Trips Have Been Adopted with a View to Encourage Fair Competiotion at International Level
MASTER OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
ECON 1102
REGULATORY INSTITUTIONS OF THE WORD ECONOMY
Trade-Related Intellectual Property Rights (Trips) Have Been Adopted With A View To Encourage Fair Competition At The International Level, But Trips Rules Tilt The Balance In Favour Of Imperfect Competition With Each Country And Exacerbates International Inequalities. (Discussion With Reference To Pharmaceutical Industry)
Name of Lecturer : Rajendran K S Name of Student : Nilesh Singh Date of Submission : 6 May 2011
Table of Contents
1. | Introduction | 3 | | 1.1 Main Objective of This Essay | 3 | 2. | Role of TRIPs in International Market | 3 | 3. | Why Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs) is Important? | 4 | 4. | Reason of Flexibility in TRIPs | 6 | | 4.1 Effect of Strong Implementation of IPRs | 6 | | 4.2 Debate on Balanced Approach to Stimulate Research and Development | 8 | | 4.3 Flexibility in TRIPs | 9 | | 4.4 IPR and International Trade | 9 | | 4.5 IPR and Health | 10 | 5. | TRIPs – A Paradox for the Poor | 12 | 6 | Conclusion | 13 | References | 16 |
1 Introduction
Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs), was the very important invention of the new international trade system by World Trade Organisation (WTO) in 1995. After the Uruguay Round (UR), under the multilateral trade negotiations, introduction of the agreement on TRIPs turn out to be a major success in the discipline and development of international law. Member nations of WTO faced different problems in defining their respective national intellectual property strategy and policy and designing intellectual property rights legislation in conformity with those policies and requirements of the TRIPS Agreement. The protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights differ from countries to countries; this was major problem in international economic relations. 1.1 Main Objective of This
ECON 1102
REGULATORY INSTITUTIONS OF THE WORD ECONOMY
Trade-Related Intellectual Property Rights (Trips) Have Been Adopted With A View To Encourage Fair Competition At The International Level, But Trips Rules Tilt The Balance In Favour Of Imperfect Competition With Each Country And Exacerbates International Inequalities. (Discussion With Reference To Pharmaceutical Industry)
Name of Lecturer : Rajendran K S Name of Student : Nilesh Singh Date of Submission : 6 May 2011
Table of Contents
1. | Introduction | 3 | | 1.1 Main Objective of This Essay | 3 | 2. | Role of TRIPs in International Market | 3 | 3. | Why Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs) is Important? | 4 | 4. | Reason of Flexibility in TRIPs | 6 | | 4.1 Effect of Strong Implementation of IPRs | 6 | | 4.2 Debate on Balanced Approach to Stimulate Research and Development | 8 | | 4.3 Flexibility in TRIPs | 9 | | 4.4 IPR and International Trade | 9 | | 4.5 IPR and Health | 10 | 5. | TRIPs – A Paradox for the Poor | 12 | 6 | Conclusion | 13 | References | 16 |
1 Introduction
Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs), was the very important invention of the new international trade system by World Trade Organisation (WTO) in 1995. After the Uruguay Round (UR), under the multilateral trade negotiations, introduction of the agreement on TRIPs turn out to be a major success in the discipline and development of international law. Member nations of WTO faced different problems in defining their respective national intellectual property strategy and policy and designing intellectual property rights legislation in conformity with those policies and requirements of the TRIPS Agreement. The protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights differ from countries to countries; this was major problem in international economic relations. 1.1 Main Objective of This
References: Commission on Intellectual Property Rights (2002) Integrating Intellectual Property Rights and Development Policy Deardoff, A. (1990) ‘Should Patent Protection Be Extended to All Developing Countries?’, World Economy, 13, 497–508. Dunkley, G. (1997) The Free Trade Adventure: The WTO, The Uruguay Round—A Critique. El-Said, M. (2006) ‘The Evolution of the Jordanian TRIPS-Plus Model: Multilateralism Vs Bilateralism and the Implications for the Jordanian IPRs Regime’, International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law, 37(5), 501–19. Grabowski, H. (2002) ‘Patent, Innovation and Access to New Pharmaceuticals’, Journal of International Economics, 5, 840–60. Jordanian Association of Pharmaceutical Manufacturers (JAPM) (2003) Data Base on Pharmaceuticals, memo, June. Jiang, F. 2008:” The Problem with Patents.” Harvard International Review, 30-33 Lacket, C Mishra, V. (2001) ‘TRIPS, Product Patents and Pharmaceuticals’, Economic and Political Weekly, 1 December, 4464–7. Office of Technology Assessment (1986).Intellectual Property Rights in an Age of Electronics Information, US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC. Oxfam (2007) ‘All Costs, No Benefits: How TRIPS-PLUS Intellectual Property Rules in the US–Jordan FTA Affect Access to Medicines’, Oxfam Briefing Note, March. Ryan, M. and Shanebrook, J. (2004) Establishing Globally Competitive Pharmaceutical and Bio-Medical Technology Industries in Jordan. International Intellectual Property Institute and AMIR, Amman. Ryan, M. and Shanebrook, J. (2004) Establishing Globally Competitive Pharmaceutical and Bio-Medical Technology Industries in Jordan Scherer, F. M. and Watal, J. (2001) Post-TRIPS Option for Access to Patented Medicines in Developing Countries, ICRIER, Working Paper No The South Centre (1999).The TRIPS Agreement: A Guide for the South. The Uruguay Round Agreement on Trade Related Intellectual Property Rights. The South Centre, Geneva. Waxman, H. (2003) Statement of the Honorable Henry A. Waxman, a Representative in Congress from the State of California, House Committee on Ways and Means [online]. Winestock, G. and Cooper, H. (2001) ‘Deal Will Allow Poor Nations to Ignore Patents to Meet Public Health’, Wall Street Journal