Trade Related Intellectual Property Rights: A Study on its Legal and Political Impact - Thesis Example

Trade Related Intellectual Property Rights: A Study on its Legal and Political Impact Proprietary rights resulting from the innovative research anddevelopment of products which are original in nature are paramount and come within the protective mantle of intellectual property rights. However, it was posited that the protection conferred upon creators by the intellectual property rights fosters monopoly, cartel and other anti-competitive acts as the greater number of the population is deprived of its benefits and more specifically, the developing and underdeveloped countries.

Indeed, products of the intellect, creation and innovation of its citizenry is a nation’s asset and its government would want to safeguard not only the formulation or technique employed for the production of such creation by any means necessary but more importantly, for the government to assist its intellectual creators to recoup their investment and to preserve the confidentiality of its processes to prevent others from producing similar or even better products. Financial gain is not the only rationale why intellectual creations are closely guarded but it also entails national pride.

And, when the governments intervene to protect these creations, such action becomes political in nature as the economic value of the product is seen as means to generate jobs and additional income to the citizenry as well as the protection of the rights of the inventor would help its people to be more creative and innovative in their work which ultimately would lead to the strengthening the nation's economic standpoint. This writer shall analyse the legal and political implications of Trade Related Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS), including its practicability and effectiveness in promoting the general welfare.

The following questions are relevant—is there a need to adapt to the TRIPS agreement? Is it anti-competitive and monopolistic? What is its impact on the improvement of the multilateral trading system? What is its effect on the socio-economic advancement of developing and underdeveloped countries? To resolve the foregoing questions, it is imperative to look into the provisions of the Trade Relations Aspects on Intellectual Property in the Uruguay General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) in 1994 where members of the World Trade Organization (WTO) are mandated to supply their people minimum standards for the protection of the intellectual property rights (WTO, 1995).

It is therefore vital for this writer to determine if the WTO is sufficient to protect intellectual creations as well as serve the well-being of the public in general. The dispositions of the various tribunals/courts shall be examined to determine any need to amend the agreement to plug loopholes, including decisions involving conflicts between the proprietary interest of the creators and the public shall ascertained to determine which interest is superior? Other pivotal questions are— how to execute intellectual property rights; how should fundamental principles of the trading system and global intellectual property agreements employed; how citizens’ rights under the agreement are imposed in their own sovereign country; how to settle disputes that relates to intellectual property rights or infringement; and how to bring in a new system with a smooth execution (WTO, 1995) as well as effects of other conventions before the advent of the TRIPS.

References: CBD (Convention on Biological Diversity), 1992. [online] Available from: http://www.cbd.int/ [Accessed 2 June 2011] Correa, C. & Yusuf, A. (2008) Intellectual Property and International Trade: The TRIPS agreement, (2nd Ed), Kluwer Law International Cottier, T. & Varon, P.(2008). Concise International and European IP Law: TRIPS, Paris Convention, European enforcement and transfer of Technology, Kluwer Law International Downes, G. (2004). TRIPs and food security: Implications of the WTO's TRIPs Agreement for food security in the developing world.

British Food Journal. 106 (Issue 6), 366-379. Govaere, I. & Ullrich, H. (2007). Intellectual Property, Public Policy and International Trade. College of Europe Studies. 6 (n/a), n/a. INTA (International Trademark Association), 1999. International Trademark Association: TRIPS 2000 Subcommittee, Treaty Analysis Committee. [online] Available from: http://www.inta.org/downloads/tap_trips2000.pdf [Accessed 2 June 2011] Lemy, P. (2010). World Trade Organization Director-General speech in the General Council Meeting, 14 December 2010 [online] Available from: http://www.wto.org/english/news_e/news10_e/ tnc_chair_report_14dec10_e.

htm [Accessed 2 June 2011] Raduntz, H. (n.d.). Globalisation, Information and Libraries: The Implications of the World Trade Organisation's GATS and TRIPS Agreements. Centre for Research in Education, Equity and Work, University of South Australia, Library Review. 56 (Issue 9), n.a. Soman, E. (2008). World Trade Organization and Dispute Settlement. [online] Available from: http://socyberty.com/organizations/world-trade-organization-and-dispute-settlement/. [Accessed 2 June 2011] UN (United Nations), 1948.

United Nation Declaration of Human Rights. [online] Available at: http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/ [Accessed 2 June 2011] WIPO (World Intellectual Property Organization), 1967. Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artisitic Works. [online] Available from: http://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/ip/berne/ [Accessed 2 June 2011] WIPO (World Intellectual Property Organization), 1967. Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property. [online] Available from: http://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/ip/paris/ [Accessed 2 June 2011] WIPO (World Intellectual Property Organization), 1967.

Rome Convention for the Protection of Performers, Producers of Phonograms and Broadcast Organizations. [online] Available from: http://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/ip/rome/ [Accessed 2 June 2011] WIPO (World Intellectual Property Organization), 1967. Washington Treaty on Intellectual Property in Respect of Integrated Circuits. [online] Available from: http://www.wipo.int/treaties/ en/ip/washington/ [Accessed 2 June 2011] WTO (World Trade Organization) 1995. Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights.

[online] Available from: http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/trips_e/trips_e.htm [Accessed 2 June 2011] EU (European Union). 2008. CONSOLIDATED VERSION OF THE TREATY ON THE FUNCTIONING OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. [online] Available from: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2008:115:0047:0199:EN:PDF [Accessed 2 June 2011] Mavroidis, P. C. & Cottier, T. (2003). Intellectual property: trade, competition, and sustainable development. Chicago. University of Michigan Press. G. Bruce Doern. (1999). Global change and intellectual property agencies: an institutional perspective. New York. A Casell Imprint.

Mitchell, A. D. (2005). Challenges and prospects for the WTO. London. Cameron May Ltd. Wallach, L. & Sforza, M. (1999). The WTO: five years of reasons to resist corporate globalization. New York. Seven Stories Press. Christoph Antons (2004) Intellectual Property Harmonisation Within ASEAN and APEC. Hague. Kluwer Law International. Dasgupta, P. (2009). The WTO at the Crossroads. New Delhi. Concept Publishing Company. Ezeani, E. (2010). The WTO and its Development Obligation: Prospects for Global Trade. London. Wimbeldon Publishing Company.