Law Articles

Return to Law Dictionary Index

Global Economy and Protection of Intellectual Property

The rapid proliferation of the Internet has profound implications on the way Intellectual Property (IP) is created, distributed, and accessed by every segment of global society. The protection of Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs) in the global economy is an important issue that has been recognized by the World Trade Organization (WTO) as far back as 1995.

The Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs), formulated as part of the Uruguay Round of the World Trade Organization meetings, gave the WTO limited authority to enforce intellectual property rights and obligates member nations to enforce IPRs.

The US has always been a strong advocate of IPRs because they encourage innovation by protecting the creators� rights for a limited period of time and therefore allowing them to reap the profits that make innovation a worthwhile endeavor. The firm US stance is basically in line with powerful commercial lobbies such as the pharmaceutical industry who want to tighten the enforcement of IPRs.

The impact of IPRs on the worldwide pharmaceutical industry affects the health and welfare of the world population. The discussion of IPRs has become synonymous with the debate on global generic drug production and trade. Pharmaceutical companies have taken issue with the vague language of previous global market agreements that could allow countries to abuse patent exemptions. Even though these companies do not want to limit access of much needed �generic� medication for the public good, they are continuously concerned regarding potential loopholes for very profitable �luxury� products such as Viagra�.

In August 2003, after facing a series of impasses, delegates finally supported an agreement that allowed developing countries to import generic drugs to treat medical conditions deemed �public health threats.� While considered, by most, a success for developing countries, some believe the agreement may add unnecessary red-tape and bureaucratic burdens for those filing for a patent exemption.

A broad range of global players, especially Non-government Organizations (NGOs), have argued in favor of relaxing IPRs in the interest of increasing access to patented pharmaceuticals. Widespread epidemics, such as tuberculosis, AIDS, dengue fever, malaria, and typhoid, have stressed the humanitarian need to make life-saving pharmaceuticals globally available. The question remains, should we restrict the transfer of important technology and medical expertise through IPRs, which often comfort and benefit the more fortunate and �richer� nations, or allow free exchange of information and technology for increased benefit to the world population? At risk is the hampering of technological and pharmaceutical competition and the development of innovative products including possible �wonder drugs.�

Another area of contention is the effect on global agriculture. Controversies regarding genetically modified foods and patents on various life forms may become a divisive issue in agricultural negotiations.

The future of IPRs in the WTO, although often controversial, looks promising. WTO member nations have established laws protecting various forms of intellectual property. These protections extend to copyrights, geographical indications, and integrated circuit designs and patents. Formal channels have been established to enforce IPRs and genialities have been legislated to deter potential violations. In humanitarian fairness, least developed countries have been granted (November 29, 2005) an extended deadline in order to meet IPR regulations.

Regardless of the agreements and necessary extensions, dispute settlement will continue to be an issue and become increasingly complicated as the WTO wades through conflicting and often vague IPR regimes. Regional trade agreements, with their own IPR enforcement rules, have further complicated dispute settlement.

References

Global Trade Negotiations Home Page: Center for International Development at Harvard University. Retrieved February 14, 2006 from http://www.cid.harvard.edu/cidtrade/issues/ipr.html

World Trade Organization (2005) Poorest countries given more time to apply intellectual property rules. Retrieved February 14, 20006 from http://www.wto.org/english/news_e/pr424_e.htm

Copyright 2006 J Klemens
Jonathan Klemens, RPh, FASCP, FAAIM is a pharmacist, writer, and speaker. He has written numerous articles on alternative medicine, leadership and ethics. http://jksamurai.googlepages.com

Return to Intellectual Property

Return to Law Dictionary Index