Patents for Development
Show Less

Patents for Development

Improved Patent Information Disclosure and Access for Incremental Innovation

Nefissa Chakroun

This book investigates whether it is possible to execute the disclosed technologies just by reading the patent application. Nefissa Chakroun argues that while TRIPS Agreement obliges inventors to disclose full and complete disclosure, patent information users lack the capacity to fully utilise such information for their economic development. The book offers a critical analysis of the disclosure requirements of the patent system as well as an in-depth examination of the ways in accessing and retrieving patent information. Chakroun articulates proposals for strengthening the disclosure and methods for enhancing retrieval and exploitation of the technological knowledge, including an integrated policy on how patent information could be better utilised for development
Buy Book in Print
Show Summary Details
You do not have access to this content

Chapter 4: The inadequacy of the disclosure requirement

Nefissa Chakroun


The obligation to disclose patent information is central to the hypothesis of this book in so far as it is the foundation of a right to access and utilise patent information. Because science progresses by building up and designing around the disclosed knowledge, researchers will not be in a position to undertake cumulative research and incremental innovation, if the disclosure of patent information is inadequate. This chapter therefore argues that although article 29 of TRIPS requires the patentee to make a clear and complete disclosure, in practice researchers and users of patent information may suffer a disadvantage because of the narrowness of the disclosure requirement and the lack of precision in drafting patent specifications. The concept of disclosure has been subject to several discussions, ranging from those advocating that inventors should be allowed natural rights in their inventions, to those articulating the idea that the patent system is based on a ‘social contract’, by which society encourages the inventor to publicise his work for use by others, in exchange for the exclusive right. The idea that an inventor should be allowed a natural right in his property has been highlighted by several thinkers. One philosopher, in particular, whose name has been linked to the natural right of property, is John Locke. His view on property theory consists of demonstrating the coherence or the truth of an argument that relies on natural rights to justify IPRs.

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.

Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Further information

or login to access all content.