“Trade-Related Aspects” and “Public Interest” in the TRIPS Agreement (WTO)
https://doi.org/10.24833/0869-0049-2010-4-72-85
Abstract
The article appears to be attempt to decipher such notions as “trade – related” aspects of IPR and “public interest” in The TRIPS Agreement. It is particularly striking that this article reveals that TRIPS negotiators, representing both developed and developing countries dedicated much effort and time to discuss antitrust-related concerns. This article covers few areas that give rise to many misunderstanding, among them compulsory licenses, control of anti-competitive practices in contractual licenses and parallel importations. This is also particularly interested in the implementation of TRIPS obligations.
About the Author
V. V. Pirogova
MGIMO-University MFA Russia
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Vera V. Pirogova – Ph.D. in Law, assistant professor of the Chair of Private International and Civil Law;
patent attorney
References
1. Богуславский М.М. Международное частное право. – М. – Юристъ. – 2005.
2. Боденхаузен Г. Парижская конвенция по охране промышленной собственности. – М.: Прогресс. – 1977.
3. Гаврилов Э.П. Судебная практика по охране интеллектуальной собственности // Хозяйство и право. – 2010. – № 7. – С. 27-40.
4. Маковский А.Л. «Американская история» // Вестник гражданского права. – 2007. – № 1. – С. 165-197.
5. Пирогова В.В. Исчерпание исключительных прав и параллельный импорт. – М. – Статут. – 2008.
6. Пирогова В.В. Исчерпание на товарный знак в США и Японии//Патенты и лицензии – 2002. – № 7. – С. 43-47.
7. Пирогова В.В. Принудительные лицензии: правовые основы выдачи// Патенты и лицензии. – 2002. – № 11. – С. 48-51.
8. Свядосц Ю.И. Правовая охрана научно-технических достижений и советский экспорт. – М. -1986.
9. Beier F.-K. Hundert Jahre Pariser Verbandsüdereinkunft – Ihre Rolle in Vergangenheit, Gegenwart und Zukunft // GRUR Int. – 1988. – S. 339.
10. Carlos M. Correa. The GATT Agreement on trade-related aspects on intellectual property rights: new standards for patent protection//E.I.P.R. – 1994.
11. Drahos. Indigenous knowledge, intellectual property and biopiracy: is a bio-collecting society the answer? // E. I. P. R. – 2000.
12. Dreier. Hugenholtz. Concise European Copyright Law. – 2006.
13. Faupel. GATT und geistiges Eigentum. Ein Zwischenbericht zu Beginn der entscheidenden Verhandlungsrunde //GRUR Int. – 1990. – S. 255-266.
14. Ghidini G. Innovation,competition and consumer welfare in intellectual property law. – UK.: Cheltenham. – 2010.
15. Goetting.H.-P. Gewerblicher Rechtsschutz. – Verlag C.H.Beck. – 2007.
16. Indigenous heritage and intellectual property. Ed. By Silke von Lewinski.-Wolters Kluwer. – 2008.
17. National Economic Research Associate, The Economic Consequence of the Choice of a Regime of Exhaustion in the Area of Trademarks // SJ Berwin & IFF Research. – 1999. – February 8.
18. Nuno P. de Carvalho. The TRIPS regime of antitrust and undisclosed information. – Kluwer Law Int. – 2008.
19. Pacon A. Maria. Was bringt TRIPS den Entwicklungsländern// GRUR Int. – 1995. – S. 875-886.
20. Stern. The Unobserved Demise of the Exhaustion Doctrine in U.S.Patent Law // E.I.P.R. -1993. – N 12. – P. 460.
21. Ullrich.H. Technologieschutz nach TRIPS: Prinzipen und Probleme. // GRUR Int. – 1995. – № 8.
22. Vallee.M. Yildzoglu. Social and Technological Efficiency jf Patent System, http://repec.org/sce2004/up.16143.1075828575.pdf (2004).
Review
For citations:
Pirogova V.V. “Trade-Related Aspects” and “Public Interest” in the TRIPS Agreement (WTO). Moscow Journal of International Law. 2010;(4):72-85. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.24833/0869-0049-2010-4-72-85
Views:
568
Email this article 