CategoriesNon classé

The general objectives of the TRIPS Agreement are set out in the preamble to the Agreement, which sets out the basic objectives of the Uruguay Round negotiations set out in the TRIPS area by the Punta del Este Declaration of 1986 and the Mid-term Review of 1988/89. These objectives include reducing distortions and barriers to international trade, promoting effective and adequate protection of intellectual property rights, and ensuring that enforcement measures and procedures for intellectual property rights do not themselves become barriers to legitimate trade. Those objectives should be read in conjunction with Article 7 (« Objectives »), according to which the protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights should contribute to the promotion of technological innovation and the transfer and dissemination of technology for the mutual benefit of producers and users of technological knowledge and in a manner conducive to social and economic prosperity, and a balance of rights and obligations. Article 8 (« Principles ») recognizes the right of Members to take measures for reasons of public health and other reasons of public interest and to prevent the abuse of intellectual property rights, provided that such measures are consistent with the provisions of the TRIPS Agreement. Unlike other intellectual property agreements, the TRIPS Agreement has a powerful enforcement mechanism. States can be sanctioned by the WTO dispute settlement mechanism. Article 10 of the Convention provides: « (1) Computer programs, whether in source code or object, are protected as literary works under the Berne Convention (1971). (2) Compilations of data or other documents, whether machine-readable or in another form, which constitute intellectual creations by reason of the selection or arrangement of their content, shall be protected as such. This protection, which does not extend to the data or the material itself, does not affect the copyright that exists in the data or the material itself. The Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) entered into force in 1995 under the Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization (WTO). The TRIPS Agreement includes and builds on the latest versions of the main intellectual property agreements administered by the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property and the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works, agreements dating back to the 1880s. This is a brief updated commentary on Article 39 of the TRIPS Agreement on the protection of disclosed information.

The registration of a trade mark using a geographical indication in such a way as to mislead the public as to the actual place of origin must be refused or declared invalid on its own initiative if the law so permits or at the request of a party concerned (Article 22(3)). Since the entry into force of travel, it has been criticized by developing countries, academics 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 (transfer of 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 grounds for such criticism. Other criticisms have focused on TRIPS` failure to accelerate the flow of investment and technology to low-income countries, an advantage highlighted by WTO members in the run-up to the establishment of 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] Long TRIPS patent terms have been investigated because they have unduly slowed down generic exchange market entry and competition. In particular, the illegality of preclinical studies or the submission of samples for approval until a patent expires has been accused of driving the growth of a few multinationals rather than manufacturers in developing countries. The agreement also includes provisions on undisclosed test data and other data, the submission of which is required by governments as a condition of approval of the marketing of agricultural pharmaceutical or chemical products using new chemical units. In such a situation, the government of the Member States concerned must protect the data against unfair commercial use. In addition, members must protect such data from disclosure, unless this is necessary to protect the public or measures are taken to ensure that the data is protected against unfair commercial use.

The TRIPS Agreement not only obliges Member States to protect layout-designs of integrated circuits in accordance with the provisions of the IPIC Treaty, but also clarifies and/or develops four points. These points concern the term of protection (ten years instead of eight, Article 38), the applicability of protection to objects, the violation of integrated circuits (last subsection of Article 36) and the treatment of innocent offenders (Article 37(1)). The conditions set out in Article 31 of the TRIPS Agreement apply mutatis mutandis to the granting of compulsory or non-voluntary licences of a design scheme or to its use by or by the Government without the authorization of the right holder instead of the provisions of the IPIC Treaty on Compulsory Licensing (Article 37.2). Article 11 provides that authors have the right, at least with respect to computer programs and, in certain circumstances, cinematographic works, to permit or prohibit the commercial rental to the public of originals or copies of their copyrighted works. In the case of cinematographic works, the exclusive rental right is subject to the so-called depreciation criterion: a member is exempt from the obligation, unless such rental has led to a widespread reproduction of such works, which seriously infringes the exclusive reproduction right granted in that member to authors and their legal successors. In the case of computer programs, the obligation does not apply to rentals in which the program itself is not an essential object of the rental. Broadcasting organizations have the right, in accordance with Article 14.3, to prohibit the unauthorized recording, reproduction of recordings and wireless retransmission of programmes and the communication to the public of their television broadcasts. However, it is not necessary to grant such rights to broadcasting organisations where, subject to the provisions of the Berne Convention, the holders of copyright in the subject matter of broadcasts have the possibility of preventing such acts.

Article 10.2 clarifies that databases and other compilations of data or material other than these are protected by copyright, even if the databases contain data that, as such, are not protected by copyright. Databases are eligible for copyright protection if they represent intellectual creations due to the selection or arrangement of their content. The provision also confirms the need to protect databases, regardless of the form in which they exist, whether machine-readable or not. In addition, the provision clarifies that this protection does not extend to the data or material itself and does not affect the existing copyright in the data or documents themselves. It is also necessary that the use of the mark in the course of trade is not unduly burdened by special requirements, such as the use of another mark, use in a special form or use in a manner prejudicial to its ability to distinguish goods or services (Article 20). Article 26(2) allows Members to provide for limited exceptions to the protection of industrial designs, provided that such exceptions do not unreasonably conflict with the normal exploitation of protected designs and do not unduly prejudice the legitimate interests of the owner of the protected design, taking into account the legitimate interests of third parties. During the Uruguay Round negotiations, it was recognized that the Berne Convention already provides broadly adequate basic standards for copyright protection. It was agreed that the starting point should be the level of protection existing under the most recent law, the Paris Act of 1971, of that Convention.

The starting point is expressed in Article 9.1, according to which Members are required to comply with the substantive provisions of the 1971 Paris Act of the Berne Convention, i.e.: to comply with Articles 1 to 21 of the Berne Convention (1971) and its Annex. However, Members shall have no right or obligation under the TRIPS Agreement with respect to the rights conferred under Article 6bis of the Agreement, i.e. moral rights (the right to claim authorship and to oppose any derogatory act relating to a work that would harm the honour or reputation of the author) or the rights deriving therefrom. The above-mentioned provisions of the Berne Convention concern issues such as the object to be protected, the minimum term of protection and the rights to be granted as well as the permissible limitations of those rights. The Annex allows developing countries to restrict, under certain conditions, the right to translation and the right of reproduction. In particular, the TRIPS Agreement requires WTO Members to grant copyrights that include authors and other copyright holders as well as holders of related rights, i.e. performers, producers of phonograms and broadcasting organizations; geographical indications; designs; Integrated circuit design schemes; patents; new plant varieties; Trademarks; Trade names and undisclosed or confidential information. .

Proudly powered by Wpopal.com