Uruguay Round Trips Agreement

Unlike other IP agreements, TRIPS have an effective enforcement mechanism. States can be disciplined by the WTO dispute settlement mechanism. Since the TRIPS agreement came into force, it has been criticized by developing countries, scientists and non-governmental organizations. While some of this criticism is generally opposed to the WTO, many proponents of trade liberalization also view TRIPS policy as a bad policy. The effects of the concentration of WEALTH of TRIPS (money from people in developing countries for copyright and patent holders in industrialized countries) and the imposition of artificial shortages on citizens of countries that would otherwise have had weaker intellectual property laws are common bases for such criticisms. Other critics have focused on the inability of trips trips to accelerate the flow of investment and technology to low-income countries, a benefit that WTO members achieved prior to the creation of the agreement. The World Bank`s statements indicate that TRIPS have clearly not accelerated investment in low-income countries, whereas they may have done so for middle-income countries. [33] As part of TRIPS, long periods of patent validity were examined to determine the excessive slowdown in generic drug entry and competition. In particular, the illegality of preclinical testing or the presentation of samples to be authorized until a patent expires have been accused of encouraging the growth of certain multinationals and not producers in developing countries. Council decision 94/800/EC of 22 December 1994 on the conclusion, on behalf of the European Community, of agreements under its jurisdiction over the conclusion of the Uruguay Round multilateral negotiation agreements under its jurisdiction (1986-1994) (OJ L 199 of 19.12.1994, p.

1). The agreement established a Council on aspects of intellectual property rights that affect trade (23.12.1994, p. 1-2). It supports monitoring the functioning of the agreement, ensuring that members meet their obligations and the possibility of consultations between members. An agreement reached in 2003 relaxed domestic market requirements and allows developing countries to export to other countries with a public health problem as long as exported drugs are not part of a trade or industrial policy. [10] Drugs exported under such regulations may be packaged or coloured differently to prevent them from affecting the markets of industrialized countries. The decision approves the agreement establishing the WTO on behalf of the European Community (now the EU). The principles are those of national treatment and treatment to the most favoured nation. This means that WTO members cannot normally discriminate against their trading partners.