Is it Fair?
Edited by Justin Malbon and Charles Lawson
Chapter 6: The Development-Balance of the TRIPS Agreement and Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights
Ermias Tekeste Biadgleng 1. INTRODUCTION The intellectual property (IP) and development discourse invokes an intriguing debate that intersects the assumed objectives of promoting innovation with concerns about the actual cost for industrialisation and public welfare in developing countries. The developed countries as major inventors continue to maintain an advantageous position regarding the utilisation of the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS). Developing countries, with limited exceptions, have yet to see the promised better days under TRIPS. They are primarily concerned about gaining IP beneﬁts from learning, reverse engineering and the acquisition of existing technologies. Despite the development concerns arising from TRIPS, the G-8 leaders and the United States (US)–European Union (EU) summit adopted a trans-Atlantic agenda on worldwide enforcement of IP rights. The agenda underlines the shift in the position of the advanced countries from setting the standards towards monitoring the enforcement of IP rights in developing countries (European Union 2006). The enforcement of TRIPS requires an assessment of the level of adjustment expected of developing countries, the degree that TRIPS facilitates technology transfers and the extent of the reward for the contribution of developing countries in terms of biological resources, traditional knowledge and cultural expression. There is a link between TRIPS and IP rights in general with normative justiﬁcations for the promotion of innovation through reward systems, including through the institution of legal rights to reward the fruits of labour (Menell 2000). The normative justiﬁcations continue to be weighted against the cost...
You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.