In addition to the basic intellectual property standards created by the TRIPS Agreement, many countries have concluded bilateral agreements to introduce a higher standard of protection. This set of standards, known as TRIPS+ or TRIPS-Plus, can take many forms. [20] The general objectives of these agreements are as follows: TRIPS plus conditions that prescribe standards beyond the TRIPS Agreement were also discussed. [38] These free trade agreements contain conditions that limit the ability of governments to introduce competition for generic manufacturers. In particular, the United States has been criticized for pushing protection far beyond the standards prescribed by the TRIPS Agreement. U.S. free trade agreements with Australia, Morocco, and Bahrain have expanded patentability by mandating the availability of patents for new uses of well-known products. [39] The TRIPS Agreement allows for compulsory licensing at a country`s discretion. U.S.
free trade agreements with Australia, Jordan, Singapore, and Vietnam have limited the application of compulsory licenses to emergencies, antitrust remedies, and cases of non-commercial public use. [39] The TRIPS Council will conduct a general review of the Agreement after five years. however, it also has the power to review it at any time in the light of relevant new developments that may warrant modification and addition (Article 71). Since the entry into force of travel, it has been criticized by developing countries, scientists and non-governmental organizations. While some of these criticisms are directed at the WTO in general, many proponents of trade liberalization also view the TRIPS Agreement as bad policy. The concentration effects of the TRIPS Agreement`s wealth (money from people in developing countries to copyright and patent holders in developed countries) and the imposition of artificial scarcity on citizens of countries that would otherwise have had weaker intellectual property laws are common ground for such criticism. Other criticisms have focused on TRIPS` inability to accelerate the flow of investment and technology to low-income countries, an advantage advanced by WTO members in the run-up to the agreement. World Bank statements suggest that the TRIPS Agreement has not led to a demonstrable acceleration of investment in low-income countries, although this may have been the case for middle-income countries.
[33] The long duration of TRIPS patents was assessed for an unreasonable slowdown in generic substitute market entry and competition. In particular, the illegality of preclinical studies or the submission of samples for approval until a patent expires have been accused of stimulating the growth of a few multinationals rather than producers in developing countries. The TRIPS Agreement introduced intellectual property law into the multilateral trading system for the first time and remains the most comprehensive multilateral agreement on intellectual property. In 2001, developing countries, concerned that developed countries were insisting on too narrow an interpretation of TRIPS, launched a round table that resulted in the Doha Declaration. The Doha Declaration is a WTO declaration that clarifies the scope of TRIPS and states, for example, that the TRIPS Agreement can and should be interpreted in light of the objective of “promoting access to medicines for all”. Article 69 of the Agreement requires Members to establish and notify contact points in their administrations in order to cooperate with each other and prevent trade in counterfeit goods. The general transitional periods apply to the founding members of the WTO, i.e. governments that were members on 1 January 1995.
Since the creation of the WTO, a number of countries have acceded to it. These countries have generally agreed in their accession agreements (accession protocols) to apply the TRIPS Agreement from the moment they officially become Members of the WTO, without any transitional period being used. In addition, the Agreement gives Members the freedom to determine the appropriate method of implementing the provisions of the Agreement in their own legal and practical system. The agreement therefore takes into account the diversity of the legal framework conditions of the members (e.B between customary law and civil law traditions). However, the agreement gives countries different deadlines to delay the implementation of its provisions. These deadlines define the transition from before the entry into force of the Agreement (before 1 January 1995) to its application in the Member States. The main transitional periods are as follows: the TRIPS Council is composed of all WTO Members. It shall be responsible for monitoring the functioning of the Agreement and, in particular, the manner in which Members fulfil their obligations under the Agreement. The WTO is a forum for further negotiations aimed at strengthening commitments in the field of intellectual property, as well as in other areas covered by the WTO Agreements.
In addition, Article 65(5) of the TRIPS Agreement provides that countries making use of the transition period should not roll back members that use a transitional period (in accordance with Article 65(1), (2), (3) or (4)) in order to ensure that changes to their laws, regulations and practices during the transition period do not result in a lower degree of compliance with the provisions of the Convention. It may also specify or interpret the provisions of the Agreement. The 2002 Doha Declaration reaffirms that the TRIPS Agreement must not prevent Members from taking the necessary measures to protect public health. Despite this recognition, less developed countries have argued that flexible travel arrangements, such as licensing. B mandatory, are almost impossible to apply. Less developed countries, in particular, cited their nascent domestic manufacturing and technology industries as evidence of the brutality of politics. .