrative changes in virtually all countries, but had particular impact in developing nations, which had generally weaker IPR standards prior to TRIPS. Since 1995 there have been additional multilateral negotiations, largely at the World Intellectual Property Organization, over stronger global standards for patents and copyrights for digital electronic goods. Most controversially, in its negotiations of bilateral free trade areas the United States aggressively demands highly rigorous standards, beyond those called for in TRIPS, for patent rules governing pharmaceutical products and new biotechnological goods in the agricultural and life sciences.